In a panel titled "Where Did My Inventory Go? Refining Gameplay in Mass Effect 2," BioWare's Christina Norman talked about the radical changes made to the second chapter in the Mass Effect trilogy. A key goal for Mass Effect 2 was to introduce "more satisfying combat," with an "intense feel" missing from the first game. One of the admitted failures of the first Mass Effect game was the incongruity between its look and feel: it looked like a shooter, but it didn't exactly play like one. With that in mind, Norman decided that the team needed to focus on rebuilding the combat in its entirety for Mass Effect 2. "BioWare is strong on RPG and story," but "not so strong on shooter combat." BioWare needed to rebuild its gameplay core, because the game's "other features depend on shooter combat."
The streamlined gameplay and GUI of Mass Effect 2 made it a huge critical success, but Norman pointed out some major criticisms from vocal members of the official BioWare forums. Threads titled "Mass Effect 2 is not an RPG" and "Gears of War with interactive dialogue" were highlighted as examples of fans disappointed by the strong shooting focus of the second game.
As with the transition from the first Mass Effect to the second, BioWare is taking these criticisms to heart for the third game, with Norman hoping the third will offer "richer RPG features" and "more combat options." What we can probably expect less of, however, is the mining minigame, which Norman described as the part that "nobody liked."
Reader Comments (130)
Posted: Mar 13th 2010 6:59PM GuardianLegend said
I thought it was outright bad in ME1. Hard to think of a shooter with worse gameplay than ME1's. ME2's was improved, but very repetitive. The first battle you get in is the same as 99% of the rest of the game's. Very simple, not enough to do. Most of the Biotic abilities were functionally the same as the others, doing nothing but insta-killing any enemy once their shields go down.
Reply
Posted: Mar 13th 2010 7:16PM (Unverified) said
The combat is much more satisfying on Insanity, its easy to steamroll through everything on Normal difficulty and you don't have to really stay on top of things.
Reply
Posted: Mar 13th 2010 7:27PM GuardianLegend said
The game only becomes more repetitive and more of a chore on Insanity.
Reply
Posted: Mar 13th 2010 6:44PM Haywire said
I haven't played ME2 yet (xbox died on me and I can't afford a replacement right now). But I'm sure I won't miss the RPG elements of the original ME, and this is coming from an RPG fan. ME's RPG features were not very deep, You got a whole bunch of weapons and then sold them at the first opportunity, and the customisation involved things like ammunition which was especially effective against all robots. Whenever you're against robotic enemies, equip that and the fight's easy. Not exactly a lot of challenging strategy involved.
Still, it will be good if they manage to improve that for ME3, a good action RPG is hard to pull off, but Bioware seems to be doing better than any other developer.
Still, it will be good if they manage to improve that for ME3, a good action RPG is hard to pull off, but Bioware seems to be doing better than any other developer.
Posted: Mar 13th 2010 8:35PM Bluebreaker said
Sorry, but this new breed of RPG's are just not doing it for me. I prefer deep, crunchy and *involved* Stat and Customization systems. Things like Resonance of Fate, Neverwinter Nights and SMT:Strange Journey.
WRPG's used to have that crunchiness too (especially the D&D games!!) but many of them are jettisoning out those elements because "I don't have time anymore!" or "It's too hard!"
Can't fault Bioware too harshly though. Any company that really actively listens to complaints and tries to fix them is great. (Even if it causes more problems....)
WRPG's used to have that crunchiness too (especially the D&D games!!) but many of them are jettisoning out those elements because "I don't have time anymore!" or "It's too hard!"
Can't fault Bioware too harshly though. Any company that really actively listens to complaints and tries to fix them is great. (Even if it causes more problems....)
Posted: Mar 13th 2010 8:43PM GuardianLegend said
Stat based games are a relic of pen-and-paper mechanics. When you have a computer that can simulate actions in real-time, what's the point of video games falling back to the simplistic stat concept?
That's basically what Gary Gygax asked, and he created D&D.
Reply
That's basically what Gary Gygax asked, and he created D&D.
Posted: Mar 13th 2010 9:00PM Bluebreaker said
"Action" seems to be a crutch to not make things more involved though.
