No "Meaningless Stat Games" in Mass Effect 3
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
ME1 was too cluttered with stats, yes, but ME2 streamlined the system very effectively, and I don't see it getting any more streamlined unless they rip out all pretense of subtlety in the level up system.Roboto said:
I don't see what the problem is. As long as the mechanics make sense and there is lots of non-combat RPGing to do, why does it matter about hidden stats? And I'm also confused as to how many changing stats there can be in a shooter, other then changing your equipment. In Mass Effect 1 it always annoyed me how much time I spent in the equipment menu re-equiping my stuff, so always was happy they simplified it. Seriously, in a ROLE PLAYING Game I want to feel like I AM the main character, this awesome action/fantasy/sci-fi hero, not the ship's quartermaster!
My thoughts exactly. All of these announcements about Mass Effect's combat are making me nervous. Gears of War and Call of Duty are where we go when we want mindless shooting, Bioware games are where we go when we want messy moral decisions and fantastic and creative environments.Jumplion said:
Get that straight, Bioware.
I'm looking forward to seeing how Mass Effect 3 is received.
It sounds like Bioware is making the game for who they think their fans are and that they are going to be in a rude awakening when it's out.
Its gonna be Dragon Age 2 all over again and between the failure of that franchise, how badly TOR is shaping up to be, and the direction they seem to be wanting to move in with Mass Effect 3, Bioware is very quickly moving from one of the best to one of the worst AAA developers.
It sounds like Bioware is making the game for who they think their fans are and that they are going to be in a rude awakening when it's out.
Its gonna be Dragon Age 2 all over again and between the failure of that franchise, how badly TOR is shaping up to be, and the direction they seem to be wanting to move in with Mass Effect 3, Bioware is very quickly moving from one of the best to one of the worst AAA developers.
This just means that when we spend points, we know what's changing. No pointless math equations giving the false impression of depth. Besides, if RPG purism is getting in the way of a better Mass Effect, then RPG purists can screw off.
When did they say they were removing leveling, tactics, or looting?RedEyesBlackGamer said:
Notice that in my post, I said entitled gamers will complain. Did I say that everyone who disagreed was entitled? Although I greatly enjoy you both putting words in my mouth and acting as if anyone with "standards" will be upset with this news.Traun said:
Stop raging.
One major problem Bioware fixed from ME1 to ME2 was the fact that, since enemies scaled according to your level, you could never really get a distinct advantage by upgrading your weapons (unless you found something exceptionally higher than what enemies would drop, as with Spectre weapons). ME2 fixed this by not constantly upgrading from weapon to weapon within the same category.
Again, though, ME2 had this same unnecessary scaling with the "+X% damage" bonuses in ME2: enemies still scaled and scaled according to your approximate power, so instead of your base weapon actually getting any stronger, all of the other weapons would get weaker over time.
From the sounds of it ME3 is going to skip all of this and go for a Call of Duty-style talent and experience system, which - in all honesty - is probably going to be the best place to take it. Whats the point of a stat system when the entire difference is doing 10 hp against an enemy with 100 at the start of the game, and 100hp against an enemy with 1000 at the end of the game?
One major problem Bioware fixed from ME1 to ME2 was the fact that, since enemies scaled according to your level, you could never really get a distinct advantage by upgrading your weapons (unless you found something exceptionally higher than what enemies would drop, as with Spectre weapons). ME2 fixed this by not constantly upgrading from weapon to weapon within the same category.
Again, though, ME2 had this same unnecessary scaling with the "+X% damage" bonuses in ME2: enemies still scaled and scaled according to your approximate power, so instead of your base weapon actually getting any stronger, all of the other weapons would get weaker over time.
From the sounds of it ME3 is going to skip all of this and go for a Call of Duty-style talent and experience system, which - in all honesty - is probably going to be the best place to take it. Whats the point of a stat system when the entire difference is doing 10 hp against an enemy with 100 at the start of the game, and 100hp against an enemy with 1000 at the end of the game?
So long as there's no scaled leveling (or at least, not like in ME2 where all those nice new upgrades ultimately didn't mean shit), and I can actually, you know, play the role of my specific flavor of Shepard, I'm happy.
Hmm... I keep thinking about Vanquish every time I hear more news about combat overhauls. And goddamn that game was awesome...
Hmm... I keep thinking about Vanquish every time I hear more news about combat overhauls. And goddamn that game was awesome...
Really, now that I think about it, if Mass Effect 2's combat was pretty much where the team wanted to go, why are they continuously telling us this about Mass Effect 3? If it's what you wanted then there should be no reason why you are constantly telling us this. Give us information about the (most likely pointlessly binary) decisions we're going to have to make, the state of the Council, Shepard's Spectre ranking, all that good stuff.elilupe said:
See, this is when I get frustrated that I can't talk to the guys in charge directly. I want to tell them, face-to-face, exactly what I thought about Mass Effect 1 and 2 and the changes they made, both good and bad (not screaming in their face, mind you) because there is only so much you can get across through text. Instead, I have to resort to pointlessly typing away my thoughts on a forum that most likely will never even be glanced at by the BioWare team. And even making a video would be pointless as people would go "Durh hur, you RPG-fanboy!" and BioWare still would not bother with it.
Sometimes I feel we forget that there are people behind these companies who want to make the best damn game possible, and that these people in the companies forget that we want to recieve the best game possible. Sure, it'd be hard to discern the real criticisms and grievances to the fanboys and trolls, but still...
Bleh, end rant.
Looting was gone in ME2, as was in depth leveling and combat was much less tactical and more fast paced. Seems to be what he is referencing.rsvp42 said:
Love this, anything to piss off traditional gamers amuses me. You can keep your minute level upgrades .01 sec to lift length etc, and exploring baren planets with about 15 textures. I'll take streamlined combat and bioware story over that crap any day.
Remember that crap in Morrowind, where even if your arrow happens to hit your target head on, you will be told that "Your Dexterity is too low to hit this target" if it isn't high enough? Oblivion ended up fixing that, involving stats too much in real-time combat can just be a real pain in the ass if it isn't done right. Mass Effect 1 and 2 both screwed it up in their own ways - making the stat adjustments more subtle might actually be a good thing.
