No "Meaningless Stat Games" in Mass Effect 3
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
That is exactly what I thought when she said no meaningless stat games, this is why the fanbase pisses me off, they hear the slightest change to a mechanic in the game and rage as hard as they can without realizing the vague statement they heard could just mean they're actually improving an existing mechanic rather than doing away with it.Magenera said:
"We're going to improve the combat" - "THEY'RE MAKING IT CALL OF DUTY IN SPACE RAWR"
"Cerberus is going after Shepard" - "RETCON!!!! THIS DOESN'T MAKE SENSE"
Please stop raging until you at the very least get a gameplay video showing what's going on, gosh bioware fans like to rage every two seconds. I for one am glad for this change, I hate feeling as if my upgrades do nothing.
hahaha yeah I play on a SD TV (not 13 inch thankfully...I remember playing N64 and some GameCube on this portable 13 inch when I was moving a few years back) and it gets frazzling sometimessneakypenguin said: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.duchaked said: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!!sneakypenguin said:
snip
altho didn't have too much trouble with Mass Effect 2 on an ok sized LCD screen (or maybe Miranda's humongous backside just covered most of the screen every time I talked to her...w00t)
I wanted to come in here and rage how they should expand ME3's RPG elements, but I'm reading here the quote from the lead designer that she meant that stats will have a bigger impact than previously. So I guess everything went better than expected.
That being said, I hope they do bring some stuff from ME1, in ME2 they streamlined it a bit too much for my taste. For instance I was missing getting on and off the spaceship, which resulted in ME2 feeling like going from a room to room, so while I wanted to feel the vastness of the open space it felt like everything was going on in different buildings in the same small town.
That being said, I hope they do bring some stuff from ME1, in ME2 they streamlined it a bit too much for my taste. For instance I was missing getting on and off the spaceship, which resulted in ME2 feeling like going from a room to room, so while I wanted to feel the vastness of the open space it felt like everything was going on in different buildings in the same small town.
/shrug, as statements go, it's pretty innocuous. Much like "delaying the game to make it appeal to a broader audience" does not automatically translate to "turning Mass Effect 3 into a pure shooter and removing the RPG element entirely".
I read this particular statement, apparently correctly, as "Mass Effect 3 will have stats, and those stats will have a significant effect on combat effectiveness", which makes it more like Mass Effect and less like the more shooter-oriented Mass Effect 2.
I read this particular statement, apparently correctly, as "Mass Effect 3 will have stats, and those stats will have a significant effect on combat effectiveness", which makes it more like Mass Effect and less like the more shooter-oriented Mass Effect 2.
... What the crud? I found this news absolutely exciting, it sounds great. Honestly, I really don't like playing space-poker for two hours just to get some space-poker cards that will improve my space-poker playing, with the promise that if I eventually get good enough at space-poker it'll become a reliable source of health-packs or whatever. If I'm playing space poker for two hours rather than playing the actual game, I expect that space poker to have a big impact on the main game. (No, none of this previous statement was based on Mass Effect 2, I honestly haven't played it. Just putting forth the idea.) Bioware isn't getting rid of side-games, folks. From what it sounds like, they're just tying side-games into the main game a bit better, and to me, that sounds like one of the greatest things an RPG developer can do.
QFT.rsvp42 said:
This groaning by everyone about the RPG credibility of ME3 is getting old fast! In my mind the ME series is one of the truly real RPG's in the world. In what other game can your decisions have an effect on the sequel?
What do we know -
- Expanded skill tree (more RPG elements)
- Expanded weapons
- Stat games having a big impact (So an RPG element impacting combat)
So let's just calm the hell down.
And for all you RPG snobs out there, get over it, just because ME doesn't have an inventory on mission inventory the size of Schindler?s list doesn't make it a shooter and not an RPG!
What do we know -
- Expanded skill tree (more RPG elements)
- Expanded weapons
- Stat games having a big impact (So an RPG element impacting combat)
So let's just calm the hell down.
And for all you RPG snobs out there, get over it, just because ME doesn't have an inventory on mission inventory the size of Schindler?s list doesn't make it a shooter and not an RPG!
@Ian_Caronia
I'm just gonna dissect every "point" you just made, because you made it easy.
1. You are not the only fan of the game. And ultimately, I'm sure all of the nerd-raging morons without a single valid point will be proven the minority, so I'm going to just let you know now...the combat change WAS a reaction to fans. And critics. And everyone but you non-gamers and your whiny, illogical opinions with no tangible back up or basis in reality.
2. Yes, there was more crap on the skill trees in ME1, but as I already pointed out in an earlier post; none of it mattered. After you get halfway through the game, singularity disables every standard enemy in the room, pistol auto-tracks opponents so far away you can't even see them on a standard definition television, and lift and throw bring down even massive Mako-based enemies, making them useless, ragdolled targets that can't fight back. In basing everything on stats, you give into the major flaw of every stat-based RPG...Min/maxing breaks it. Every time. Forever. YOU might have liked the combat more. Some of us want more.