Reply
Posted: Mar 13th 2010 9:03PM Bluebreaker said
RPG's used to be for people that didn't like "action games" or "platformers" though. Apparently we're not giving the game makers enough money any more.
Reply
Posted: Mar 13th 2010 11:02PM bm111 said
I always hear that, and what bullshit it is. Slow, deliberate, turn-based, stat based combat allows for a very fine tactical control over every moment of battle, something which makes for entirely different gameplay than real-time combat. Shouldn't this be blindingly obvious? I'm baffled each time someone says something like, computers can do real-time now, why do we want turn-based? Why do these people don't get that just because they don't prefer it, doesn't mean it shouldn't exist?
Reply
Posted: Mar 13th 2010 9:13PM kmcroc said
the bottom right hand corner of the art cover tells you why you will not see any of the Mass Effect trilogy on ps3,as for future Mass Effect games depends on what EA & BIOWARE want to do.
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3156637
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3156637
Posted: Mar 13th 2010 9:13PM The Nth Doctor said
Ordinarily I am completely against the whole concept of exclusives, however, in the case of Mass Effect 3, I can understand. The Mass Effect series is so invested in the incorporation of saves from one game to another, that unless the first two were ported to the PS3, the third would be completely inferior to its 360 and PC counterparts. It would be denying those that have chosen to primarily play games on the PS3 a major part of the ME3 experience.
Posted: Mar 13th 2010 9:40PM DarkShock91 said
They should also improve the cover system.
Posted: Mar 13th 2010 11:05PM bm111 said
Ugh, I hope "richer RPG features" means better, less on-rails world exploration, and not something like, more character dress-up features.
Posted: Mar 13th 2010 11:45PM (Unverified) said
I happen to think the shooting gameplay was improved in 2. A cover system by itself isn't novel but the addition of bio n tech powers keeps in interesting. If they added execution moves, it'd be even better.
Posted: Mar 14th 2010 12:10AM Jack Tretton said
"Not too many PS3 owners are very interested in [Mass Effect]..."
It's not a lie if *you* believe it.
It's not a lie if *you* believe it.
Posted: Mar 14th 2010 12:58AM The Blank Mage Returns said
I want moar LEGION.
Posted: Mar 14th 2010 3:17AM Trojan said
As long as they don't replace the planet scanning with something just as tedious, ME3 might end up being a perfect game.
Posted: Mar 14th 2010 5:28AM Baron Milton Von Crompton said
Here, here, whynot!
Fix the damn enemy and squad AI, please! It truly sucks! I don't use Unity, even when playing as an adept on the insanity difficulty level, for the same reasons as you mentioned.
Further more, the game mechanics and enemy AI are so rudimentary, that it relies solely on staying behind cover, behind objects that allow you to be "behind". Why the fuck can't I squat down, for fuck sakes, when the program doesn't allow me to stay in cover behind an object?
What is the purpose of having the option to press down 'both' analogue sticks to see the objective arrow? What the fuck? Why can't one of them be a squat down toggle switch?
Also, why do I have to hold down the right bumper button, to see the scanner of enemy layouts, just to interrupt the flow of the game, when I want to see where the enemies are? Why can't it be there, or better yet, have it toggled with the press of the camera stick.
Melee was so much fun on the first one, since it was context sensitive. This boded well because I could melee and turn in the enemy direction. Can't do that with the melee button assigned to the B button on Mass Effect 2 though. What a shame.
Minor complaints, but still, I love this game to death! I am a sucker! :D
Fix the damn enemy and squad AI, please! It truly sucks! I don't use Unity, even when playing as an adept on the insanity difficulty level, for the same reasons as you mentioned.
Further more, the game mechanics and enemy AI are so rudimentary, that it relies solely on staying behind cover, behind objects that allow you to be "behind". Why the fuck can't I squat down, for fuck sakes, when the program doesn't allow me to stay in cover behind an object?
What is the purpose of having the option to press down 'both' analogue sticks to see the objective arrow? What the fuck? Why can't one of them be a squat down toggle switch?
Also, why do I have to hold down the right bumper button, to see the scanner of enemy layouts, just to interrupt the flow of the game, when I want to see where the enemies are? Why can't it be there, or better yet, have it toggled with the press of the camera stick.
