Mass Effect 3 discussion

yeah probably. But that made the game more fun in the end. At leats for me.

Though you really can lower those randomness with high level characters quite much.
 
sea said:
snip
Click to expand...

I agree with Ausdoerrt here. IMO you are vastly overexagarrating, you make it sound as if a critical hit would occur in every turn in every combat, while in reality the chance for that to happen is much, much lower. I agree that Fallout lacked some ways to counter some critical effects, but that was what the game made interesting for me...

I also can't understand what's wrong with the BG examples you provided, they're fun. The Dragon Age ones sound rather boring to me.. In the end it boils down to matter of tastes anyway..
 
brfritos said:
It's interesting that this particular battle in ME2 contradicts in every way what you've said.

The battle depends more of your strategy and how you move your "pieces" on the battelfiled, like a chess game, than Shepard skills.
You have lots of different ways to fight and the battle is hard, but if you make a wrong or poorly move the chances to be killed are raised exponencially.
Click to expand...
I've played ME2 about nine times between the PC and 360, I had to look up Horizon as it was so unmemorable. It's not a difficult level, annoying especially the boss fight at the end which won't allow you to save between waves but not difficult. Only strategy I've needed, even on insane, is head to the left to the little walkway between two prefabs. Position one companion either end of the walkway, behind cover. Take cover yourself and just pop up and shoot the enemy, keep and eye out for husks popping up behind you. When the praetorian arrives go from cover to cover not letting it get too close and hit it with your heavy weapon. Only time I've died in that section is when I wanted to sprint away from the praetorian and the stupid sprint key, which is also the take cover and use key, stuck me into cover instead. Now that's bad design.

brfritos said:
Is funny that people take the comment as a direct "insult" against Fallout. :roll:
Click to expand...
Which comment?

sea said:
Really? I would say Fallout suffered immensely from unlucky crits, in which cases there was basically nothing you could do to protect yourself. And don't go saying Power Armor is some sort of godly artifact that protects you from all harm - small arms, yes. Missiles? Laser and plasma weapons? Explosives? No way in hell, you're still just as squishy. I die just as much in Power Armor in the later stages of the game, almost always due to critical hits. You can say it's a flaw in my tactics, or that I'm not healing enough, but then that just reveals an even bigger problem, i.e. the player shouldn't have to rely on using healing items every turn.
Click to expand...
Build, armour, drugs and position help but knowing the sequence and therefor which targets to attack first is important as is knowing the best weapons to use in each situation. Sometimes it does come down to luck, I sure have dealt more lucky criticals than I've ever received. You just have to take a chance, if you always know exactly what is going to happen when you press end turn where's the fun in that?

sea said:
I think a good example of bad use of random die rolls is Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate 2. Granted, the basic system is taken from D&D, but I think the implementation in Baldur's Gate sucks... at high levels, enemies get spells that will completely ruin you if you don't save against them (including instant death spells with no real counter, charm spells that are almost impossible to resist, etc.) and often victory is not a result of tactics, it's whether or not you get those 1-in-10 odds. With Tales of the Sword Coast especially, the low level cap and limited quality equipment often reduced combat to a series of lucky rolls rather than anything requiring strategy.
Click to expand...
I'm not a big fan of the balding git (though I did start replaying it yesterday funny enough), but there is a lot of strategy it's not just random rolls. For every instant death spell there's either a class kit, potion, magical item or spell that'll protect you if not entirely at least from the worst. It's a definite example of preparation over reaction.

sea said:
If it's "replay this fight because an enemy insta-killed you at random" and your only recourse is to try again and wait for a) the AI to shit itself and do something stupid or b) get a lucky crit yourself, then that is bad design. If you seriously think that killing the player, with you having absolutely no influence on the outcome whatsoever, is a good thing... then I just don't know what. You'd might as well just have a 0.5% chance of getting a game over screen every second. I don't buy the "it's a tabletop thing!" excuse that some people use as well... that doesn't excuse the fact that it's still pointless and frustrating in a single-player (and especially a single-character) game.
Click to expand...
What's pointless and frustrating in single player games is not allowing freesaving and requiring people to replay from the last checkpoint rather than the last quicksave. There are games where you prepare, plan and then eventually just have to roll the dice and see what happens. There are games that can almost literally play themselves (especially if you download the mod for Dragon Age that enables tactics for your controlled character) and there are games that only require you to hit the coloured buttons in the right order at the right time. Not all games are for everybody but just because you don't like a feature of a game doesn't mean it's bad design. Bad design would be to only allow the ai the chance of critical hits and the player the chance of critical misses.

sea said:
One thing semi-related to randomness that I also hate is when games force you to metagame or abuse their mechanics or flaws in order to win. Many RPGs have battles that can only be won by dying repeatedly to learn all the enemy's attacks, and in lots of cases even exploiting bad AI and other things like that that the developers intend you to do. Fallout actually has a lot of this, like ducking behind corners and waiting for the Super Mutants to follow you out one at a time. It turns the game into abusing cheese tactics, and downplays the ability to adapt to new situations, which is what random rolls are supposed to help with in the first place
Click to expand...
And how many real time games have scripted death traps where they literally drop the floor out from under your feet instantly kill your character the first time? It's not metagaming it's just gaming pure and simple. No gamer worth their salt expects to just breeze through every fight without having to learn the ai's tactics. Where's the challenge in that? You think that no military in the real world never tries to split the enemy forces is it cheese tactics then?

sea said:
In those cases where you have no way of knowing otherwise, it'd might as well be luck. Not sure if you've suffered through Call of Duty 4+ on Veteran, but it basically comes down to dying 20 times at every combat encounter, peeking out from behind corners until you can get a clear shot off, and then repeating that a dozen times through each level in the game. About the only way to win is to memorize enemy spawn locations and triggers. If that's your idea of fun, then go nuts, but I don't think it qualifies as good design any day of the week.
Click to expand...
I'm still laughing at you believing you didn't die from a lack of skill. Funniest thing I've read on NMA in ages, COD4 that's the first Modern Warfare isn't it? I've played that, yeah it wasn't brilliant (single player at least I don't play multiplayer) but it also wasn't very random. It's one of the most heavily scripted shooters I've played, it's the sort of thing you're advocating for by removing random chance from games.
 
Sub-Human said:
If anything, I enjoyed Mass Effect more than the second one. I liked the idea of a inventory with millions of items (hmm... I'm in a minority here myself). The story was much better and to be honest, I like the idea of being military rather than the boring badass rogue.

Also, this Shepherd 'back from the dead' is extremely annoying. Come on, couldn't they just make up something else? Talking with Anderson as the new Councellor was just amazingly stupid, it just seemed they were lazy adding it.

The romance was, lol, pretty infantile. Back in high school, now are we? :)
Click to expand...

I agree. Mass effect 2 was only better combat wise. I hated the fact that importing my save only gave me some cash, a few extra bits of dialogue and some e-mails. E-MAILS FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.
 
I wonder how many people are going to preorder the game now. After DA2 and SWTOR I would be very doubtful.
God help if they make multiplayer obligatory for finishing the game 100%...
 
LinkPain said:
I wonder how many people are going to preorder the game now. After DA2 and SWTOR I would be very doubtful.
God help if they make multiplayer obligatory for finishing the game 100%...
Click to expand...

I don't know, I'm not THAT pessimist like the rest of you guys.

Some features confirmed by the devs includes:

- XP system goes back to ME1 (almost like they say).
- weapons and armors can be fully customized regarding aesthetics and functionality
- more complex skill tree
- powers will evolve more than once
- return of the banter system
- male and female Shepard will have different animations (wich had to be implemented a long time ago)
- no more mission summary and "loading the level"
- Reapers will have different sizes, they are not all "Empire State size"
- they are promissing multiple endings
- every major character in both ME1 and ME2 will make a return, including previous squadmates
- the Council choice will matter
- indoctrination seems to play a role in ME3, possibly including party members (yes, kill your allies!).

Regarding combat we have:

- Shooting specific armor parts can have certain effects, and the AI of the enemies will have them routing Shepard and will coordinate with each other.
- Enemy Weapons may be used. Bioware is currently testing whether they should drop weapons or not.
- Biotic Powers such as pull, throw, and shockwave are more effective on enemies with shields and armor (like in ME1, BTW).
- All classes have fitness which boost health/shields and melee damage
- Melee attack statistical progression has to do with ability level-up, not weapon customization
- Grenades are making a return
- Partial Leaning has been introduced
- Most pistols reload quickly, hit harder, but have less ammo (about time, a pistol is a pistol, they are not uselless weapons)

People can agree and disagree with the features, is their right, but it seems that Bioware is trying to make the game and story more cohesive, logical and without some contradiction with the established lore, instead of simply adding a lot of coolshit.

If the game will be good is a whole other topic, but at least they are trying.
Let's wait and see.
 
brfritos said:
- the Council choice will matter
Click to expand...


Oh dear. I hope the lack of the council won't screw me over. I let them go because I thought if I didn't sovereign wouldn't get killed in time.
 
brfritos said:
LinkPain said:
I wonder how many people are going to preorder the game now. After DA2 and SWTOR I would be very doubtful.
God help if they make multiplayer obligatory for finishing the game 100%...
Click to expand...

I don't know, I'm not THAT pessimist like the rest of you guys.

Some features confirmed by the devs includes:

- XP system goes back to ME1 (almost like they say).
- weapons and armors can be fully customized regarding aesthetics and functionality
- more complex skill tree
- powers will evolve more than once
- return of the banter system
- male and female Shepard will have different animations (wich had to be implemented a long time ago)
- no more mission summary and "loading the level"
- Reapers will have different sizes, they are not all "Empire State size"
- they are promissing multiple endings
- every major character in both ME1 and ME2 will make a return, including previous squadmates
- the Council choice will matter
- indoctrination seems to play a role in ME3, possibly including party members (yes, kill your allies!).

Regarding combat we have:

- Shooting specific armor parts can have certain effects, and the AI of the enemies will have them routing Shepard and will coordinate with each other.
- Enemy Weapons may be used. Bioware is currently testing whether they should drop weapons or not.
- Biotic Powers such as pull, throw, and shockwave are more effective on enemies with shields and armor (like in ME1, BTW).
- All classes have fitness which boost health/shields and melee damage
- Melee attack statistical progression has to do with ability level-up, not weapon customization
- Grenades are making a return
- Partial Leaning has been introduced
- Most pistols reload quickly, hit harder, but have less ammo (about time, a pistol is a pistol, they are not uselless weapons)

People can agree and disagree with the features, is their right, but it seems that Bioware is trying to make the game and story more cohesive, logical and without some contradiction with the established lore, instead of simply adding a lot of coolshit.

If the game will be good is a whole other topic, but at least they are trying.
Let's wait and see.
Click to expand...

Well, it's still little more than an action game with few RPG elements. Plus, I don't really trust EA anyways. 6 possible outcomes doesn't mean 'the game has a massive amount of choices, with consequences that follow you up close through the whole game' as EA, each pre- and reviewer, and various players promised.

Yes, I like the cinematic experience of Mass Effect, but there's a certain thing about 'choices' in between or during these cutscenes that bothers me.
 
Sub-Human said:
Well, it's still little more than an action game with few RPG elements. .
Click to expand...



See this is what always kind of confused me about NMA. If it's a good game, then why bother considering what genre it is?

Like if I bought a romance novel and halfway through it cut out the weird gay subtext stuff that middle aged women like for some unfathomable reason, and replaced it with a tech noir thriller set in Mumbai 2073 I would be annoyed, but if it was done well I'd probably be on board as long as it was good.
 
see it more like a vanilla ice cream sandwich which tourned out to be chicken flavoured fried meat sandwich once you muched half trough it. - And that all while you expected ONLY to get an ice cream sandwich

Some might not care.

Others do.
 
Sabirah said:
Sub-Human said:
Well, it's still little more than an action game with few RPG elements. .
Click to expand...



See this is what always kind of confused me about NMA. If it's a good game, then why bother considering what genre it is?

Like if I bought a romance novel and halfway through it cut out the weird gay subtext stuff that middle aged women like for some unfathomable reason, and replaced it with a tech noir thriller set in Mumbai 2073 I would be annoyed, but if it was done well I'd probably be on board as long as it was good.
Click to expand...

Fact is, I liked Mass Effect mostly because of the amount of stuff you could say in dialogue. Usually an action game cuts that down to few dialogue pieces (not that Mass Effect 1 didn't).

So when I say a genre in a negative way, it means I don't imagine the game actually being made in it and being good at the same time (for example, Fallout as a first-person shooter and exploration, aka Fallout 3). Not that I have anything specific against genres, but in the late years, I've come to be really bored of games unless they're something I've played in my childhood, and action games especially get on my nerves.
 
Sabirah said:
Sub-Human said:
Well, it's still little more than an action game with few RPG elements. .
Click to expand...

See this is what always kind of confused me about NMA. If it's a good game, then why bother considering what genre it is?

Like if I bought a romance novel and halfway through it cut out the weird gay subtext stuff that middle aged women like for some unfathomable reason, and replaced it with a tech noir thriller set in Mumbai 2073 I would be annoyed, but if it was done well I'd probably be on board as long as it was good.
Click to expand...

Actually there's a lot of concerns about ME3, I'm too a little cautious about what Bioware is doing with the saga.
Cautious, not pessimist, let me reinforce that.

This doesn't mean the game is automatically crap, but I understand the pessimism around the third installment.
The first game was not perfect, had some flaws, but showed a lot of promisse.

Then in second they simply scrap off almost everything and changed the gameplay to a shooter saying "is for the better". But now almost everything that was cutted from the first game is returning?
And they are putting back almost everything they cutted off from ME1, I'm not joking.
Why the sundden change back and forth?

So the reasons for people being insecure about ME3 are not unfounded.

In this month XBOX 360 magazine it was confirmed that the Action mode turns the game in a straigh shooter subtracting the story, dialogs and RPG elements (the RPG mode is the game with all elements togheter).
My friend scanned the pages, if it's allowed I can put the links here.

I'm all for given choices to the player, but how do I not know that one mode will interfere with the other?
 
Action Mode automates dialog, nothing more, and alternates between Paragon/Renegade. Story Mode sets the difficulty to the lowest possible, a walk in the park basically. You can change those settings in the options at any time. So I don't see what the big deal is.

As for my expectations, the gameplay side is pretty encouraging to me. More ways to play, refined combat and more customization can't go wrong. Story-side? Um. I didn't read the leaks, but the echoes seem to show Bioware caters to the... fringes of their fanbase way to damn much. I certainly hope that bit about [spoiler:f486021d56]Joker and EDI having hot robot sex[/spoiler:f486021d56] is a fabrication, because yuck.
 
thats pretty cool.


now, i know that kinect can be used for the PC, but when is MS going to port it to the PC and allow publishers to use it?

something like this on PC would be nice, but much less important due to how many buttons we have in comparison to the consoles.
 
sea said:
Token-not-found said:
Any more info about how the "1000 variables" will be used?

What changes based on what?
Click to expand...
The photograph on Shepard's nightstand changes based on who you banged, and if party members died in Mass Effect 2, they won't be around to tell you they can't join your party for some contrived reason.
Click to expand...

UHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

But at least I think this time you won't get a mail telling you this.
 
We got a demo coming February 14 (so much for that planned January release) and a little video with James Vega's voice actor http://www.gametrailers.com/video/james-vega-mass-effect/726004

And while I still think the bloke looks way too much like a Jersey Shore douchebag, he seems to at least have more character than Jacob or Kaidan, and his voice actor sure is enthusiastic. He's also very couragous to spar with Shepard, the man/women who punches 10 foot tall monsters for sport.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top