Mass Effect 3
- Thread starter nightshade
- Start date
Yeah, in Gears you can shoot, throw grenades, melee, and maybe use the hammer of dawn at times.
In ME, you can shoot, melee (omniblade in ME3, yeah), but you can also levitate, detonate, burn, freeze, push, mind control enemies, (robots), speed up time, teleport, and then there's the mini-nuke and more... And then there's the whole exploration, conversation, decision making, skill and equipment upgrades... Which is why it takes three to ten times as long to complete
There's just a whole lot more to do.
In ME, you can shoot, melee (omniblade in ME3, yeah), but you can also levitate, detonate, burn, freeze, push, mind control enemies, (robots), speed up time, teleport, and then there's the mini-nuke and more... And then there's the whole exploration, conversation, decision making, skill and equipment upgrades... Which is why it takes three to ten times as long to complete
There's just a whole lot more to do.And for people like me, the run and gun is merely the incredibly annoying lever I have to push to get to the reward of the storyline. I would be happier if the game had no combat at all, or at least, let you turn the combat sections into cutscenes. For me the fun is in the "choose your own adventure" storyline. I felt the same way about Mirror's Edge, which would have been a lot more fun with absolutely no guns in it.
Maybe you should go rent a movie?
Anyway....played ME3 demo and the combat seems ok, not great. This coming from someone who plays a lot of TPS ie...Vanquish, Lost Planet, Gears3. I also HATE the mannequin faces of the character models, there is no LIFE in them and the EYES seems like they're from robots.
As soon as someone makes a Mass Effect movie, I will absolutely go rent it.
I think you misunderstand though. I am not against all gameplay elements, I am merely against pointless twitch related gameplay that does nothing to advance the story. For instance, I loved Jade Empire, including the combat, because the combat itself was a character in the story.
In Mass Effect, it makes absolutely no sense. Shephard's the _captain_ of the ship, not a bloody marine or security officer. Who the hell does she think she is? Captain Kirk? If anything, the combat sections should be RTS style, except for rare cases where she gets caught unawares during other negotiations.
And in Mirror's Edge, the police are way too free with their weaponry. Do you realize how many forms a cop who discharges their weapon has to fill out, along with being suspended until the shooting is deemed justified? It is a last resort, and in Mirror's Edge, where the richness was in the free running and fluid fighting style, it was a completely unnecessary and annoying gameplay element. (And I'll note I finished Mirror's Edge without firing a single shot)
I actually agree that they broke RPG elements in Mass Effect 2 and are continuing that in Mass Effect 3. The first example i would give, its how You build You character, there is almost no development in terms of classes, You can have Your favorite primary skill that will be maxed earlier, but overall everyone has the same build in the end.
You cant do tank builds, or completely support builds on characters, because You cant increase Your hp regeneration/resistances/armor/shield significantly. You cant send one char as a tanked decoy, You cant play as a tank as a Shepard not only because You cant build hp and resistances or have proper skills for that, but also because AI always target You first, so whole game get into the cover, pop up, kill some guys, hide, pop out etc. In Mass Effect combat was much more tactical, even if a little clumsy at times.
Ps. Multiplayer is so fun
I have to argue with some of that as well. There are at least 2-3 very different builds per class, combining powers, weapons, armor elements and squad members in specific ways. The elements of the ME2 system are more simple on their own, that is true, but the balance is actually better and the variety from their combinations is actually far greater.
In ME1 it was all about getting singularity, firepower, and the electronics/decryption skill to open loot crates, so either you chose an adept, or took Liara with you - and every battle was easy after you unlocked that power.
Yeah, there was a little room for experimentation with some of the weapon mods, like build a two-shot sniper rifle, or a sigle-shot with more kick. But the various ammo types didn't really make any difference, and weapon characteristics within a class weren't differentiated.
It also made sense to get toxic protection armor mods against the rachni, but otherwise you just slapped in the strongest shield generator and regeneration mods.
In ME2 you need to counter three types of protection, so biotics are no longer owerpowered, you need to get rid of shields and armor first (although Warp works against armor too). You have multiple options through the various ammo and offensive powers - of which there are more in the second game, too. Then there's the added bonus that you can choose a squad member power for Shepard on the second playthrough, and you also have an extra weapon training option on the Collector ship.
Also, the weapons are better differentiated, although it was a very bad decision from Bioware to restrict some of those to DLC. But there are no ultimate weapons, each has strengths and weaknesses and can be tailored to a specific strategy.
Check the Bioware forums for builds and videos to demonstrate them, there are some really clever and unorthodox combos. I've seen a shotgunning engineer, there's an infiltrator with reave which allows the regeneration you've missed, there are some nearly unstoppable vanguard builds, and so on. They all present very different gameplay experiences and rely on different team members, making for more distinctive playthroughs then what ME1 offered.
However I'd also like to add that character stat building is not what makes something an RPG, at least in my opinion. It's a fun aspect but the stats are only there to define what your character can do so that the player and the "gamemaster" don't need to argue about what's possible. But the more advanced pen and paper gamers usually keep it to the minimum and focus on the character's choices instead.
