Who tells someone they don't contribute, then writes a post that's two-thirds whining about how someone else does their foruming? This guy:
You probably half-read posts, or you are more interested in popping up to say whatever than contribute. I said... the best, in an RPG. Not an action title. dimis_
Yeah...I got that. The "battle system" in Mass Effect played like a shooter, a simple shooter. I commented on this in the thread:
[QUOTE="xXNOOBKILLAXx"]
...the story and rpg elements of mass effect is what drives the game..not the combat
I
I agree. The combat in Mass Effect goes:
- Shoot things until they die.
- See point 1.
There's very little room for planning and tactical ingenuity in Mass Effect. For me, the fun in the combat came from upgrading my weapons and improving my abilities, so that I was able to "Shoot things until they die" faster.
You can perform only the most rudementary actions in Mass Effect that aren't simply shooting enemies. You have a couple crowd control spells with the biotic powers, and a couple de-buffs with the engineer. That's it. Basic RPG concepts, like tanks and healers, buffs, and aggro control don't exist in Mass Effect. RPGs 20 years ago had a wider selection of spells than Mass Effect, both in number and type.
I loved Mass Effect, and I enjoyed shooting stuff, but I thought its combat was about as divorced as you could get from the RPG experience. Then you say that you think Mass Effect has a great battle system, whereas a game like Dragon Age (that does have normal RPG combat) sucks. Dragon Age's combat (especially when constrasted with Mass Effect) basically describes most party-based RPGs ever made. So...what's up with that? Do you just not like normal RPGs?
Log in to comment