Melee was so much fun on the first one, since it was context sensitive. This boded well because I could melee and turn in the enemy direction. Can't do that with the melee button assigned to the B button on Mass Effect 2 though. What a shame.
Minor complaints, but still, I love this game to death! I am a sucker! :D
Posted: Mar 14th 2010 4:55AM Draken Stark said
I have to say I love reading lines comments like these for games. Comedy mixed with good impressions that I can compare to is like nothing else I enjoy on the net.
I also think Trey needs to go on a posting spree in the official mass effect forums.
I also think Trey needs to go on a posting spree in the official mass effect forums.
Posted: Mar 14th 2010 9:12AM (Unverified) said
I'd like to see more items, like in the 1st one. However, I'd like the option to choose what items to pick up, and what items to leave behind.
I'm just glad the folks at Bioware have already stated that the mining minigame will be a thing of the past. I'd much rather do some repetitive mission in a pre rendered environment that involved me moving around than watching a scanner cover a planet for extra resources.
I'm just glad the folks at Bioware have already stated that the mining minigame will be a thing of the past. I'd much rather do some repetitive mission in a pre rendered environment that involved me moving around than watching a scanner cover a planet for extra resources.
Posted: Mar 14th 2010 12:00PM (Unverified) said
Wait, so nobody liked the mining sequences, but they made it into the game?
Posted: Mar 14th 2010 5:24PM Luthorcrow said
@Jason Statham
"And since when was ME for "hardcore rpg enthusiasts?" ME has always been an action rpg. Final Fantasy is a game for hardcore rpg fan, ME really isn't."
That really depends on your definition of an RPG. If you fixate on the game play trappings that have lingered on from the desktop role playings days (stats, experience points, leveling, etc) then your statement is accurate, but ultimately shortsighted. A good role playing game has absolutely nothing to do with inventory management, leveling, etc. Those are just systems. Systems that have become progressively archaic. Things that really matter in a RPG is the ability to make choices that matter. Given that criteria I think ME2 trumps FF, the majority of the other robotic JPRGs and many western RPGs.
Personally when it comes to the future of RPGs, I would be excited to see someone really use Natal to good use. Face and voice recognition would be incredible for an RPG.
The sooner RPG game designers start to ditch complex inventories, states, levels, etc., all of which are game play crutches, and really start to focus on deeper character interaction and choices the better.
"And since when was ME for "hardcore rpg enthusiasts?" ME has always been an action rpg. Final Fantasy is a game for hardcore rpg fan, ME really isn't."
That really depends on your definition of an RPG. If you fixate on the game play trappings that have lingered on from the desktop role playings days (stats, experience points, leveling, etc) then your statement is accurate, but ultimately shortsighted. A good role playing game has absolutely nothing to do with inventory management, leveling, etc. Those are just systems. Systems that have become progressively archaic. Things that really matter in a RPG is the ability to make choices that matter. Given that criteria I think ME2 trumps FF, the majority of the other robotic JPRGs and many western RPGs.
Personally when it comes to the future of RPGs, I would be excited to see someone really use Natal to good use. Face and voice recognition would be incredible for an RPG.
The sooner RPG game designers start to ditch complex inventories, states, levels, etc., all of which are game play crutches, and really start to focus on deeper character interaction and choices the better.
Posted: Mar 14th 2010 6:12PM Sordid State of Eclairs said
I will admit I haven't read every comment (thus far)
But, earlier I saw a quick comparison of the way in which ME2 and FFXIII were streamlined and I'll say this:
ME2 is 100x the game FFXIII is (this coming from a huge FF fanboy.) Do I like FF? Yes.. do I think it got the reviews it deserved? Yes. But Mass Effect 2 is the better game.
When playing ME2, I was like "this is the most amazing game ever!!!!" It was amazingly fun to see how the story played out, shooting everything in sight, upgrading weapons and the ship (I probably didn't even mind the planet scanning as much as others but.. I can see how it would bother some) and just all the little things that happen that you remember which don't really have anything to do w/ the main plot.
Story wise, when playing FFXIII, compared to ME2, there is not as much of a feeling of danger.. not as much of a lingering threat to the player/characters.. there is no feeling of something catastrophic happening like in ME2. It's still a really interesting story, just not enough to go toe to toe w/ ME2.
Gamplay wise, Bioware streamlined their game in the right way. FF feels the loss more on what they removed. Despite that fact that I still like it, it's my opinion they removed things that, for me, define it as FF (item/spell management, gear management, leveling.. sounds stupid but one of the things I loved most about old FF games was taking a break from the story and just going out and fighting enemies for a while to level up.)
... Bioware listened to their fans, changed for the sake of improvement, not the bottom line and cut away the fat. Hopefully they don't change ME3 too much, but I think they'll do the right thing. Square-Enix, on the company side, seem like they make changes because they assume they know what everyone wants, think too much about shareholders and just want to maximize the amount of units sold, no matter the sacrifice.
But, earlier I saw a quick comparison of the way in which ME2 and FFXIII were streamlined and I'll say this:
ME2 is 100x the game FFXIII is (this coming from a huge FF fanboy.) Do I like FF? Yes.. do I think it got the reviews it deserved? Yes. But Mass Effect 2 is the better game.
When playing ME2, I was like "this is the most amazing game ever!!!!" It was amazingly fun to see how the story played out, shooting everything in sight, upgrading weapons and the ship (I probably didn't even mind the planet scanning as much as others but.. I can see how it would bother some) and just all the little things that happen that you remember which don't really have anything to do w/ the main plot.
Story wise, when playing FFXIII, compared to ME2, there is not as much of a feeling of danger.. not as much of a lingering threat to the player/characters.. there is no feeling of something catastrophic happening like in ME2. It's still a really interesting story, just not enough to go toe to toe w/ ME2.
Gamplay wise, Bioware streamlined their game in the right way. FF feels the loss more on what they removed. Despite that fact that I still like it, it's my opinion they removed things that, for me, define it as FF (item/spell management, gear management, leveling.. sounds stupid but one of the things I loved most about old FF games was taking a break from the story and just going out and fighting enemies for a while to level up.)
... Bioware listened to their fans, changed for the sake of improvement, not the bottom line and cut away the fat. Hopefully they don't change ME3 too much, but I think they'll do the right thing. Square-Enix, on the company side, seem like they make changes because they assume they know what everyone wants, think too much about shareholders and just want to maximize the amount of units sold, no matter the sacrifice.
Posted: Mar 14th 2010 7:53PM MNeko said
Improvements? Mass Effect 2 can be improved?!
Posted: Mar 14th 2010 11:55PM lunarlasso said
I loved all the changes bioware put forth in this 2nd effort. I also liked the mining. Why? I like it when games reward dedication. Maybe, it could have been done with less tedium (I'm not a developer), but I want the ability to achieve more than a casual or just a regular gamer would be able to put up with.
I think Reggie Miller said it best, some years ago. "You move the 3 pointer in that close, every fool is going to be able to make it"!
If your going to dumb it down, let there be those hardcore aspects too...
I think Reggie Miller said it best, some years ago. "You move the 3 pointer in that close, every fool is going to be able to make it"!
If your going to dumb it down, let there be those hardcore aspects too...
Posted: Dec 12th 2010 10:01PM SSJ5 said
You know what I'd like to see? I'd like to see some focus on Abilities and Skills. Mass Effect 2 was perfect in every sense except for that and the mining. Skills were really, really simplified, and I found very little excitement after leveling up. It was like, meh, I'll upgrade this, doesn't matter that much anyway, and that is an important part of an RPG. I missed class talents very, very much. It was awesome in ME and I don't know why they didn't keep it (experimenting I guess). It is much better than just changing ammo. I mean come on, I want my protagonist to be customizable in his talents and skills and not ammo and the such. IMO that's what make my Shepard a character that I made. Also I'd like to see Garrus and the rest of the gang back (if not all then some at least).
Featured Stories
Super Joystiq Podcast 004: 38 Studios meltdown, Gravity Rush, Civilization 5: Gods & Kings, Dragon's Dogma
Posted on May 25th 2012 3:30PM




