Mass Effect 3

[MRSKELETON]

I really am digging the mass effect series. Bioware's crafted a universe lovingly, and (at least for me) that's very easy to immerse yourself into. On the other hand, there's some pretty blatantly bad choices about design and characterization.
On a whole, I feel like a lot of side characters are just 'there', Bioware really misses out on awesome chances for characterization/attachment to characters like Doctor Chakwas and Joker, and then makes us suffer through Miranda's

[TheGunheart]

New Gameplay trailer.

That was...amazingly dull. Somehow, it actually looks worse than last game.

[derboo]

So what are the gaping differences between that and exciting TPS combat? Cause I noticed none...

[LouieBee]

Aug 16, 2011 18:31:14 GMT -5 TheGunheart said:

New Gameplay trailer.

That was...amazingly dull. Somehow, it actually looks worse than last game.

I'd agree. It focuses far too much on the combat, something of which doesn't need changing to be honest. I'd rather have Bioware tease the story more, perhaps go into depth on the RPG features in the game, dialogue options, plot twists, etc, etc.

[Deleted]

Aug 16, 2011 19:03:36 GMT -5 LouieBee said:

Aug 16, 2011 18:31:14 GMT -5 TheGunheart said:

New Gameplay trailer.

That was...amazingly dull. Somehow, it actually looks worse than last game.

I'd agree. It focuses far too much on the combat, something of which doesn't need changing to be honest. I'd rather have Bioware tease the story more, perhaps go into depth on the RPG features in the game, dialogue options, plot twists, etc, etc.

That doesn't move units. Plus I'd rather not have any of the plot spoiled before I play the game. Let's face it, we're all going to buy ME3, regardless of the trailers. Let the mainstream have the game sold to them however they want.

[TheGunheart]

Aug 16, 2011 18:59:30 GMT -5 derboo said:

So what are the gaping differences between that and exciting TPS combat? Cause I noticed none...

You just sit behind walls, pointing flashlights at stuff. Where are the rocket boots like those soldiers? Where's a Vanquash-style dash feature? Where are collapsible structures? Parkour? I realize it's silly to want all of that, but I'm sick of every game with a gun being a bargain bin cover shooter.

[susanismyalias]

gamerant.com/mass-effect-3-fans-accessible-dyce-99145/

Gonna suuuuuuuuuck.

[Super Orbus]

Yup.

[kitten]

Aug 16, 2011 19:15:34 GMT -5 TheGunheart said:

Aug 16, 2011 18:59:30 GMT -5 derboo said:

So what are the gaping differences between that and exciting TPS combat? Cause I noticed none...

You just sit behind walls, pointing flashlights at stuff. Where are the rocket boots like those soldiers? Where's a Vanquash-style dash feature? Where are collapsible structures? Parkour? I realize it's silly to want all of that, but I'm sick of every game with a gun being a bargain bin cover shooter.

I gave looking through your achievements and trophies a quick spin and I noticed that you seem to have barely played any cover shooters, and not completed any on their highest difficulty. You also seem to play a lot of games like the Crackdown games, Just Cause 2 and the Assassin's Creed series. I'm going to make a pretty educated assumption you care less about how a game plays and more about what you can do in it. Concept and style seem to be more important to you than execution and mechanical functionality.

If you're out for a challenge, a "mundane," but well-balanced TPS or FPS is a lot more gratifying than the mess that comes out of adding a lot of flair - Vanquish, one of the games you listed, is a HUGE example of the Japanese trying and failing to mix things up. You ended up staying in cover just as long (if not longer) than its competition, and it just wasn't as mechanically satisfying a game. I enjoyed the Wanted: Weapons of Fate game more than I did Vanquish, and that was a budgeted movie game.

If you're not looking for a challenge, there's going to be a lot less these games have to offer to you. You say you basically played flashlight tag when playing ME2... What difficulty were you playing? If it was normal, there was no excuse to be behind cover more than like 5% of the time you had a gun drawn, unless you were trying to make it boring. I'm imagining, from the way you describe these games, that you play like a turtle.

Higher difficulties on cover shooters flush you out of cover rather quickly, and Mass Effect 2 is no exception to that (I had to complete Insanity as what is universally deemed the worst class for it - a Vanguard - which does a lot of out-in-the-open fighting). You don't seem to have played the Uncharted games, which are what I would consider the best cover shooters, either. They keep you moving around constantly, and a kill is rewarded (in most cases) with a single headshot, emphasizing skill and flow over cowardly potshot tactics (especially on the higher difficulties).

