|
Well, with the NG+ wrapped up (not bothering with every scanning side-quest makes it so much faster), I can call the series wrapped up and enter DLC hibernation mode. The first bit of DLC is supposed to be the ending-fix one right? I imagine it'll take a while to cobble that together since they probably had to start from scratch  .
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 19:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 05:18 |
|
|
HenessyHero posted:The first bit of DLC is supposed to be the ending-fix one right? I imagine it'll take a while to cobble that together since they probably had to start from scratch
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 19:59
|
|
|
They're not starting from scratch, they are expanding on what's already there (we really should take EndChat over to the Spoiler thread).
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 20:02
|
|
|
HenessyHero posted:Well, with the NG+ wrapped up (not bothering with every scanning side-quest makes it so much faster), I can call the series wrapped up and enter DLC hibernation mode. No, it isn't a new ending. So far as I am aware, the narrative aspects of the ending (e.g. starkids, the risible origin of the Reapers, and the three choices) are unaffected. The DLC will  elaborate on the end of the game. Precisly what that means remains to be seen. For my part, in line with the ending not changing, I'd settle for something that gave me a greater sense of closure with respect to all the characters - some sense of their affairs after the ending of the game. Not saying I need to see the rest of their lives play out, but the ending suffered suffered most mightily (for me) from having no sense of the suriving characters picking up the threads of their lives after the events of the game. If any of that could in some way take into account certain choices made throughout the games, that'd be great.That aside... The continuing adventures of Ryan Shepard, Flashbang-lobbing Infiltrator extraordinaire. I haven't quite incorporated use of Flashbangs into a style of play that is really working for me. So I shall jump into the bonus with both feetk, and rush to Improved Flashbang at the expense of th rest of the build; that is certain to work well  (More seriously, the stupendously wide area of effect and overload proc will be very useful. Kind of like how Charge *really* comes into its own once you've evolved it, so rushing the build is worthhile).Edit: You see, thats what I get for making one larger post, instead of two smaller ones 
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 20:06
|
|
|
Gammatron 64 posted:If you want to play Mass Effect for the gameplay, you should probably play a different game. If that's the case, ME1 should have been rated as harshly as Alpha Protocol was, since they are both story driven with rear end for actual gameplay. Hell, even as an RPG, ME1 comes up short in terms of interactivity with the cast when you compare it to Alpha Protocol. It seems to me that this is a franchise that has managed to get a pass on many of its flaws for all three games, both from fans and 'professional reviewers' alike. The argument that the 'expectation' of decent gameplay is somehow incorrect ignores the fact that Bioware addressed how awful ME1 was as a game and made improvements in ME2 and 3 that most people actually enjoy. By ME3 they actually made a pretty competent shooter where you have more than just 'shoot gun' available for the majority of the classes, competent enough where they could actually have a multiplayer mode of some kind that people are enjoying a helluva lot more than I expected. Especially from a crowd that went into the game with people dead set on hating multiplayer just because it even existed in 'their' Mass Effect.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 20:10
|
|
|
sassassin posted:Hang on, did people not use cover in ME1? Immunity and Barrier both completely eliminate the need for cover in ME1. The game wasn't a cover shooter at all, if you knew what you were doing. Incidentally, that's also why Engineer is the weakest class in ME1: no defensive power at all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 20:23
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:The fact that you think that "everything went to poo poo" with Mass Effect 2's combat (which was, by far, the more engaging, interesting, and challenging combat that was better designed in virtually ever way from Mass Effect 1) just shows you have no credibility when it comes to discussing a game's mechanical systems. Your whole perspective seems to be, "I like the feeling of power and superiority that comes from breaking a bad system, which I will pretend is a thing called Min/Maxing" and who cares about that perspective? Mass Effect 2's combat, unless you were playing Vanguard, was pretty poor overall. Mediocre level design (oh look, waist high barriers have popped up from the floor!) and a health system for the enemies that marginalised powers and removed decision making because every power was essentially good against one type of health and worthless against the others. Similarly, level scaling means that no matter which order you play the missions they're basically the same difficulty. The argument he made is an extremely common one against level scaling and is nothing to do with breaking a bad system - if anything, a system which is sufficiently based on player skill to allow you to do more difficult things earlier is a good system by definition. You seem to be putting "Shallow" up on a pedestal as something to aim for.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 20:46