3. Red crap...actually, I agree with you on this one. And it hurts me to say that, but nothing makes a tough situation harder and more frustrating to fight through than a blinding wall of pointless red-bleedy nonsense that gets more intrusive the more dire things get. And Mass Effect isn't the only game that does it. It's a trend that needs to see a stop.
4. Powers from the same energy pool, though an odd choice, DOES have both pros and cons. It forces you to think carefully about which is the most useful power in a critical moment, and makes you take into consideration about how long it takes down your abilities. Tech-Armor's a great example. It can save your butt, but using it means you can't get out that much needed warp or overload for another hour. You could argue it made gameplay more gun focused, but in ME1 you could cycle through all your character's abilities and THEN your squad mates' in an infinite loop and never have to use guns at all. Especially since, and I can't stress this enough...SINGULARITY BEATS EVERYTHING!
5. Limited Ammo is also a mixed bag. Sure it's kind of annoying in theory, but I can hardly remember a point where the game wasn't throwing ammo at you for killing enemies. If you know how to shoot straight, even on insanity it was rarely, if ever, a big deal. That being said, The idea of overheat was cool, but ultimately, the ability of Assault Rifles and Pistols to activate abilities that removed it from the equation made it so that you could just hit Marksman or Overkill and finish the fight before the time even ran down...even fighting multiple colossi and armatures on foot. Easily so after a warp, which in ME1 knocked an enemy's damage resistance down by a whopping 75% at max level. Seriously...how can ANYthing be challenging with an ability like that?
6. Heat sinks bother you? Really? You're sitting there trying to make a real, serious business scientific argument about a game based on the premise that we use ONE magical substance called element zero to travel MILLIONS of times faster than the speed of light, create force fields, and GAIN PSYCHIC POWERS. I...wow. Just wow dude. REALLY?
7. NONE of your arguments PROVE Mass Effect isn't a ROLE PLAYING GAME. In fact, the breadth of choices YOU brought up pretty much prove that it IS. What you and half the people here on this board don't understand is that no matter what YOU personally like it, and no matter what PREVIOUS games in the genre clung to, a massive system of stat-based character building full of redundancies and useless dice rolls is NOT critical to the genre. If you like it so much, go buy a JRPG, because they utterly LACK choices and haven't had a meaningful evolution since the 16-bit era, which should work for those of you threatened by change. But of course, you must have some bone to pick with those games too, because NO ONE IS BUYING THEM OUTSIDE OF JAPAN ANYMORE. Which is yet another indicator of the kind of game "fans" want, whether your minority opinion syncs up with it or not.
8. And this will be the last and most important point...Bioware never PROMISED you shit, and Bioware doesn't OWE you shit. Period.
I'm just gonna dissect every "point" you just made, because you made it easy.
1. You are not the only fan of the game. And ultimately, I'm sure all of the nerd-raging morons without a single valid point will be proven the minority, so I'm going to just let you know now...the combat change WAS a reaction to fans. And critics. And everyone but you non-gamers and your whiny, illogical opinions with no tangible back up or basis in reality.
2. Yes, there was more crap on the skill trees in ME1, but as I already pointed out in an earlier post; none of it mattered. After you get halfway through the game, singularity disables every standard enemy in the room, pistol auto-tracks opponents so far away you can't even see them on a standard definition television, and lift and throw bring down even massive Mako-based enemies, making them useless, ragdolled targets that can't fight back. In basing everything on stats, you give into the major flaw of every stat-based RPG...Min/maxing breaks it. Every time. Forever. YOU might have liked the combat more. Some of us want more.
3. Red crap...actually, I agree with you on this one. And it hurts me to say that, but nothing makes a tough situation harder and more frustrating to fight through than a blinding wall of pointless red-bleedy nonsense that gets more intrusive the more dire things get. And Mass Effect isn't the only game that does it. It's a trend that needs to see a stop.
4. Powers from the same energy pool, though an odd choice, DOES have both pros and cons. It forces you to think carefully about which is the most useful power in a critical moment, and makes you take into consideration about how long it takes down your abilities. Tech-Armor's a great example. It can save your butt, but using it means you can't get out that much needed warp or overload for another hour. You could argue it made gameplay more gun focused, but in ME1 you could cycle through all your character's abilities and THEN your squad mates' in an infinite loop and never have to use guns at all. Especially since, and I can't stress this enough...SINGULARITY BEATS EVERYTHING!
5. Limited Ammo is also a mixed bag. Sure it's kind of annoying in theory, but I can hardly remember a point where the game wasn't throwing ammo at you for killing enemies. If you know how to shoot straight, even on insanity it was rarely, if ever, a big deal. That being said, The idea of overheat was cool, but ultimately, the ability of Assault Rifles and Pistols to activate abilities that removed it from the equation made it so that you could just hit Marksman or Overkill and finish the fight before the time even ran down...even fighting multiple colossi and armatures on foot. Easily so after a warp, which in ME1 knocked an enemy's damage resistance down by a whopping 75% at max level. Seriously...how can ANYthing be challenging with an ability like that?
6. Heat sinks bother you? Really? You're sitting there trying to make a real, serious business scientific argument about a game based on the premise that we use ONE magical substance called element zero to travel MILLIONS of times faster than the speed of light, create force fields, and GAIN PSYCHIC POWERS. I...wow. Just wow dude. REALLY?
7. NONE of your arguments PROVE Mass Effect isn't a ROLE PLAYING GAME. In fact, the breadth of choices YOU brought up pretty much prove that it IS. What you and half the people here on this board don't understand is that no matter what YOU personally like it, and no matter what PREVIOUS games in the genre clung to, a massive system of stat-based character building full of redundancies and useless dice rolls is NOT critical to the genre. If you like it so much, go buy a JRPG, because they utterly LACK choices and haven't had a meaningful evolution since the 16-bit era, which should work for those of you threatened by change. But of course, you must have some bone to pick with those games too, because NO ONE IS BUYING THEM OUTSIDE OF JAPAN ANYMORE. Which is yet another indicator of the kind of game "fans" want, whether your minority opinion syncs up with it or not.
8. And this will be the last and most important point...Bioware never PROMISED you shit, and Bioware doesn't OWE you shit. Period.
Kahunaburger said:
I now feel 100% better. Thanks Bioware for putting these rumors to rest.Duskflamer said:
I'm pleased about this. All Norman's saying is that there won't be a repeat of the silly 'galactic quantity surveyor' thing we saw last time, which only affected the final battle and did so in a way which felt a little forced and strange. Using it to upgrade your battle weaponry felt a little weird to me also - like there was a gap between the upgrades and the method for getting the minerals which felt a little too large.
My interpretation of what she's saying here is that the RPG elements will still be present, but will be blended into the gameplay rather than being as disconnected as they were in ME2.
My interpretation of what she's saying here is that the RPG elements will still be present, but will be blended into the gameplay rather than being as disconnected as they were in ME2.
Who cares? All I really care about is that they leave the dialogue alone. However, if they say no more meaningless cut scenes or dialogue I will rage along with the rest of you.
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
This proves how one misquote can incite mass hysteria. So much for PC gamers being the more intelligent section of the gaming world.
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
This proves how one misquote can incite mass hysteria. So much for PC gamers being the more intelligent section of the gaming world.
umm, the ME series is also on the Xbox360 you know, and ME2 is on the PS3 as well. Who said anything about this being a PC gamer issue?Savber said:
It's no secret that the greatest ire towards Bioware recent games are mostly from PC gamers and I don't blame them. However, I find the hysteria about the 'dumbing down' and 'consolization' attitude of the PC crowed downright more irritating than whiny console gamers.Duskflamer said:
You know, for some of us the "meaningless stat game" is actually a large part of the game experience itself. It's a little vague what they mean by that but recalling how Mass Effect 2 was changed from the original I can imagine the meaning. How many hours shorter would Baldur's Gate, Planescape, Arcanum or even Mass Effect 1 have been if we didn't spend any time in the "meaningless stat game"? It isn't just some time sink, all of those items and upgrades give us small pieces of the game world. It makes us think strategically and oddly, also forces us to think about our characters more and spend more time in their inventory screens. That's more time looking at their portraits, it really does work and you can't just ignore that.
The magic items in Baldur's Gate with their bite sized fantasy backgrounds may seem more obvious than giving each of the weapons and upgrades in Mass Effect a manufacturer but it's the same principle. You fill the world with these odd little tidbits and it fills in the gaps of the story more intuitively than some NPC blithely whining exposition at you. You gun down an enemy and/or find a body you have the ability to pick up what he/she was carrying. The importance isn't just of getting more loots, what that body carried has meaning for the setting. And upgrading the skills of your roster of buddies makes you spend more time thinking about them as well and considering their role in the game. If you take that away you're making the game world just a little more hollow.
The magic items in Baldur's Gate with their bite sized fantasy backgrounds may seem more obvious than giving each of the weapons and upgrades in Mass Effect a manufacturer but it's the same principle. You fill the world with these odd little tidbits and it fills in the gaps of the story more intuitively than some NPC blithely whining exposition at you. You gun down an enemy and/or find a body you have the ability to pick up what he/she was carrying. The importance isn't just of getting more loots, what that body carried has meaning for the setting. And upgrading the skills of your roster of buddies makes you spend more time thinking about them as well and considering their role in the game. If you take that away you're making the game world just a little more hollow.
Actually, according to the new Game Informer, or a number of other sources I'm sure, Mass Effect 3 actually DOES allow you to pick up weapons from the enemies you down. They've also added the ability to customize your weapons. And since they haven't stated otherwise, I'm pretty sure you can STILL choose how your teammates' skills evolve, since that never really left the series at any point. Without rehashing the "randomized stats aren't really at ALL strategic" argument, I have to ask...what's your complaint, exactly?GGZeta said:
I was sceptical of the changes in ME2, then I played it and found it better than the original. If they're going for more of the same in ME3, I'm cautiously optimistic.
ya know, one thing I'm hoping it'll be. Is when I shoot a guy in the head with my sniper rifle, that he doesn't duck behind cover after words, but he dies. it happens way to much in ME, and thats after their shields are down. I hope thats one thing they are doing.