If you want a challenge, these games are where to go, as far as modern gaming is concerned. They're still embarrassingly sloppy and full of "fake" difficulty compared to better-refined, "old school" genres like action-platformers, run 'n guns and shmups, but they're miles ahead of free roam games or games with broken upgrade trees like Bioshock.

Admittedly, Mass Effect 2 definitely has some flaws in its design - lack of balance for each class, "sticky" clinging, poor flow - but it's still very solid and made a lot more fun by the variety introduced to it. The new trailer demonstrates more emphasis on getting close, which is great, and that roll function is going to fundamentally change how the game tends to be played and make it a lot more fluid (the fact you can use it to break from cover is wonderful).

I'd say your criticism of cover shooters doesn't really hold any real insight given you seem to dislike them more for what they are rather than what they try to do (and, subsequently, have played few of them).

[TheGunheart]

Aug 17, 2011 0:32:47 GMT -5 kitten said:

I gave looking through your achievements and trophies a quick spin and I noticed that you seem to have barely played any cover shooters, and not completed any on their highest difficulty. You also seem to play a lot of games like the Crackdown games, Just Cause 2 and the Assassin's Creed series. I'm going to make a pretty educated assumption you care less about how a game plays and more about what you can do in it. Concept and style seem to be more important to you than execution and mechanical functionality.

I've played lots of demos for them. Killzone, Uncharted, Vanquash...only the last of those I liked, but I realize the demo is as good as it gets. I also own Gears of War and have played through both Mass Effects.

Kind of funny you should mention the others, since I feel combat is their weakest link, but for different reasons. Crackdown is littered with impossibly accurate foes, which pretty much removes any satisfaction of being a supersoldier and coupling it with the worst aiming possible. Just Cause 2 has the typical sandbox problem where enemies will spawn endlessly until you escape, and ammo is surprisingly scares for this type of game unless you're constantly switching weapons, and even then you're not guaranteed that there'll be more guards with that type. I find getting around in Assassin's Creed fun, but combat is literally just triggering cutscenes.

If you're out for a challenge, a "mundane," but well-balanced TPS or FPS is a lot more gratifying than the mess that comes out of adding a lot of flair - Vanquish, one of the games you listed, is a HUGE example of the Japanese trying and failing to mix things up. You ended up staying in cover just as long (if not longer) than its competition, and it just wasn't as mechanically satisfying a game. I enjoyed the Wanted: Weapons of Fate game more than I did Vanquish, and that was a budgeted movie game.

Vanquish's problem had nothing to do with its style, though. It had to do with the poor weapon upgrade system and tying your health and powers all to the same bar. I found things like the rocket slide to be quite sound, the problem is the way the energy system works. This isn't just a Japanese problem, either, given the Crysis series.

I'm also only interested in the challenge if I find the underlying game fun. Demon's Souls is challenging and fun to me.

If you're not looking for a challenge, there's going to be a lot less these games have to offer to you. You say you basically played flashlight tag when playing ME2... What difficulty were you playing? If it was normal, there was no excuse to be behind cover more than like 5% of the time you had a gun drawn, unless you were trying to make it boring. I'm imagining, from the way you describe these games, that you play like a turtle.

As a Vanguard, I'll admit I had fun. But when I upped the difficulty, Charge became pretty much the suicide button. It wasn't challenging in the fun way to me, because now the Vanguard's advantages were removed and I was left with only the drawbacks. I tried again on that difficulty as a Soldier, had an easier time but it became apparent I was spending most of my time behind walls. Moving is also pretty sluggish compared to say, Halo or even the Metal Gear Solid series, so even when it comes time to come out of cover, there's not a whole lot of fun in moving to a different spot.

Higher difficulties on cover shooters flush you out of cover rather quickly, and Mass Effect 2 is no exception to that (I had to complete Insanity as what is universally deemed the worst class for it - a Vanguard - which does a lot of out-in-the-open fighting). You don't seem to have played the Uncharted games, which are what I would consider the best cover shooters, either. They keep you moving around constantly, and a kill is rewarded (in most cases) with a single headshot, emphasizing skill and flow over cowardly potshot tactics (especially on the higher difficulties).

Tried both Uncharted demos and the Uncharted 2 multiplayer beta. Nice set pieces and Prince of Persia platforming broken up by more hiding behind walls and moving a cursor over peoples heads. Doesn't help that I hate the overall aesthetics of them.

If you want a challenge, these games are where to go, as far as modern gaming is concerned. They're still embarrassingly sloppy and full of "fake" difficulty compared to better-refined, "old school" genres like action-platformers, run 'n guns and shmups, but they're miles ahead of free roam games or games with broken upgrade trees like Bioshock.