ME is actually a step in this direction, because computers are very good at the stat game but can't respond and improvise the way a human GM can. So early RPGs were either about the stats and loot, or had a very linear story and maybe tried to create the illusion of choice (Warren Spector talked about it when discussing Ultima VII/2, I think). But unfortunately, now that the software could get more sophisticated, the content production costs are becoming the new limitation on player freedom. We'll see how far Bioware can take it in ME3.
In ME1 it was all about getting singularity, firepower, and the electronics/decryption skill to open loot crates, so either you chose an adept, or took Liara with you - and every battle was easy after you unlocked that power.
Yeah, there was a little room for experimentation with some of the weapon mods, like build a two-shot sniper rifle, or a sigle-shot with more kick. But the various ammo types didn't really make any difference, and weapon characteristics within a class weren't differentiated.
It also made sense to get toxic protection armor mods against the rachni, but otherwise you just slapped in the strongest shield generator and regeneration mods.
In ME2 you need to counter three types of protection, so biotics are no longer owerpowered, you need to get rid of shields and armor first (although Warp works against armor too). You have multiple options through the various ammo and offensive powers - of which there are more in the second game, too. Then there's the added bonus that you can choose a squad member power for Shepard on the second playthrough, and you also have an extra weapon training option on the Collector ship.
Also, the weapons are better differentiated, although it was a very bad decision from Bioware to restrict some of those to DLC. But there are no ultimate weapons, each has strengths and weaknesses and can be tailored to a specific strategy.
Check the Bioware forums for builds and videos to demonstrate them, there are some really clever and unorthodox combos. I've seen a shotgunning engineer, there's an infiltrator with reave which allows the regeneration you've missed, there are some nearly unstoppable vanguard builds, and so on. They all present very different gameplay experiences and rely on different team members, making for more distinctive playthroughs then what ME1 offered.
However I'd also like to add that character stat building is not what makes something an RPG, at least in my opinion. It's a fun aspect but the stats are only there to define what your character can do so that the player and the "gamemaster" don't need to argue about what's possible. But the more advanced pen and paper gamers usually keep it to the minimum and focus on the character's choices instead.
ME is actually a step in this direction, because computers are very good at the stat game but can't respond and improvise the way a human GM can. So early RPGs were either about the stats and loot, or had a very linear story and maybe tried to create the illusion of choice (Warren Spector talked about it when discussing Ultima VII/2, I think). But unfortunately, now that the software could get more sophisticated, the content production costs are becoming the new limitation on player freedom. We'll see how far Bioware can take it in ME3.
After these the opponents are dead men walking ... lets for a moment you find the game difficult, in that case you have to optimize to get rid of shields and armor first because it's the greatest part of the battle for the majority of enemies ... when you have done that the best method to get rid of health? The same method you used to get rid of shields and armour!
The only biotics which are relevant are the defensive ones, the ones which modify your martial attacks (charge!!!) and singularity and warp ... the other offensive biotic powers are window dressing. They followed the Pathfinder method of RPG design ... trap options, trap options everywhere (on the difficulties where shields/armour stop most offensive powers).
The problem is that most gamers just aren't able to swallow saving throws ... if they use it, they have to know if it will work ... those kinds of people ruin it for the rest of us. If shields/armour gave say a 95% resist chance at full gradually going to 0 as they went down the balance would be a whole lot better.
In ME3 they seem to have chosen the MMO method of failed design ... powers are nice for clearing trash, but useless on bosses (which for the most part turns optimization choices into the same choices as in ME2). ME1, ME2 and ME3 all (seem to) have failed designs in their choices of how and when to let powers affect opponents, but ME1 is the most fun in it's failure.
Last edited by a moderator:
Different powers work against shields, barriers, armor and health. Disruptor ammo is useless on anything but synthetics, incendiary is only good against armor and organics, same goes for overload, incinerate and so on. So the player usually has to focus powers on one aspect and ammo powers on the other.
Other biotic powers are also useful because you can usually detonate their fields with a warp which damages everyone in the area. Reave also lets you regenerate quite quickly.
I do agree however that they've went a little too far with the balancing and biotics should have some level of effect even on protected enemies. Haven't played the ME3 demo yet so I'm not sure about their new approach.
Nevertheless, ME2 was more successful and had better reviews, and makes it pretty hard to get back to ME1 for most people. The obviously can't please everyone but I think they made good calls wit the game design and I hope they manage to fine tune it with ME3.
Other biotic powers are also useful because you can usually detonate their fields with a warp which damages everyone in the area. Reave also lets you regenerate quite quickly.
I do agree however that they've went a little too far with the balancing and biotics should have some level of effect even on protected enemies. Haven't played the ME3 demo yet so I'm not sure about their new approach.
Nevertheless, ME2 was more successful and had better reviews, and makes it pretty hard to get back to ME1 for most people. The obviously can't please everyone but I think they made good calls wit the game design and I hope they manage to fine tune it with ME3.
ME1 still has the superior cover system IMO.