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:Mass Effect 2's combat, unless you were playing Vanguard, was pretty poor overall. Mediocre level design (oh look, waist high barriers have popped up from the floor!) and a health system for the enemies that marginalised powers and removed decision making because every power was essentially good against one type of health and worthless against the others. Holy cow. Did this post come in from opposite world? Because literally everything in it is the exact opposite of reality. I'm halfway to thinking you're a troll. A "health system that marginalized powers and removed decision making?" Oh as opposed to Mass Effect 1's health system, which required zero decision making whatsoever; you simply alpha-strike'd everyone into oblivion. The fact that ME2 powers "only affected one defense type" assumes you played on Hardcore and Insanity where everyone actually had defenses; on "regular" settings ME2's powers were crazy awesome good, allowing you to remove everything but the toughest enemies from the fight, immediately, and nullify cover completely, sending your biotics over walls and around corners. Yes these certainly are marginalized powers, except of course that they are as powerful or moreso than any weapon! And for Hardcore and Insanity, you will need to shoot a guy once or twice with a gun before taking him out of the fight with your insanely powerful biotics! "The argument he made is an extremely common one against level scaling and is nothing to do with breaking a bad system". Hmm yes absolutely let's look at the post: "We want a way to play a hard mission earlier than we should to grab a chest with an uber weapon." Do you actually think that the designers put that weapon in that chest and said to themselves, "Yes, I really hope that the player can get to this weapon 20 levels early and completely trivialize the combat that I've worked so hard on. That would be really cool, from my perspective."? Of course not. Every "get this uber weapon early" guide I've ever seen has been through some exploit (hug this wall to run to this chest to GTFO out of there with your shiny new item), bad mechanics (such as use this so and so spell with this other tactic to trivialize this fight) or been really bad item design, where one choice is clearly the best and the rest are trash. Sometimes it's all three at once. Thinking that level scaling means all the missions are the same difficulty is the exact moment that your argument gets blown to poo poo, because in fact your character will be increasing their TACTICAL OPTIONS and INCREASING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF HIS EXISTING OPTIONS by gaining new powers, weapon options, and synergies. So even though you won't ever be able to one-shot a SuperMech with you laser pistol because you're Level 100 and he's Level 1, you will have more numerous powers, they will be more specialized to deal with particular situations, etc. etc. Which is the polar opposite of "shallow" game design. Megaman's Jockstrap fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Apr 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 21:07
|
|
|
Maybe I'm crazy, but I feel like a game shouldn't punish you for playing a level "out of order" from the others, nor should a different area become boringly easy because you did an easy area later. Enemy difficulty ought to come from encounter design and not their level relative to yours. I especially don't get the complaint about biotics not being super effective against literally every enemy. An "I win" button isn't very fun or interesting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 21:13
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Holy cow. Did this post come in from opposite world? Because literally everything in it is the exact opposite of reality. I'm halfway to thinking you're a troll. Well I think the same about you so does that cancel things out? Megaman's Jockstrap posted:A "health system that marginalized powers and removed decision making?" Oh as opposed to Mass Effect 1's health system, which required zero decision making whatsoever; you simply alpha-strike'd everyone into oblivion. Perhaps they're both bad systems? Megaman's Jockstrap posted:"The argument he made is an extremely common one against level scaling and is nothing to do with breaking a bad system". Hmm yes absolutely let's look at the post: "We want a way to play a hard mission earlier than we should to grab a chest with an uber weapon." Do you actually think that the designers put that weapon in that chest and said to themselves, "Yes, I really hope that the player can get to this weapon 20 levels early and completely trivialize the combat that I've worked so hard on. That would be really cool, from my perspective."? Of course not. Going by what rope kid has said on things like level progression at least one person goes out of their way to make sure that sequence breaking, either in the main plot or in terms of getting powerful items earlier, is allowed and planned for. And if an "uber weapon" trivialises the combat maybe you have a bad combat system? Just sayin'. Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Every "get this uber weapon early" guide I've ever seen has been through some exploit (hug this wall to run to this chest to GTFO out of there with your shiny new item), bad mechanics (such as use this so and so spell with this other tactic to trivialize this fight) or been really bad item design, where one choice is clearly the best and the rest are trash. Sometimes it's all three at once. You can finish BG2, without exploits, without levelling up. If you're good at the game. If you're not, you're going to struggle making it out of the first dungeon. Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Thinking that level scaling means all the missions are the same difficulty is the exact moment that your argument gets blown to poo poo, because in fact your character will be increasing their TACTICAL OPTIONS and INCREASING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF HIS EXISTING OPTIONS by gaining new powers, weapon options, and synergies. So even though you won't ever be able to one-shot a SuperMech with you laser pistol because you're Level 100 and he's Level 1, you will have more numerous powers, they will be more specialized to deal with particular situations, etc. etc. Which is the polar opposite of "shallow" game design. Thanks for the BLOCK CAPS OF NONSENSE, that really got your argument across well. I'm not sure what you're arguing against, because it sure isn't me. Game mechanics shouldn't simply be about DPS in/DPS out (which is the biggest problem of something like Dragon Age), there should be options and variation. However, that's not the point. The point is that level scaling means that mission A -> mission B -> mission C vs mission B -> mission C -> mission A or any other of the permutations will play largely identically, barring a few set pieces (the shutters in the Archangel mission are things that people mention a lot, although I've never really had trouble with them). losonti tokash posted:Maybe I'm crazy, but I feel like a game shouldn't punish you for playing a level "out of order" from the others, nor should a different area become boringly easy because you did an easy area later. Enemy difficulty ought to come from encounter design and not their level relative to yours. I especially don't get the complaint about biotics not being super effective against literally every enemy. An "I win" button isn't very fun or interesting. The game shouldn't punish you, but that doesn't mean that you can't come back and do it later. Mass Effect 2 breaking things down into little self contained missions where you go into a single determined area to do combat and then can never come back is part of what is limiting things here. Consider the Windspar hills quest in BG2 - there's a dragon at the end of it, but you don't have to fight him there and then. You can if you want to, no matter your level, and you'll probably get slaughtered. If you're good at the game then you may well kill him, even if you're fresh out of the first dungeon. If you're not then you'll find it difficult, even impossible, even if you're just about to finish the game. If you don't want to fight him you can leave and come back later. Or never come back at all. With level scaling you're always supposed to be able to beat whatever is in front of you - you're never in a situation where you're able to do something unexpected. I like games to allow that kind of challenge, as I find it more fulfilling than making an artificial challenge by, say, limiting myself to only using melee or something like that. (I still do that kind of thing, but when I do it tends to be the kind of game that lets you go off the beaten track anyway).
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 22:07
|
|
|
Wow. Line-by-lining me with worthless little quips to make a simple, stupid, wrong point. We're done because you're irredeemable. I haven't put anyone on my Ignore List in like 5 years, congratulations on that one.
Megaman's Jockstrap fucked around with this message at 22:33 on Apr 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 22:26
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Holy cow. Line-by-lining me with worthless little quips to make a simple, stupid, wrong point. We're done because you're irredeemable. I haven't put anyone on my Ignore List in like 5 years, congratulations on that one. You are the biggest drat baby. "Someone disagrees with me oh no what shall I do" All the Mass Effect games are good, and had I not lost my Mass Effect disk somehow a couple of weeks ago I would be in the process of playing the whole trilogy through. However, linearity is something that I dislike in video games and it's the reason why the majority of games I play repeatedly are either (pseudo) non-linear or otherwise of varying difficulty (eg. Roguelikes). Examples being things like BG2, Morrowind, Fallout: New Vegas, Dungeons of Dredmore and the Binding of Isaac. I, and probably the guy you quoted initially, like to try to do difficult things in games because it's fun to challenge yourself. You seem to think that this is a mental disorder. [edit] The eagle-eyed among you will spot that something like BG2 does have limited level scaling, although I use the "always use hardest spawns" part of Tactics. It doesn't affect everything though, and doesn't affect the "big" monsters at all. Kangaxx is still Kangaxx at level 9. MrL_JaKiri fucked around with this message at 22:41 on Apr 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 22:35
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Wow. Line-by-lining me with worthless little quips to make a simple, stupid, wrong point. We're done because you're irredeemable. I haven't put anyone on my Ignore List in like 5 years, congratulations on that one. There is nothing at all wrong with finding fault in the way the Mass Effect series has taken "level scaling" to the absolute absurd extreme. Not only that, but they flat out got it wrong in the case of the final, penultimate, HOLY poo poo THIS IS REALLY HAPPENING mission of ME2 was probably one of the easiest missions in the entire game. It sure was for me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:06
|
|
|
Honestly, I think the combat design in ME3 is really great, but the changes to power combos can make the single player in particular completely trivial, especially for biotics. If you have Liara and Javik or Kaidan with you setting up biotic explosions, your adept or sentinel can literally be a Throw-bot and do nothing else. This works in every single encounter on every single enemy in the game and takes down even the toughest bosses in just a few explosions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:06
|
|
|
Zoran posted:Honestly, I think the combat design in ME3 is really great, but the changes to power combos can make the single player in particular completely trivial, especially for biotics. If you have Liara and Javik or Kaidan with you setting up biotic explosions, your adept or sentinel can literally be a Throw-bot and do nothing else. This works in every single encounter on every single enemy in the game and takes down even the toughest bosses in just a few explosions. I imported my Sentinel into 3 and the first chance I got, I took all my points out of Tech Armor and into things that made more awesome things happen when I press buttons.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:11
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Wow. Line-by-lining me with worthless little quips to make a simple, stupid, wrong point. We're done because you're irredeemable. I haven't put anyone on my Ignore List in like 5 years, congratulations on that one. Funny how this particular rhetorical tactic seems to involve making GBS threads yourself and then rolling around in it and kind of smearing it on your face, too. Nice post man. MrL_JaKiri posted:Mass Effect 2's combat, unless you were playing Vanguard, was pretty poor overall. Mediocre level design (oh look, waist high barriers have popped up from the floor!) and a health system for the enemies that marginalised powers and removed decision making because every power was essentially good against one type of health and worthless against the others. ME2 also suffers pretty hard from Waves And Waves Of Enemies. The shooting galleries are incredibly obvious, which isn't necessarily a terrible thing, but they just keep spawning in more guys and it just ends up being tedious. Don't build encounters like that, thanks Bioware. (They will continue to do this.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:14
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:They're not "fixing" the endings, they're just expanding them with extra cut scenes, so no, they're not starting from scratch. But, yeah, it will probably take a little while. Great, this probably means we'll need to wait 3-7 months for a gameplay DLC  .
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:24
|
|
|
I'm sure there will be another (this time not-free) multiplayer DLC in a month or so. EA knows that's where the money is. (I'm not complaining, I like the MP. Sometimes I like it more than the SP.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:26
|
|
|
Dush posted:Funny how this particular rhetorical tactic seems to involve making GBS threads yourself and then rolling around in it and kind of smearing it on your face, too. Nice post man. Or maybe I don't want to get in an internet slapfight with someone who is quite honestly incoherent, someone who would actually make the argument, "because of level scaling, you can do the missions in any order and they are basically the same difficulty." Oh really I must have missed the part when I hadn't unlocked my bonus sniper rifle damage on my Infiltrator cloak and the Widow from my weapon training and was having a hell of a time with those stupid Vorcha at the end of the Mordin vents mission. Whereas by the midpoint of the game I was a Sniper God who blasted Harbringer into Space Pudding before he could even finish ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL. No, really, not engaging with something so stupid and self-evidently wrong is exactly like smearing poo poo on my face. I really should want to wade through a page of dumb quips and line-by-lining to get to the incoherent meat of the argument, which is of course totally wrong and a waste of my time. Maybe you should throw a pointless aside about Baldur's Gate 2 in there. Keep the streak alive. Megaman's Jockstrap fucked around with this message at 23:33 on Apr 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:29
|
|
precision posted:I'm sure there will be another (this time not-free) multiplayer DLC in a month or so. EA knows that's where the money is. While the MP's pretty good don't get me wrong, I'm hungrier for Overlord/LotSB quality DLC for the SP. Those were some wicked DLCs, all things considered, that did more than add new guns* or player skins*. *Not to rag on the costume or firepower packs in ME2. Giving Jack a proper shirt was more than worth the money.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:34
|
|
|
Normally I'd agree with you, Henessy...but with that ending...there's very little single player content I can care about until and unless they fix it. So unless that happens, all I'm going to be interested in is more MP content.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:35
|
|
|
They could really, really use some more multiplayer game modes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:36
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Or maybe I don't want to get in an internet slapfight with someone who is quite honestly incoherent, someone who would actually make the argument, "because of level scaling, you can do the missions in any order and they are basically the same difficulty." Maybe they made that argument because it's true. Seriously dude, I don't know what you're smoking but on Hardcore I sleepwalked through the entirety of ME2 without even bothering to buy upgrades. The one arguably difficult mission in the entire game is Horizon. Sorry you're bad at games I guess. I dunno what to tell you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:37
|
|
|
Aristobulus posted:unless they fix it. Not gonna happen.  
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:38
|
|
|
precision posted:Seriously dude, I don't know what you're smoking but on Hardcore I sleepwalked through the entirety of ME2 without even bothering to buy upgrades. The one arguably difficult mission in the entire game is Horizon. I played, and beat, the game on Insanity. Before Horizon, it was fairly tough. When I replayed through on Hardcore I breezed through it. How is a difficulty curve relevant to level scaling? They are independent variables. That's why this argument is so indescribably dumb. BTW I had no trouble playing ME1 on Hardcore to try to unlock Insanity, but I stopped playing because it made the cardinal sin of video games: not being fun, just becoming a handful of rote tricks and overpowered poo poo to prevent bad situations.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:42
|
|
|
precision posted:Maybe they made that argument because it's true. I have literally no idea how static level enemies would fix this. Not trying to be sarcastic or anything like that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:43
|
|
|
edit: ^^^^ True, the lack of difficulty certainly isn't only because of level scaling.Megaman's Jockstrap posted:I played, and beat, the game on Insanity. Before Horizon, it was fairly tough. When I replayed through on Hardcore I breezed through it. ME2's form of level scaling ensures that there literally is not a difficulty curve. That is how it is relevant. precision fucked around with this message at 23:49 on Apr 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:46
|
|
|
losonti tokash posted:I have literally no idea how static level enemies would fix this. Not trying to be sarcastic or anything like that. It wouldn't. There's no actual argument happening here. We started out with a guy saying how much he loved a power fantasy, and that Bioware should cater to his desire to blow away enemies without any effort, and how bad ME2 was because they actually took steps to prevent you from alpha-striking enemies and putting all your best mods on 1 gun and using it exclusively. When that was blown to poo poo, the goalposts immediately shifted to how level-scaling made every playthrough the same and let you tackle any mission in any order. When that was blown to poo poo, it became how easy Mass Effect 2 was. Where will we go next, I wonder? Edit: and there's your answer precision posted:ME2's form of level scaling ensures that there literally is not a difficulty curve. That is how it is relevant. But when I did my Insanity playthrough with an Infiltrator, I had a very tough time at the beginning of the game and it became very easy after Horizon (and even moreso after the Collector Ship). So how do you explain this? There was a difficulty curve, but it fell off quickly as I progressed. As an aside, Witcher 2 doesn't have level scaling and has the exact same problem, where it's tough at the beginning and easy at the end. So what am I supposed to take away from this? Megaman's Jockstrap fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Apr 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:47
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:It wouldn't. There's no actual argument happening here. We started out with a guy saying how much he loved a power fantasy, and that Bioware should cater to his desire to blow away enemies without any effort, and how bad ME2 was because they actually took steps to prevent you from alpha-striking enemies and putting all your best mods on 1 gun and using it exclusively. I think you'll find that actually what some people want is the opposite of that; a game in which you can go somewhere and get totally destroyed because you're just not ready. New Vegas is a good example of encounter/level scaling done right. ME2 (and to a lesser extent 3) is an example of "let's make sure nobody gets confused and accidentally sees the Game Over screen".
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:52
|
|
Aristobulus posted:Normally I'd agree with you, Henessy...but with that ending...there's very little single player content I can care about until and unless they fix it. But... but I want to pay big bucks for premium level design, music, action and tacky memorabilia for Shep's cabin right now.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:54
|
|
|
precision posted:ME2 (and to a lesser extent 3) is an example of "let's make sure nobody gets confused and accidentally sees the Game Over screen". Translation: "If it's not a cargo cult sandbox RPG, it's babby's first game." Go back to Grimrock and watch your genre die around you, and good riddance to it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 23:59
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Translation: "If it's not a cargo cult sandbox RPG, it's babby's first game." I have nothing against easy games in general. Lots of my favorite games are very easy. I never said otherwise. Now who's moving the goalposts? You sound like you could use a drink. I'm about to go to the beer store, I suggest you do the same.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 00:02
|
|
|
Welp, after just beating Mass Effect 3 I can say without a doubt that I won't buy another Bioware game again. After the shitstorm that was Dragon Age 2 and that extremely disappointing end, I won't give them another cent. And it was such a good game too. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 00:03
|
|
|
