|
Yeah it's a case of "two missions, except _______" the logic behind the mission progression gates got pretty complicated. Probably why Bioware wanted to stay far away from that with ME3, much to everyone's dismay.
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 14:25 |
|
|
Just use Gibbed's savegame editor for weapons in ME2 on 360/PC. It had a big update in 2011 I think which enabled unlocking everything from the get-go, even the Collector ship guns (which previously required hex editing).
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
Spikeguy posted:For me, I've never disliked any Bioware game, and I use that experience to color my judgements. But I'm always interested in other points of view. From Bioware, I've only played KOTOR, SWTOR, and Mass Effect. I enjoyed KOTOR enough to replay it several times (though I prefer KOTOR II, which I have replayed dozens of times). SWTOR started out nicely, but as with all MMOs, I lost interest once I got out of the initial area and into the wider world of true grinding/exploration. Of course, all complaints aside, I love the ME trilogy. I don't know if I like 1 or 2 better, the full-on exploration aspect of 1 really appealed to me as a super-expansion over the "only main story worlds" aspects of KOTOR, but there were some things that -while they might make sense if you think about it, like certain Starfleet "if in your explorations you ever find X you will stop whatever you're doing to study it" directives- were left unstated in the game: like why Shep would bother looking for minerals or artifacts at all in ME1, and it would have been nice to have to actually do some investigation and uncover early story planets (Noveria and Therum), and discover who certian characters are (like Liara and Benezia) without Udina and the Council pointing you towards them from the get go. ME2's side missions and exploration aspect were weaker by comparison, but the main story was more emotionally involving than the first. They did a good job opening with "you're alone in the den of vipers and in the control of your enemy, all your friends have gone their separate ways", so when old characters started showing up I was actually pleased to see them and when Garrus gets shot I was legitimately upset and pissed. ME3 was a little bit of a departure, with you being under the gun the whole time so exploration was cut out, but it was still good and still emotionally involving, to the point where I had to put it down, walk away and collect my feelings on my first playthrough when I couldn't convince the Quarian fleet to stop their attack on the Geth. I was sure there was going to be at least once more try when they refused the second time, my reputation/persuasion was maxed! Tali, No!!!  As for the combat, am I the only one who just likes playing RPGs and don't need my games to be all things to all people? I (still) prefer Morrowind to Oblivion and Skyrim. I swear gamers who want everything in one game are like the people who eat chocolate mayonaise bacon-wrapped pancake sausage corndogs and people who insist that all their favorite stories just keep getting sequels and cross-overs and reboots until they die.  "It's not enough that these things exist separately, I want EVERYTHING ALL AT ONE TIME!!!!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 11:58
|
|
|
I put the game down and walked away for a while during the Quarian section, too. The game is bad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 12:12
|
|
|
sassassin posted:The game is bad. Mass Effect 3 is the best game ever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 12:15
|
|
|
Dan Didio posted:Mass Effect 3 is the best game ever. It's extraordinarily great op
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 12:23
|
|
|
My Q-Face posted:As for the combat, am I the only one who just likes playing RPGs and don't need my games to be all things to all people? I (still) prefer Morrowind to Oblivion and Skyrim. I swear gamers who want everything in one game are like the people who eat chocolate mayonaise bacon-wrapped pancake sausage corndogs and people who insist that all their favorite stories just keep getting sequels and cross-overs and reboots until they die. This would be fine and dandy if the combat were in fact a small side element of the Mass Effect games, and not something that you are engaged in for a majority of the time. I really do not get it. If you're going to be shooting mooks in the face for what, two-thirds of the duration of the game, why would you not want that to be good?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 12:24
|
|
|
At least Mass Effect 3 isn't Star Citizen.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 12:25
|
|
|
Star Citizen will be the greatest game of all time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 12:26
|
|
|
Thank god Star Citizen/Elite: Dangerous/No Man's Sky will let me scratch that fly a gently caress off spaceship into the galactic core gently caress yeah itch I've been feeling since the finalé of ME2.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 12:36
|
|
|
Star Citizen drives you to new, tantric heights of gaming pleasure.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 12:42
|
|
|
Fag Boy Jim posted:This would be fine and dandy if the combat were in fact a small side element of the Mass Effect games, and not something that you are engaged in for a majority of the time. I really do not get it. If you're going to be shooting mooks in the face for what, two-thirds of the duration of the game, why would you not want that to be good? I thought that the point of these games was the dialogue/choices/interactivity, not the shooting -which was just thrown in to give experience points/make it an actual game and not just an interactive animated movie- but considering that in 3, turning off the interactive dialogue was an option, I'm not sure what the point was anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 13:04
|
|
|
I would even go as far to not call Mass Effect an RPG. It's really more of an action game with skillpoints. Everything is combat related.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 13:23
|
|
|
My Q-Face posted:I thought that the point of these games was the dialogue/choices/interactivity, not the shooting -which was just thrown in to give experience points/make it an actual game and not just an interactive animated movie- but considering that in 3, turning off the interactive dialogue was an option, I'm not sure what the point was anymore. Yeah when I first started playing and it asked if I wanted to take away the shooting or the talking and I thought "who played ME1 and 2 and wants EITHER of those things gone  "
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
Aces High posted:Yeah when I first started playing and it asked if I wanted to take away the shooting or the talking and I thought "who played ME1 and 2 and wants EITHER of those things gone No one. Those features were aimed at people who didn't play Mass Effect 1 and 2.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 17:45
|
|
|
Police Automaton posted:I would even go as far to not call Mass Effect an RPG. It's really more of an action game with skillpoints. Everything is combat related. That is still an RPG, grandpa.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 17:55
|
|
|
Dan Didio posted:No one. Those features were aimed at people who didn't play Mass Effect 1 and 2. Why would you start a series at its end?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
Some people don't like to play old games.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
Aces High posted:Why would you start a series at its end? I don't really know, but it was a stated intent of the developers, who made those features we were talking about.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
Police Automaton posted:I would even go as far to not call Mass Effect an RPG. It's really more of an action game with skillpoints. Everything is combat related. Boot up Baldur's Gate, create a character. Tell me, how many things on your character sheet do not pertain to combat?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
My Q-Face posted:I thought that the point of these games was the dialogue/choices/interactivity, not the shooting -which was just thrown in to give experience points/make it an actual game and not just an interactive animated movie- but considering that in 3, turning off the interactive dialogue was an option, I'm not sure what the point was anymore. I guess some people just want a sci-fi shooter and want to remove all that boring talky stuff in between shooting. Probably the Battlefield and GOW crowd that EA was so intent on bringing in for maximum profit. Playing the previous titles for those kind of games isn't necessary as the story is always the same, but the mechanics are usually more primitive. Some just want a mindless bit of shooting virtual bad guys to pass a few off hours and EA wanted a piece of their wallets.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
The real 
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:Boot up Baldur's Gate, create a character. F.A.T.A.L. is the only true RPG!
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
My Q-Face posted:I thought that the point of these games was the dialogue/choices/interactivity, not the shooting -which was just thrown in to give experience points/make it an actual game and not just an interactive animated movie- but considering that in 3, turning off the interactive dialogue was an option, I'm not sure what the point was anymore. Once again- if combat is not a key part of the game, why on earth is there so goddamn much of it? Check that- why does so much of the RPG system directly involve it? Why was there so much effort put into the game's combat (not to say that it's good) if it "wasn't the point"? What in the Sam Hill was going on there? And I'm just talking about ME1, the slow, explorey, non-militarized* one. *actually, militarized
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
All RPGs involve a poo poo load of combat. RPG fans just have a habit of deluding themselves on this point.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 23:38
|
|
|
I can actually get an argument that the "actual game" bits were only thrown in because of cargo-cult design/necessity, because, poo poo, that's exactly what I think about Bioshock Infinite, which clearly wants to be a game about anything except shooting a bunch of idiots in the head. But I never got that about Mass Effect- it's cribbing from RPGs, and RPGs have combat. And it's not even as if the plot of the game isn't engaged with the idea that Shepard is, you know, a really good soldier, or something. You're in the most badass killer division of the Space Navy, for the love of god. This isn't a game where they shoehorned combat into some highfalutin sci-fi plot "just because". and besides, I really detest the implication that the gameplay bits are like, the unpleasant poo poo you have to wallow through to get to the story bits. They should be good. Everything in a game should be good, otherwise, it shouldn't be there in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
What kind of RPG's doesn't have combat? Visual novels? In D&D you could have a fairly low-combat campaign, but so much of it was still geared towards combat. In a computer game, Planescape gave combat a fairly low priority, but it still had it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 00:14
|
|
|
Torrannor posted:What kind of RPG's doesn't have combat? Visual novels? In D&D you could have a fairly low-combat campaign, but so much of it was still geared towards combat. In a computer game, Planescape gave combat a fairly low priority, but it still had it. I think you could get away with a no-kills run in Fallout: New Vegas, but you'd have to go way out of your way and have foreknowledge of the game's mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 01:17
|
|
|
Beef up your stealth and pistols in Alpha Protocol and, well, there are still enemies but I'm not sure I'd call what happens to them "combat"
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 06:06
|
|
|
2house2fly posted:Beef up your stealth and pistols in Alpha Protocol and, well, there are still enemies but I'm not sure I'd call what happens to them "combat" There are other ways to play that game?! I don't know how you can, it seems designed for it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 07:23
|
|
|
Axe-man posted:There are other ways to play that game?! I don't know how you can, it seems designed for it. To be honest, you kind of almost can't.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 07:24
|
|
|
Pattonesque posted:I think you could get away with a no-kills run in Fallout: New Vegas, but you'd have to go way out of your way and have foreknowledge of the game's mechanics. To be fair, stealth systems to avoid combat are basically a facet of combat systems themselves.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 07:28
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:Boot up Baldur's Gate, create a character. I don't have to go back that far, even ME1 had non-combat related skills which completely fell to the side in later games. (Mainly because they sucked) With Baldurs Gate there was also the difference that the characters skills directly decided the outcome of the combat, yeah you had to plan general tactics and stuff but you couldn't really affect the outcome of the combat much if your characters sucked balls. In the ME games it's clearly directly the players skill how the combat plays out. That where's the distinction for me. Of course RPGs are also mainly about the combat. I never claimed otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 07:39
|
|
|
I don't feel too strongly about non-combat skills in RPGs. Some are good, some are bad. The only thing that annoys me is when they're mixed in with your combat abilities, forcing you to choose between lowering your ability to fight or your ability to do absolutely anything else. It's too easy to gimp yourself in many RPG systems already without that "feature" to add to the busywork.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 14:46
|
|
|
Replacing the Charm/Intimidate skills in ME1 with a system where you unlock charm/intimidate options by accumulating Paragon/Renegade points was maybe the worst mistake they made in the ME1 -> ME2 transition. Not that the former was ideal, but the latter was really dumb.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
I think the problem with non-combat skills in most RPGs is they end up being really binary. It's always just about "Did you spend enough points on X to not get locked out of this content?" and that makes them more of a feat tax than anything.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 17:16
|
|
|
Opposing Farce posted:I think the problem with non-combat skills in most RPGs is they end up being really binary. It's always just about "Did you spend enough points on X to not get locked out of this content?" and that makes them more of a feat tax than anything. In some games its "Do I get this content?" "maaaaaaaaaaaaaybe" and then the dice roll says no. That system works on the tabletop where everyone improvises around the new problem, it's not so good in a computer game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 17:25
|
|
|
ShineDog posted:In some games its "Do I get this content?" "maaaaaaaaaaaaaybe" and then the dice roll says no. While I don't necessarily think the end result was the best, I kind of like how Fallout 3 did it. It may have been prone to save-scumming or  syndrome where you'll fail a 90% chance check but at least it gave you all the information you needed to make that risk.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
Games really should just let you "roll a 20" for percentage-based checks outside of combat. RIP Fallout 1 and 2, where you used Science on a computer over and over again until it worked. Really, percentage-based checks don't work unless you restrict save/reload, and nobody (except me) wants to restrict save/reload, especially PC gamers, for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 14:25 |
|
|
New Vegas tries to get around the save/load thing in casinos by disabling the gambling minigames for a minute or so after loading. Doesn't stop the dedicated savescummer, but it inconveniences you enough that you might not want to savescum any more.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 17:38
|
|
