The only RPG part that was phased out in ME2 was the weapon mods and stats, none of which really mattered in the end. The storytelling and non-combat gameplay were all intact.
Look me in the face and tell me that ME1 had better combat than ME2.
They're not stripping away everything that makes an RPG an RPG. Mass Effect as a series has an RPG story with shooter gameplay. Get off your high horse and stop thinking you can tell a company how to make their games.
My sentiment exactly.
Also: "We got combat the way we wanted it for ME2, so you're going to feel right at home straight away..."
Oh, good for you. How about how the fans wanted it? You know, the innumerable fans that said the shooting aspect of the gameplay (which, let's be honest, is the only aspect of gameplay aside from dialogue choices and walking) felt terribly generic, seriously repetitive, horrifically derivative, and eventually down right boring?
Them: "No, you don't get it. You see, you weren't bored and frustrated after 14min of shooting from cover because if you even looked around the corner you'd get COD red crap smothering your screen, forcing you to play the game in one single way over and over again (barring powers when they became available since they all came from the same power pool...great idea there >_>). You liked it because we like it, and because you have to deal with it since we want Mass Effect to be on the same level as Call of Duty and the greatest shooters in the world."
[Reference Link: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.277254-BioWare-Mass-Effect-3-Combat-Perfected?page=1 ]
I already made a thread about my fears for ME3, and it seemed a lot of folk felt similar or exactly the same. I want to buy ME3, Bioware! Between you and EA I already feel too much apprehension to pre-order it! Stop making it worse for the gamers who still remember when Mass Effect was meant to be an RPG/shooter hybrid and not a straight forward, run-of-the-mill third person cover shooter.
[obviously not talking about the characters or plot when I say run of the mill]
The only RPG part that was phased out in ME2 was the weapon mods and stats, none of which really mattered in the end. The storytelling and non-combat gameplay were all intact.
Look me in the face and tell me that ME1 had better combat than ME2.
They're not stripping away everything that makes an RPG an RPG. Mass Effect as a series has an RPG story with shooter gameplay. Get off your high horse and stop thinking you can tell a company how to make their games.
Firstly, mate, Bioware's whole deal is about how they supposedly listen to their fans and incorporate their responses into their games to make them better (and sell more of course).
Case in point: Why is Tali romanceable in ME2? Why is Garrus? Because the fans asked for it.
This is why people complain about the game/some of the aspects of the game, because there was a time when Bioware listened to it's fanbase to help develop a series.
Secondly, not to be a douche but as a rebuttal to what you stated:
...Supposed to be a funny joke about me looking you in the eye and telling you...nevermind.
Joking picture aside, it's true. Mass Effect 1 may have seemed slower paced, but you could do more. As a matter of fact, here's a list I have of things that SUCK about ME2's combat:
1. RED CRAP COVERS SCREEN WHEN GETTING HIT Now this is incredibly annoying already since, if I'm getting shot, I'd like to SEE what the hell is going on, but the annoyance is taken to heights of stupidity when there is a HEALTH BAR UNDER YOU. The point of the red crap is for games that have the dumb idea that a health bar breaks immersion. So...why is there two different indications I'm taking damage, both telling me the same thing?
2. POWERS COMES FROM SAME POOL OF ENERGY...AND SO DOES HEALING In Mass Effect 1 you could heal with a medikit and revive someone with a power, then switch over to another power all within an instant. In ME2, you use one power to heal and revive that takes energy. Then you need to wait for it to recharge in order to use any other power, leaving the "strategy" of the combat to just blazing guns a majority of the time since you're stuck waiting for the interesting bits.
3. CONSTANTLY BEHIND COVER I was barely ever behind cover in ME1 once I upgraded my guns (which didn't take mining planets like a jackass and actually showed a difference in combat). In ME2 you HAVE to be behind cover. Even on Casual. Why? It's the only way to heal! No medkits for you, LULZ! You get one power that heals and revives, and you can only use it every thirty seconds or so (with upgrades pending). Now, you might say upgraded healing is like, what, ten seconds? Well, early on in the game you meet the new and aggravatingly "improved" running zombie husks which come at you by the dozen and NEVER LET UP. If you don't find a good cover, you will die because you have no other way to heal (and even then it's wonky as hell and takes about ten seconds to regenerate health).
And speaking of the Husk, which is an enemy type that also really shows the stupidity of having all the powers come from the same power pool, we can end with
4. LIMITED AMMO ME1 was considered breaking the mold with it's idea of overheating weapons. No need for ammo, just watch the heat. Thanks to customizable ammunition (something not in ME2 also since the devs thought bullet-types were super powers), you could end up with a gun that never let up! A sniper rifle with infinite ice-cold shots!
Then Mass Effect 2 came up with "heat sink" canisters, which is another way of saying "We DID promised we wouldn't change the gunplay to limited ammunition, our fans, but we lied! HAHA! Oh, but it's not a bold face lie since, teehee, those ammo rounds keep the gun cool! [insert troll face jpg]"
No. The premise and how it's executed is stupid. That's a fact. Why? Because even with out the "heat sink" the gun would cool off eventually from not being used. And if it doesn't, that means something inside melted and it's useless no matter how much "heat sink" you have.
Thanks to this idea, and thanks to the idea of all the powers and healing coming from the same place, you are sometimes left with meleeing enemies, which means you need to leave cover which is the only place you can heal and as you get hit out of cover the red crap covers your screen so you can't see which way leads to cover and...well... You get to see why the combat is so derided by so many people. Including me.
And yes, though I don't see a point in it, especially now: This is further proof that Mass Effect is not an RPG. It's a shooter with choices and fuckable squad mates. Though I really think we should concern ourselves less with classifying the genre and more with making sure we get the game that was promised to us long ago, and not end up with a mix of DA2 and Modern Warfare 2. In such a situation, in my opinion, the genre it will be under is known as "shit".
I was misrepresented in an article recently, which made it sound like I
wanted to remove RPG elements and stats from combat. What I actually
said was, I wanted RPG progression to have a more meaningful impact on
combat, but that was misrepresented as "cutting rpg stats" we actually
have more stats in me3 that affect combat, and the overall impact of rpg
progress on combat is greater. Anyway sorry for the longish tweet but I
just wanted ot clear that up, and a few people were asking me what was
up!
-Christina Norman, Lead Gameplay Designer of Mass Effect 3
Twitter / @Christina Norman: I was misrepresented in an ...
Stop freaking out on a vague statement. Really the only stat that gotten rid of in ME2 was the mods. That is coming back, along with multiple evolutions in skills. Actually ME1 all of the skills had a use in combat, even charm, and Intimidate had a effect in combat, whether it was cool down reduction (charm) or weapon damage (intimidate). In fact the only useless stat that didn't have a effect in combat was the Paragon/ Renegade charm intimidate crap system that forces people to be extreme in the scale. Will the Charm, and Intimidate skill return? Hopefully it will, not likely but maybe.
That's good to hear. This article really should be updated.
It does bug me when people complain about RPG stats only affecting combat. The only stats besides Charm/Intimidate in ME1 that did not only affect combat were the Electronics and Decryption skills, which would allow you to open containers (Woop-de-doo). The inventory system and the weapon mod system were also only there to serve combat purposes.
The only RPG part that was phased out in ME2 was the weapon mods and stats, none of which really mattered in the end. The storytelling and non-combat gameplay were all intact.
Look me in the face and tell me that ME1 had better combat than ME2.
They're not stripping away everything that makes an RPG an RPG. Mass Effect as a series has an RPG story with shooter gameplay. Get off your high horse and stop thinking you can tell a company how to make their games.
Firstly, mate, Bioware's whole deal is about how they supposedly listen to their fans and incorporate their responses into their games to make them better (and sell more of course).
Case in point: Why is Tali romanceable in ME2? Why is Garrus? Because the fans asked for it.
This is why people complain about the game/some of the aspects of the game, because there was a time when Bioware listened to it's fanbase to help develop a series.
Secondly, not to be a douche but as a rebuttal to what you stated:
...Supposed to be a funny joke about me looking you in the eye and telling you...nevermind.
Joking picture aside, it's true. Mass Effect 1 may have seemed slower paced, but you could do more. As a matter of fact, here's a list I have of things that SUCK about ME2's combat:
1. RED CRAP COVERS SCREEN WHEN GETTING HIT Now this is incredibly annoying already since, if I'm getting shot, I'd like to SEE what the hell is going on, but the annoyance is taken to heights of stupidity when there is a HEALTH BAR UNDER YOU. The point of the red crap is for games that have the dumb idea that a health bar breaks immersion. So...why is there two different indications I'm taking damage, both telling me the same thing?
2. POWERS COMES FROM SAME POOL OF ENERGY...AND SO DOES HEALING In Mass Effect 1 you could heal with a medikit and revive someone with a power, then switch over to another power all within an instant. In ME2, you use one power to heal and revive that takes energy. Then you need to wait for it to recharge in order to use any other power, leaving the "strategy" of the combat to just blazing guns a majority of the time since you're stuck waiting for the interesting bits.
3. CONSTANTLY BEHIND COVER I was barely ever behind cover in ME1 once I upgraded my guns (which didn't take mining planets like a jackass and actually showed a difference in combat). In ME2 you HAVE to be behind cover. Even on Casual. Why? It's the only way to heal! No medkits for you, LULZ! You get one power that heals and revives, and you can only use it every thirty seconds or so (with upgrades pending). Now, you might say upgraded healing is like, what, ten seconds? Well, early on in the game you meet the new and aggravatingly "improved" running zombie husks which come at you by the dozen and NEVER LET UP. If you don't find a good cover, you will die because you have no other way to heal (and even then it's wonky as hell and takes about ten seconds to regenerate health).
And speaking of the Husk, which is an enemy type that also really shows the stupidity of having all the powers come from the same power pool, we can end with
4. LIMITED AMMO ME1 was considered breaking the mold with it's idea of overheating weapons. No need for ammo, just watch the heat. Thanks to customizable ammunition (something not in ME2 also since the devs thought bullet-types were super powers), you could end up with a gun that never let up! A sniper rifle with infinite ice-cold shots!
Then Mass Effect 2 came up with "heat sink" canisters, which is another way of saying "We DID promised we wouldn't change the gunplay to limited ammunition, our fans, but we lied! HAHA! Oh, but it's not a bold face lie since, teehee, those ammo rounds keep the gun cool! [insert troll face jpg]"
No. The premise and how it's executed is stupid. That's a fact. Why? Because even with out the "heat sink" the gun would cool off eventually from not being used. And if it doesn't, that means something inside melted and it's useless no matter how much "heat sink" you have.
Thanks to this idea, and thanks to the idea of all the powers and healing coming from the same place, you are sometimes left with meleeing enemies, which means you need to leave cover which is the only place you can heal and as you get hit out of cover the red crap covers your screen so you can't see which way leads to cover and...well... You get to see why the combat is so derided by so many people. Including me.
And yes, though I don't see a point in it, especially now: This is further proof that Mass Effect is not an RPG. It's a shooter with choices and fuckable squad mates. Though I really think we should concern ourselves less with classifying the genre and more with making sure we get the game that was promised to us long ago, and not end up with a mix of DA2 and Modern Warfare 2. In such a situation, in my opinion, the genre it will be under is known as "shit".
Perhaps the combat changes were also a product of fan response, and not just the romance options. You can't tell me that 'there was a time when Bioware actually listened to us' right after giving examples of them doing just that in the game you're knocking.
1. Red Crap Covers Screen When Getting Hit
I'll give you that, that was annoying. It's supposed to serve as an immediate visual indicator of damage so you can keep your eyes focused on the screen and not on the HUD, but it's hard to kill the guys shooting at you when you can't see them.
2. Powers all come from same energy pool
Yes, they most certainly did. The energy pool also refilled within a second or two, so I was never really inconvenienced by it. The reason they changed it was to make you use your teammates and their powers more, encouraging teamwork and not just plowing through by yourself, making the squad useless. It adds strategy to combat by making you choose your powers carefully over the course of a fight instead of just firing them all off that the start of combat and shooting the one guy that's left over.
3. Constantly behind cover
This is just going to have to be a sign of the times. Remember when Ocarina of Time did away with 8bit side scrolling combat in favor of 3D and lock-on targeting? This is kind of like that.
Also, if you were fighting the sprinting husks from behind cover you must have died a lot. You're supposed to run around while shooting them, kind of like you seemed to love so much in ME1. It's generally a bad idea to sit in one spot when fighting fast-moving melee enemies in any game in any genre. And you don't only heal in cover, you heal when you haven't been hit for a couple seconds. Melee enemies only hit you when you're in cover. Don't let them hit you and you'll heal.
4.Limited Ammo
You know what I didn't like in ME1? Not being able to fire more than 6 or 7 shots at a time in the first half of the game. There's also no difference between shooting an enemy in the foot or the head, so there's little need to aim.
Ammo was everywhere. And all guns used the same ammo, so you'd never get stuck using one you didn't want to when your baby ran out. Bioware changed the ammo system because they didn't like how it worked in ME1. They tried the heat thing and didn't like it, so it's not there anymore.
You're desperately trying to make the change seem like a deliberate attack on your dignity, like they had a big poster with your face on it in the office to remind them to gear all their changes to piss you off.
You said you wanted them to make ME3 but you clearly don't. You want them to make ME1 again, but they're not going to because they already made that game and now they're doing something else. Go play ME1 again instead of complaining about a company's evolution.
"BioWare announced yesterday that Mass Effect 3 has been pushed back from its planned launch target at the end of 2011 so that it can be tweaked to appeal to as wide a market as possible."
Yup, Mass Effect has just officially ceased to be an RPG. If you are going to piss on us, Bioware, at least have the courtesy to call it rain.
"BioWare announced yesterday that Mass Effect 3 has been pushed back from its planned launch target at the end of 2011 so that it can be tweaked to appeal to as wide a market as possible."
Yup, Mass Effect has just officially ceased to be an RPG. If you are going to piss on us, Bioware, at least have the courtesy to call it rain.
You realize that two posts above yours is a quote from Mass Effect 3's lead gameplay designer stating that they're actually improving the stat-based RPG elements, yes?
More to the point, and I do have to ask this...who exactly is playing Mass Effect for the stats? Mass Effect has ALWAYS been known for the story/characters, emphasis on player choice and the dialogue wheel.
for about two pages we were having a civilized back and forth now its devolving to "hup derp gears in space durr me no likey call of duty effect. just great to reiterate my last statement ME will never be call of duty or gears or w.e the hell people decide to pull out of their ass to compare it to. Like i also stated judging by all the shooter hate im pretty sure most of the haters here haven't even played any of these games they are tryna lump ME in with, improved combat is always a good thing, besides the powers Combat in ME1 sucked it was piss poor if u liked it thats fine its your preference and i wont knock yall on that but but as some1 WHO HAS ACTUALLY PLAYED SHOOTERS i can tell you thats is garbage, why wouldn't bioware want to present a more fluid and dynamic combat system? Thats like being an MMA fighter who is amazing at one aspect of combat and bad at the rest, your not gonna compete at a high level only knowing one form of combat now matter how good you are at that one aspect.
I was misrepresented in an article recently, which made it sound like I
wanted to remove RPG elements and stats from combat. What I actually
said was, I wanted RPG progression to have a more meaningful impact on
combat, but that was misrepresented as "cutting rpg stats" we actually
have more stats in me3 that affect combat, and the overall impact of rpg
progress on combat is greater. Anyway sorry for the longish tweet but I
just wanted ot clear that up, and a few people were asking me what was
up!
-Christina Norman, Lead Gameplay Designer of Mass Effect 3
Twitter / @Christina Norman: I was misrepresented in an ...
In my opinion, people have been overreacting over the "wider audience" statements made by EA.
The way I see it, it may mean the exact opposite of what everybody thinks it means, especially since those same people who have been overreacting are also the people who have stated that Mass Effect 2 appealed towards shooter fans too much.
This "wider audience" may in fact be referring to the RPG fans who were unsatisfied with Mass Effect 2's trend towards FPS elements, in an attempt to regain that core fanbase that Bioware has been seen as shirking.
Me? I'll be fine as long as all calibrations have been calculated prior to the release date.
On one hand, an RPG for me means a developed, dynamic story with in-depth character interaction. For a lot of people (and by "a lot of people" I mean "a solid chunk of Bioware's customer base"), however, it means a deep stats system.
"Stat-free" RPGs can be done - Borderlands jumps to mind, for instance - the stat customization is roughly on par with COD or BFBC2, and it's widely seen as Diablo in space. But Bioware has not exactly inspired the confidence as of late.
On one hand, an RPG for me means a developed, dynamic story with in-depth character interaction. For a lot of people (and by "a lot of people" I mean "a solid chunk of Bioware's customer base"), however, it means a deep stats system.
"Stat-free" RPGs can be done - Borderlands jumps to mind, for instance - the stat customization is roughly on par with COD or BFBC2, and it's widely seen as Diablo in space. But Bioware has not exactly inspired the confidence as of late.
People generally consider Borderlands an RPG because it's basically Diablo with guns. Pretty low on stats, unless you count stuff like gun damage/fire rate/clip size, which any decent shooter has.
I was misrepresented in an article recently, which made it sound like I
wanted to remove RPG elements and stats from combat. What I actually
said was, I wanted RPG progression to have a more meaningful impact on
combat, but that was misrepresented as "cutting rpg stats" we actually
have more stats in me3 that affect combat, and the overall impact of rpg
progress on combat is greater. Anyway sorry for the longish tweet but I
just wanted ot clear that up, and a few people were asking me what was
up!
-Christina Norman, Lead Gameplay Designer of Mass Effect 3
Twitter / @Christina Norman: I was misrepresented in an ...
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.
but I enjoy going through my weapons inventory and upgrading them one by one...micromanaging each and every piece of equipment is so much fun...otherwise you can't call it a role playing game!!
Haha, yeah getting a new gun (version VII instead of VI) then picking up new ammo upgrades incendiary rounds +1 damage over the previous level, now go stick it on each party members guns. I usually didn't bother until a few levels were between what i was using and what I was picking up. Otherwise you couldn't really tell a difference. That inventory sucked my first playthrough I didn't even know you could upgrade your guns cause i was on a 13 inch SD tv and couldn't read text lol.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