precision posted:I think you'll find that actually what some people want is the opposite of that; a game in which you can go somewhere and get totally destroyed because you're just not ready. also absolutely carving your way through mooks that gave you trouble previously is wicked satisfying It's one of the reasons the Baldur's Gate series is so good. You go from being a complete pushover to being reasonably powerful to being essentially a god of war. There's one scene, where old enemies spawn in to fight you, and you just utterly massacre them until a certain point where they're brought à jour, as it were (though ToB had a problem with absurdly powerful mercenaries, I'll grant). The point is not that you immediately slaughter everything (that is also a point, Shepard is one of the hardest bastards in the galaxy, but they give a pretty good impression of that), but you have real relative progression. Like, the drow of Baldur's Gate are an enormous hassle when you first encounter them. Then you fight them again in that "enemies spawning in" segment, and you just chop the little buggers to bits. It is extremely satisfying, much more so than having that blue merc be inexplicably slightly more powerful than the last identical blue merc you killed. I say this as someone who's *bad* at video games - for me, killing one of the Baldur's Gate dragons is a serious feat. I occasionally die when I get careless, even on normal mode which I play. Level scaling removes an element of, I think, excitement - you know what, whereever you go, whatever you face will be calculated to be a slight challenge, but pretty easy to overcome. Then again, I actually liked Mass Effect 1's combat, so shows what I know I guess
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 00:05
|
|
|
JGBeagle posted:Welp, after just beating Mass Effect 3 I can say without a doubt that I won't buy another Bioware game again. After the shitstorm that was Dragon Age 2 and that extremely disappointing end, I won't give them another cent. I'll never understand how people can say things like this. The dumb last 20 minutes of a game somehow makes the excellent 30 hours leading up to it moot? Like, all that fun you had is just gone? OK, now I'm going to the beer store.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 00:06
|
|
|
JGBeagle posted:Welp, after just beating Mass Effect 3 I can say without a doubt that I won't buy another Bioware game again. After the shitstorm that was Dragon Age 2 and that extremely disappointing end, I won't give them another cent. Welcome to the 99%. Seriously just read through some of this thread, or the spoiler thread, to see how many people are like you and got seriously, seriously burned by that ending. I know I sure did.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 00:11
|
|
|
precision posted:I'll never understand how people can say things like this. The dumb last 20 minutes of a game somehow makes the excellent 30 hours leading up to it moot? Like, all that fun you had is just gone? Believe it or not, yes, a bad story can make the whole game feel less fun. Astonishing, I know.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 00:13
|
|
|
precision posted:I'll never understand how people can say things like this. The dumb last 20 minutes of a game somehow makes the excellent 30 hours leading up to it moot? Like, all that fun you had is just gone? Maybe you should read the psychological studies where people who have a medical procedure that ends with pain remember the entire procedure as being very painful, whereas people who have painful procedures that end "nicely" remember the whole thing much more fondly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 00:16
|
|
|
losonti tokash posted:I have literally no idea how static level enemies would fix this. Not trying to be sarcastic or anything like that. In something linear, it wouldn't. "Powerful non-scaling enemies" is something for going off the beaten track and ME2 would have to be rebuilt from scratch to really allow it. If, for example, they made the suicide mission more difficult to 100% by making some loyalty missions more difficult, and easier/possible to fail, that would be a good way to take out level scaling. It would also add to the time constraint more - do this mission when I'm more powerful or now when it's really difficult? The lack of time constraint on the priority missions was something that really disappointed me about ME3. I thought initially it might be set up in a "do just enough then RUSH BACK TO EARTH but it's more difficult because you don't have the assets!" kind of way but you still have to play through all the "priority" missions even if they're not directly relevant to the fate of Earth, like the Quarian vs Geth failed-attempt-at-genocide slapfight. Megaman's Jockstrap posted:I really should want to wade through a page of dumb quips I am honestly confused by this guy's belief that something like "Going by what rope kid has said on things like level progression at least one person goes out of their way to make sure that sequence breaking, either in the main plot or in terms of getting powerful items earlier, is allowed and planned for. And if an "uber weapon" trivialises the combat maybe you have a bad combat system? Just sayin'." is a quip. And if anyone is confused I mentioned BG2 because it's a) a game that doesn't use level scaling very much b) a game that I'm very familiar with, and c) a game made by the same company that made Mass Effect 2. Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Translation: "If it's not a cargo cult sandbox RPG, it's babby's first game." Go back to Grimrock and watch your genre die around you, and good riddance to it. Fallout: New Vegas is cargo cult  Even if you like level scaling it should be obvious that this man is an idiot, such as when he claimed he "blew [an argument] to poo poo" by announcing that he was putting me on his ignore list.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 00:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 05:18 |
|
|
Holy poo poo, you guys. This thread is tearing itself apart. Let's just relax and have a look at this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 00:24
|
|