Again, I only want a challenge if I find the underlying game fun. The thing about free roam games for me is that there's still the exploration aspects and stunts.

Admittedly, Mass Effect 2 definitely has some flaws in its design - lack of balance for each class, "sticky" clinging, poor flow - but it's still very solid and made a lot more fun by the variety introduced to it. The new trailer demonstrates more emphasis on getting close, which is great, and that roll function is going to fundamentally change how the game tends to be played and make it a lot more fluid (the fact you can use it to break from cover is wonderful).

The inability to balance biotics is probably one of my biggest problems with the core mechanics besides being based around cover. They're pretty much broken on lower levels due to how drastic their effects are, and are good for little more than finishers on higher modes because of easily thwarted they are by armor and shields.

I'd say your criticism of cover shooters doesn't really hold any real insight given you seem to dislike them more for what they are rather than what they try to do (and, subsequently, have played few of them).

Again, demos. And frankly, if I didn't enjoy the demo, what's the point of paying full price for the game? It doesn't help matters that I'm not a fan of realistic gunplay.

[Deleted]

Aug 16, 2011 20:46:15 GMT -5 susanismyalias said:

gamerant.com/mass-effect-3-fans-accessible-dyce-99145/

Gonna suuuuuuuuuck.

Crappy MS Paint pic tiem!


I just hope that the "far reaching effects" don't fall by the wayside. Like, not exterminating the rachni having a benefit in the final battle in the reapers rather than some email saying "sup dawg. thanks for not killing us." Or nothing at all, for that matter.

I haven't played Dragon Age 2, but people have complained about that being dumbed down. I just hope that EA isn't forcing Bioware to make ME3 more of a mainstream shooter than ME2 was at the expense of the story and (illusion of) freedom of choice that made the first two games worth playing over say, Gears of War.

[kitten]

Aug 17, 2011 1:34:44 GMT -5 TheGunheart said:

I've played lots of demos for them. Killzone, Uncharted, Vanquash...only the last of those I liked, but I realize the demo is as good as it gets. I also own Gears of War and have played through both Mass Effects.

You've barely played Gears of War, though, making the only cover shooters you've completed games that are considerably supplemented by not shooter stuff. You also claim Mass Effect 2 is "bargain bin" cover shooter stuff when you're hardly experienced with or even interested in the genre.

Kind of funny you should mention the others, since I feel combat is their weakest link, but for different reasons.

I find almost no appeal in any sandbox game I play because there is zero direction and no level design (among a litany of other problems, most of them spawning from those two biggies). I get bored absurdly quickly and wonder why I'm not playing G-Mod if I just want to "fuck around."

Vanquish's problem had nothing to do with its style, though. It had to do with the poor weapon upgrade system and tying your health and powers all to the same bar. I found things like the rocket slide to be quite sound, the problem is the way the energy system works. This isn't just a Japanese problem, either, given the Crysis series.

Yeah, but it's some of the best work the Japanese has put into the genre (as mediocre as it is, that's really disappointing and damning to say). It's problem isn't with its style (I'm not docking it points for trying), it is, as you said, with the game's mechanics. Which are awful. Sliding around LOOKS cool, but it has to be limited, otherwise it's going to be all you're doing to avoid taking hits. It would require enemies to fire projectiles at speeds you can narrowly avoid while sliding to maintain any level of excitement, which would require a fundamental rehaul of the entire game. "Super fast movement" just doesn't work in a shooter, unless the attacks are slow projectiles or the combat is melee-based (in which case it's no longer even a shooter).

When projectiles move so quickly you can't avoid them or enemies use hitscan, you're fundamentally going to require cover to avoid their shots. That's just how it works. You have less of a problem with these games' execution and much more a problem with their premise, in general - Which is shooting people with things that resemble what a gun might actually do. Up the difficulty in any shooter with hitscan/fast projectiles and you're ultimately going to have to spend time at least staying behind walls and then popping out - ducking behind cover was a natural progression meant to make games more variable. If you've ever played Halo on legendary, solo, you'll know what I'm talking about.

You demand of these games something the genre cannot do without becoming a different genre entirely or thematically changing the game. Bullets move too quickly to step out of the way of. There are a lot of enemies. You're going to have to have something obstructing the bullets to survive, or the game is going to have to be a different game (slow/removing projectiles fundamentally changes everything about how it is played). I'll definitely agree Mass Effect 2 could have had a few bigger enemies with slow projectiles that you're meant to fight out in the open, but from what I gather, you wouldn't be satisfied unless the entire game were like that.

I'm also only interested in the challenge if I find the underlying game fun. Demon's Souls is challenging and fun to me.

The challenge is more or less supposed to be integral to the "fun" part. Knowing when to charge out of cover and blow someone's head apart, having the skill to be able to pull it, etc. That's when the game becomes satisfying!

As a Vanguard, I'll admit I had fun. But when I upped the difficulty, Charge became pretty much the suicide button. It wasn't challenging in the fun way to me, because now the Vanguard's advantages were removed and I was left with only the drawbacks. I tried again on that difficulty as a Soldier, had an easier time but it became apparent I was spending most of my time behind walls.

Class balance was really unfair on the Vanguard, they just get torn apart on higher difficulties. Going through Insanity with a Vanguard and witnessing how absurdly poor the balancing was for the class was a massive disappointment. I'm playing through Hardcore with a soldier, right now, and only die when I do something stupid - it's much more fair, and I'm having way more fun.

I'll concede Mass Effect 2 sticks me to cover more than I like in a shooter, but even on this high difficulty I am very frequently running out of cover, whipping into slow-mo and then lighting a few heads up. I often run up to enemies to melee them and finish them off. I also run out of cover and across the screen to another piece far away, on the way blasting like 3 guys in the head with rounds that will stun them and maybe having a teammate finish them off with an ability like concussive shot or incinerate.

Playing like a turtle isn't only not fun to do, it's not what the game wants you to do. Pausing behind cover is more for catching your breath. Rather than strafing to dodge projectiles like in ye olde day day, things have changed so that you're now timing when to come in and out, occasionally pausing just to grasp the situation.

Moving is also pretty sluggish compared to say, Halo or even the Metal Gear Solid series, so even when it comes time to come out of cover, there's not a whole lot of fun in moving to a different spot.

MGS is DEFINITELY much, much more sluggish. I don't know when the last time you played it was, but MGS is an infinitely more sluggish and mechanical game.

Tried both Uncharted demos and the Uncharted 2 multiplayer beta. Nice set pieces and Prince of Persia platforming broken up by more hiding behind walls and moving a cursor over peoples heads. Doesn't help that I hate the overall aesthetics of them.

I played and initially hated the demo for Uncharted, using similar logic to defame the series. A friend gave me his old copy for free months later, and I was completely enamoured with the game after a couple hours with it. I know it's a huge leap of faith to take to buy the game without any insurance it will be something you'd enjoy, but as a big fan of the genre I can confidently say it has the best cover shooting out of any game out there.

But, you outright say you hate aiming (putting a cursor on a head), so maybe you just don't like guns. If that's the case, why do you even care about these games enough to criticize them? I mean, I could dumb down sword-fighting in games to "get next to the enemy and then press the trigger," something even more rudimentary sounding that placing the cursor over their head, but that wouldn't validate my criticism were I to say that Demon's Souls is mediocre (which, for the record, I wouldn't).

The inability to balance biotics is probably one of my biggest problems with the core mechanics besides being based around cover. They're pretty much broken on lower levels due to how drastic their effects are, and are good for little more than finishers on higher modes because of easily thwarted they are by armor and shields.

I agree this is a significant flaw with the game, but with the right teammates and playing as a soldier, there's still a lot of exercise room for skill. It's a shame that things like singularity, pull and throw all become useless, though, and I definitely fault the game for that, too.

Again, demos. And frankly, if I didn't enjoy the demo, what's the point of paying full price for the game? It doesn't help matters that I'm not a fan of realistic gunplay.

If you're not a fan of the basic draw, why criticize it without really even getting to know it?

Your argument isn't that Mass Effect is a bad shooter. It isn't even an argument. It's more like you're just personally complaining it's not a different type of game. You're upset all the elements of the story you like are attached to a cover shooter rather than something else. If you don't like it, that's fine, you just don't need to maintain this hate campaign against it for that.

[kyouki]

My problem with ME2 is that the "stages" are boring and might as well have been randomly generated. Maybe it gets better later, but it just seemed like a bunch of corridors to me, with a bunch of robots popping out every room.

What little I played of GoW and the Uncharted games (demos) tells me they have interesting level design. Even Vanquish had some nice layouts and interesting encounters.

[Weasel]

I remember saying this in another thread a long while ago (after Gunheart said the only parts of Half-Life 2 that he liked were the vehicle segments), but I get this feeling that Gunheart just isn't a fan of shooter games. By trying to critique them, he's only succeeding in demonstrating that he'd rather be playing any other genre.

[susanismyalias]

I think he's mentioned really enjoying Doom 2 and Serious Sam.

Jojo WHERE IS GARRUS' WIFE