Defending ME2/3 as a game is one thing, actually calling it's cover system good is another ... as the other guy said, it's just not up to scratch with the best of other third person shooters (and I think as a whole all those mechanics are inferior to just having crouch and lean buttons and letting line of sight do the work rather than having level designers designate sticky cover, but I'm willing to grant that that's just because I'm a PC gaming grognard).
Cover, sprint and jump all on one button does not make for fluid gameplay.
Defending ME2/3 as a game is one thing, actually calling it's cover system good is another ... as the other guy said, it's just not up to scratch with the best of other third person shooters (and I think as a whole all those mechanics are inferior to just having crouch and lean buttons and letting line of sight do the work rather than having level designers designate sticky cover, but I'm willing to grant that that's just because I'm a PC gaming grognard).
Cover, sprint and jump all on one button does not make for fluid gameplay.
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh man
I've finished a game on Insanity 3 times with different classes and what You really need is 4 skills - Incinerate, Pull, Warp and Overload, every other skill is worse compared to them which makes runs actually too similar [pull + warp is win button in this game]. Yes You can use other skills, but they are not effective.Reave isnt good, because You dont have resistances [except for Soldier class on adrenaline rush], and actually energy drain is much better [You get better sustain because of more enemies with shields and You have more shield than health]. Guns arent different and they arent even described properly. You just one that have the biggest damage/rof and You have an option to choose Collectors weapon, it will be always superior to others.
Powers that Shepard can choose as a additional one are too similar, You end up with shield boost or some synergy for biotics like energy drain or singularity or warp damage for Soldier.
Ammo is useless, except for Warp and 1 lvl of Cryo, because Your teammates dont do anything with their weapons, and bosses have always both protections applied and normal enemies die too fast anyway with varied protection to notice damage boost anyway.
And i agree that Mass Effect 1 wasnt balanced properly and wasnt too proper in terms of skills etc, but actually had better system that expanded on, would be much better solution than what we have now. Also it would give better replayability, because newgame+ would give us new challenge, new loot, better enemies instead of exactly the same like in ME 2.
Of course we are talking about difficulties higher than normal, because on normal in ME 2 there are hardly any enemies with protections and even there are, its really low amount. On normal You just use Pull+Warp combo from Your squad mates to destroy anything.
Goddamn bat-... Shepard.
------
Anyhoo, played the MP. It has some neat things going for it (character progression, upgrades etc), but the gameplay felt like crap. The animations are stiffer than that chick one time- er...
The FOV has got to be a new record low for gaming, but at least I'm not a small person. So awful for a third person shooter. Someone needs to be fired.Silent_Buddha
Legend
That's what basically made me go from liking the game to thinking the game sucked. Up until the point people started to shoot at you it was great. Some light shooting to up the drama wouldn't have been bad. The outright shooters everywhere trying to force you to engage in combat just ruined it. And rather than liking the game as I did at first, I ended up hating the game.
Except you don't. If you, the player, have even mediocre shooter skills there's absolutely no need to counter anything in the game or pick any of the fluff skills in ME2. Even the most difficult combat is easily handled with bog standard ammunition, non-upgraded weapons, and just a dash of shooting skill.
At no point do you ever feel like you're playing anyone but yourself as every single character is equally good (or bad, if you aren't good at shooters) at every single weapon if you take control of them. Something I will always find incredibly vomit inducing anytime I play a shooter trying to masquerade as an RPG. Most of the time I can overlook this as the game franchise was designed that way (Borderlands for example). For ME, I cannot ignore it no matter what as I'm always comparing it to the far surperior RPG combat in ME1.
And at no point did I ever feel the ammunition or combat skills made any difference what-so-ever. The relatively bad cover system made the game more difficult than any of the fluff they put in to try to make the game seem like it still had any sort of RPG influence on the combat.
Play it like the shooter that it is and it's just a Gears clone (combat) with worse cover implementation and a better storyline.
Regards,
SB
Obviously you guys can't be convinced that ME2 isn't bad. No problem, doesn't keep me from enjoying it
People have different tastes and I really loved ME1 and didn't enjoy ME2 at all. But then I'm not a fan of shooters, one in every 5 years is enough
Except well over 70-80% of the people who play Mass Effect play the Solider class which plays the most like a shooter out of all the classes. Mass Effect 2 is objectively the better game with the better gameplay because they made it a better shooter. So you can now mantle out of cover and the crosshair orientation is always centered so it's slightly better shooter than Mass Effect 2
Last edited by a moderator:
Link me where you got that stat.... or wait... please don't, I'd rather not see a picture of your backside.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm going to guess that other 30% is split between classes which play closer to Solider but has some interesting powers and I'm going to guess that's Vanguard and Infiltrator about covers the rest. You are going to get all you are going to need out of the class system playing those 3 classes. You play through it once as Solider, than you might want to use some of the tech or force powers so you pick a class which plays closer to Solider anyway. It's so funny really, most people play this game as a shooter. In fact, they put action option in ME3 because most people SKIP all the dialogue and just want to get straight to the gameplay. Quite the inverse of what people on the forums tell it's all about the story, characters and choices they are going to remember forever and that jizz.
Last edited by a moderator:
