Also devs are caught in a catch 22: limit exploration and you're criticized for making a linear corridor simulator; create an open world and players will complain it's either empty or too full of stuff to see that your main plot becomes meaningless.
Just curate your own experience and take some responsibility for the way you play
That works until you realize that largely you don't know whether content is good or not until you play it, especially in a story-based game like ME. Like yeah, if a marker says it's part of the mineral scanning quest, I'm not going to do that. But most of the quests in this game are written in a way that they could be interesting, and you don't know until you do it whether or not it's successful. Personally, I've found that they aren't often enough that I wish they had culled some of the worst stuff, even if it didn't result in improvements elsewhere.
Or like the monolith quests: I dug going through those on Eos. My 2nd planet was Voeld, where I am now, and I still do them because I assume they unlock stuff with the vaults or something, but I don't know what they do. They seem pretty freaking important, but the actual mechanics of that quest no longer interest me. What am I supposed to do in that situation?
This is super valid too, the whole question of novelty in mechanics, storytelling, and whether or not the player needs a change at that point (or will change if given the option).
I think one of the strongest elements in ME2 wasn't that it was a linear corridor shooter, but that they tried hard to make each mission, loyalty or otherwise, feel different. You were essentially shoehorned into a tasting menu of gameplay and atmosphere. Short, sweet, and out of your hands.
Whereas andromeda is more of a truly large buffet, and players are complaining that they got full because they filled up on 1 dish.
I also think a lot players are raising the wrong issue. They're complaining that the buffet is too big rather than pointing out that some of the dishes are poop on a plate. I refuse to complain about too much content in a game I like. Down that path lies madness. I will, however, complain about content that's bad, no matter how much or how little of it there is. More is, as they say, better. But with that in mind, accounting for the quantity of content in the design of a game is part of making that content good. There can't be too much or too little content, there's only good or bad content.
Sort of. The quality/quantity of content is always an inverse sliding scale, because budgets in both time and money are a constant. People are complaining about quantity, because the flip side is, with less quantity the quality would (or should) have gone up.
It's pretty clear even with Bioware games. Smaller tighter games with less content (ME2, DA2 (rushed dev issues aside)) featured a lot more memorable (quality) characters and scenes, whereas much more ambitious games, feature less memorable (quality) characters and scenes. For example, I remember damn near everything about my ME2 companions years later, but I honestly can't remember shit about my DA:I companions or honestly even much of the main plot. I'm never going to forget busting through Omega and finding out Archangel was one of my best bros all along. I think the only DA:I stuff I kinda remember was some Qunari shenanigans with Bull.
Simpsonia on
+3
Options
TTODewbackPuts the drawl in ya'llI think I'm in HellRegistered Userregular
So, one of the things that I find interesting about their selection of preset faces—lack or minimal touchups aside—is that the majority of them are either a) non-white or b) outside the spectrum of general attractiveness. Which is to say that even if they had adjusted certain things about those faces, they'd still be normal everyday faces. While the source of the default faces for the Ryder twins happen to fall very strongly along those lines of general attractiveness. Racial connotations aside, the other responses that I've read about the faces are that people don't play these games to look "normal." Sometimes citing other games where "ugly" involves generating characters with what would be physical deformities IRL.
Like, this image below is from comes from a 2015 survey taken by Dr. Chris Solomon of the University of Kent and more or less involved a process of compositing faces into what would be considered the epitome of beauty for that population (Source). That's about as close to the original release that I can trace to; the article has been heavily aggregated, and salted with other opinions. If the faces, etc possible have even been mentioned already within the context of ME:A too, idk. It should be noted that I am not suggesting that they cast those two because of this survey, I think it's coincidental more than anything. There's naturally some variation between American/other beauty standards too as it was a UK-only sample, natch.
Here's shots of the models and whatnot:
But I think part of the reason that people are voicing such a strong "the presets/faces are ugly" thing is that gap. You can be a face that falls into the ideal or... just normal face with wonky sliders. Whether or not Sara's face model has been over manipulated or whatever, I don't know... I've left that argument alone intentionally in this post.
Also curious to know what the actual face models for the cyberscans think about how their appearances are being bashed to high hell on the internet and back. Especially Addison's model.
As long as the model for Addison doesn't possess a human face somehow glued over one of those CPR dummies from swim lessons at the Y, I don't think she should take anything she reads about her computer incarnation, you know, personally.
I know I've seen someone rework her to have not terrible lighting and normal make-up, and she looks perfectly fine. It isn't an issue with whoever provided the face scan for her, but what Bioware did with it.
Or according to that one video, what EA Burachest or whatever did to it.
So those galaxy transitions aren't load screens and are instead pure design decision. Yikes! Well I'm glad they're addressing that stuff, and so swiftly, too. Fixing that and the dead eyes are two major improvements only like two weeks past release, so good on 'em. Looking forward to the rest!
This is largely valid, but games like W3 had enormous diversity and got the same criticism. At some point the common factor is the player, not the game.
W3's problem was needlessly adding tons of filler mini-quests when they already had heaps of strong content. There was no way to differentiate the X marks for buried treasure (or whatever the two or three other common disposable quest types were) and more involved side content on W3's map (outside of Skellige, where presumably nothing marked in open water was worth examination), but there were like 6000 of them, so if you were prowling for interesting stuff, you'd inevitably have to check out lots of those on the way in the process of elimination. I found them pretty fatiguing considering the game already took like 120 hours to beat!
"More stuff" isn't always better, especially if it dilutes stronger content.
Also devs are caught in a catch 22: limit exploration and you're criticized for making a linear corridor simulator; create an open world and players will complain it's either empty or too full of stuff to see that your main plot becomes meaningless.
Just curate your own experience and take some responsibility for the way you play
That works until you realize that largely you don't know whether content is good or not until you play it, especially in a story-based game like ME. Like yeah, if a marker says it's part of the mineral scanning quest, I'm not going to do that. But most of the quests in this game are written in a way that they could be interesting, and you don't know until you do it whether or not it's successful. Personally, I've found that they aren't often enough that I wish they had culled some of the worst stuff, even if it didn't result in improvements elsewhere.
Or like the monolith quests: I dug going through those on Eos. My 2nd planet was Voeld, where I am now, and I still do them because I assume they unlock stuff with the vaults or something, but I don't know what they do. They seem pretty freaking important, but the actual mechanics of that quest no longer interest me. What am I supposed to do in that situation?
This is super valid too, the whole question of novelty in mechanics, storytelling, and whether or not the player needs a change at that point (or will change if given the option).
I think one of the strongest elements in ME2 wasn't that it was a linear corridor shooter, but that they tried hard to make each mission, loyalty or otherwise, feel different. You were essentially shoehorned into a tasting menu of gameplay and atmosphere. Short, sweet, and out of your hands.
Whereas andromeda is more of a truly large buffet, and players are complaining that they got full because they filled up on 1 dish.
I also think a lot players are raising the wrong issue. They're complaining that the buffet is too big rather than pointing out that some of the dishes are poop on a plate. I refuse to complain about too much content in a game I like. Down that path lies madness. I will, however, complain about content that's bad, no matter how much or how little of it there is. More is, as they say, better. But with that in mind, accounting for the quantity of content in the design of a game is part of making that content good. There can't be too much or too little content, there's only good or bad content.
Sort of. The quality/quantity of content is always an inverse sliding scale, because budgets in both time and money are a constant. People are complaining about quantity, because the flip side is, with less quantity the quality would (or should) have gone up.
It's pretty clear even with Bioware games. Smaller tighter games with less content (ME2, DA2 (rushed dev issues aside)) featured a lot more memorable (quality) characters and scenes, whereas much more ambitious games, feature less memorable (quality) characters and scenes. For example, I remember damn near everything about my ME2 companions years later, but I honestly can't remember shit about my DA:I companions or honestly even much of the main plot. I'm never going to forget busting through Omega and finding out Archangel was one of my best bros all along. I think the only DA:I stuff I kinda remember was some Qunari shenanigans with Bull.
I don't know that I would count ME2 as a "small" game but that's not entirely the point I was trying to make. A better example is the quest that Simpsonia was (correctly) complaining about a few pages back. Go scan a bunch of minerals on a bunch of different planets and get... a few hundred credits and some XP. That's a pretty terrible quest! But what if it gave you an upgrade to the Nomad every time you scanned all the minerals on a particular planet instead? That'd make it a pretty good quest. Is it as a good as the Archangel recruitment mission in ME2? Of course not. Had it been designed with a better effort:reward ratio, though, it'd be something worth doing for reasons beyond just completionism.
Then again, I also don't seem to have all the list of complaints everyone else does, so I can only hope that "fixing all these problems" doesn't screw my experience up like it usually does.
+6
Options
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
Also devs are caught in a catch 22: limit exploration and you're criticized for making a linear corridor simulator; create an open world and players will complain it's either empty or too full of stuff to see that your main plot becomes meaningless.
Just curate your own experience and take some responsibility for the way you play
That works until you realize that largely you don't know whether content is good or not until you play it, especially in a story-based game like ME. Like yeah, if a marker says it's part of the mineral scanning quest, I'm not going to do that. But most of the quests in this game are written in a way that they could be interesting, and you don't know until you do it whether or not it's successful. Personally, I've found that they aren't often enough that I wish they had culled some of the worst stuff, even if it didn't result in improvements elsewhere.
Or like the monolith quests: I dug going through those on Eos. My 2nd planet was Voeld, where I am now, and I still do them because I assume they unlock stuff with the vaults or something, but I don't know what they do. They seem pretty freaking important, but the actual mechanics of that quest no longer interest me. What am I supposed to do in that situation?
This is super valid too, the whole question of novelty in mechanics, storytelling, and whether or not the player needs a change at that point (or will change if given the option).
I think one of the strongest elements in ME2 wasn't that it was a linear corridor shooter, but that they tried hard to make each mission, loyalty or otherwise, feel different. You were essentially shoehorned into a tasting menu of gameplay and atmosphere. Short, sweet, and out of your hands.
Whereas andromeda is more of a truly large buffet, and players are complaining that they got full because they filled up on 1 dish.
I also think a lot players are raising the wrong issue. They're complaining that the buffet is too big rather than pointing out that some of the dishes are poop on a plate. I refuse to complain about too much content in a game I like. Down that path lies madness. I will, however, complain about content that's bad, no matter how much or how little of it there is. More is, as they say, better. But with that in mind, accounting for the quantity of content in the design of a game is part of making that content good. There can't be too much or too little content, there's only good or bad content.
Sort of. The quality/quantity of content is always an inverse sliding scale, because budgets in both time and money are a constant. People are complaining about quantity, because the flip side is, with less quantity the quality would (or should) have gone up.
It's pretty clear even with Bioware games. Smaller tighter games with less content (ME2, DA2 (rushed dev issues aside)) featured a lot more memorable (quality) characters and scenes, whereas much more ambitious games, feature less memorable (quality) characters and scenes. For example, I remember damn near everything about my ME2 companions years later, but I honestly can't remember shit about my DA:I companions or honestly even much of the main plot. I'm never going to forget busting through Omega and finding out Archangel was one of my best bros all along. I think the only DA:I stuff I kinda remember was some Qunari shenanigans with Bull.
Hmm...I would actually argue DAI has one of Bioware's stronger party casts.
Dragkonias on
+7
Options
Tynnanseldom correct, never unsureRegistered Userregular
I have to assume these shemrys things on Havarl must breed like rabbits given what a bunch of incredibly aggressive level 1 bugs they are. You're attacking me and your entire body explodes if I flick you, this is a bad life choice.
Nah I can't imagine they'll be doing a balance towards difficulty. Noticably in multiplayer powers and weapons are weak. Sniper Rifles are a symptom, not the disease.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Has anyone here used Backlash in Gold? I've found myself liking the Asari Sentinel and the tankiness offered by Backlash and Energy Drain on Silver, but the numbers make me think the aegis might not accomplish very much in Gold. So I'm wondering if I should even bother leveling her any further at this point.
I have a feeling the MP balance changes will make outlaws more difficult rather than making anything else easier.
Remnant are quite doable. The big problem with the Kett is the prevalence and damage output of their tier 2-3 units; if an Anointed sees you and shoots you, you're 99% going to go down unless you have cover right there, or saw it first. Unfortunately, due to the stacks of Destined, all the Anointed are currently invisible and untargetable, so whoops you're dead.
If I had to guess, it'll be a shield HP nerf to Anointed, or put the Destined invisibility on a timer/cooldown as opposed to continuous effect. There's always 2-3 of them in a spawn group, and the AI likes to cluster up, so you have this permanent invisible deathball shooting sniper miniguns and shotguns across the map. Suspect they might also tweak Anointed/Destined damage output as well, since "just take cover!" doesn't work when you're coated in invisible dogs, the Anointed is also invisible, and was halfway across the map anyway.
Honestly, with Remnant all I'd want is maybe a slight tweak to laser tracking/damage. It's very close to "whoops you're dead" at the moment, even if you dodge. Maybe also a slight drop to Breacher spawn frequency from the Assemblers.
Nah I can't imagine they'll be doing a balance towards difficulty. Noticably in multiplayer powers and weapons are weak. Sniper Rifles are a symptom, not the disease.
Somehow I don't think they'll buff everything that needs buffing.
Nah I can't imagine they'll be doing a balance towards difficulty. Noticably in multiplayer powers and weapons are weak. Sniper Rifles are a symptom, not the disease.
Somehow I don't think they'll buff everything that needs buffing.
Probably not, but I can't imagine they'll be upping the difficulty when most people feel its too high right now.
What they really need is weapon classes getting bonus's. Like AR's should get their single player component of a stacking debuff for damage dealt to a target, pistols should do more head shot damage, and shotguns should get a bonus for how close you are.
You could even buff snipers by having them acquire a bonus damage the further you are from the target.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
As a comparison, both Sharpshooters and Observers have a delayed damage application, telegraph position, and while not squishy, are certainly not tanky the same way. If a sharpshooter gets you, it feels more "fair", even if you start swearing about that little bastard, because there's this big laser sight thing. Not "invisible machine gun from nowhere whoops there went the team". I get the feeling Anointed are "supposed" to have a spinup period on their gun, and/or need to reload a lot, but it isn't enough, especially in packs.
Edit: The stacking debuff is totally a thing. Any class with Munitions Training has it at R6. Human soldier + Revenant (even shitty one) plus max dakka + max Munitions is a lot of hurty bullets. Yeah you have to use a lot of bullets, but I've got a 99 round magazine here, and 700 spare, so yeah I'm totally just holding the trigger down it's all good. On Bronze (don't judge, level 6!) a full clip in Overcharge with a Revenant 2 will do ~50% of a Fiend's HP, which is pretty respectable I think. ARs just seem to suck out of the box, but once you get some synergy/ranks going feel way better.
Yeah the annointed have a spin up period and are slow to move, but with how open some maps are and with the destined cloak you might not even see that spin up.
I mean annointed are sniper meat, their head is like sputnick and again they are slow as shit, but with all the harrassing units like wraiths who are also stealthed they can just as easily chunk you.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Berserkers could use some tweaking, but I'm not sure what. Right now they're annoying HP sponges that keep knocking you out of cover so often the best strategy is for everyone to run up to them and start punching them in the face, because for mighty Krogan warriors they're surprisingly soft in a fistfight. That just doesn't feel right. They should be deadly in melee (although a sync kill might be too much?) and maybe a little less dangerous at range.
Is there some page or Twitter account somewhere that says what the modifiers for the current MP missions are? Going into the MP screen every time a new one pops up to see if it's one I want to do is a bit annoying.
The most egregious thing about piles of content is that you can't tell if it's quality or only there so there's lots of shit until AFTER you do it.
It just needs more granularity. Like, dropping the busy work into a 'Tasks' category was a good start. Bow, mark them in the UI before I take them, categorize everything by type (fetch and gather, rescue and retrieval, assault, defense, whatever go nuts) and category (remnant, kett, etc) and location and reward type and then let me filter after the fact based on those things and prompt me with map clutter and quest tracking bloat only on the shit I actively want to do.
It's not a problem that it exists. It's a problem that it won't go away. Shit, I mark I'm no interested in it, don't even count it in the 100% progress calculation. Make it like it doesn't even exist.
What the shit, Bioware? You let me romance freaking point-zero-zero-two-bit journalists but not someone on my ship? Minor pet peeve, that's all I'm sayin'.
Aww, who am I kiddin', Ryder ain't got nothin' goin' on to lure Lexi's eyes away from Drack.
What the shit, Bioware? You let me romance freaking point-zero-zero-two-bit journalists but not someone on my ship? Minor pet peeve, that's all I'm sayin'.
Aww, who am I kiddin', Ryder ain't got nothin' goin' on to lure Lexi's eyes away from Drack.
Also devs are caught in a catch 22: limit exploration and you're criticized for making a linear corridor simulator; create an open world and players will complain it's either empty or too full of stuff to see that your main plot becomes meaningless.
Just curate your own experience and take some responsibility for the way you play
That works until you realize that largely you don't know whether content is good or not until you play it, especially in a story-based game like ME. Like yeah, if a marker says it's part of the mineral scanning quest, I'm not going to do that. But most of the quests in this game are written in a way that they could be interesting, and you don't know until you do it whether or not it's successful. Personally, I've found that they aren't often enough that I wish they had culled some of the worst stuff, even if it didn't result in improvements elsewhere.
Or like the monolith quests: I dug going through those on Eos. My 2nd planet was Voeld, where I am now, and I still do them because I assume they unlock stuff with the vaults or something, but I don't know what they do. They seem pretty freaking important, but the actual mechanics of that quest no longer interest me. What am I supposed to do in that situation?
This is super valid too, the whole question of novelty in mechanics, storytelling, and whether or not the player needs a change at that point (or will change if given the option).
I think one of the strongest elements in ME2 wasn't that it was a linear corridor shooter, but that they tried hard to make each mission, loyalty or otherwise, feel different. You were essentially shoehorned into a tasting menu of gameplay and atmosphere. Short, sweet, and out of your hands.
Whereas andromeda is more of a truly large buffet, and players are complaining that they got full because they filled up on 1 dish.
I also think a lot players are raising the wrong issue. They're complaining that the buffet is too big rather than pointing out that some of the dishes are poop on a plate. I refuse to complain about too much content in a game I like. Down that path lies madness. I will, however, complain about content that's bad, no matter how much or how little of it there is. More is, as they say, better. But with that in mind, accounting for the quantity of content in the design of a game is part of making that content good. There can't be too much or too little content, there's only good or bad content.
Sort of. The quality/quantity of content is always an inverse sliding scale, because budgets in both time and money are a constant. People are complaining about quantity, because the flip side is, with less quantity the quality would (or should) have gone up.
It's pretty clear even with Bioware games. Smaller tighter games with less content (ME2, DA2 (rushed dev issues aside)) featured a lot more memorable (quality) characters and scenes, whereas much more ambitious games, feature less memorable (quality) characters and scenes. For example, I remember damn near everything about my ME2 companions years later, but I honestly can't remember shit about my DA:I companions or honestly even much of the main plot. I'm never going to forget busting through Omega and finding out Archangel was one of my best bros all along. I think the only DA:I stuff I kinda remember was some Qunari shenanigans with Bull.
Hmm...I would actually argue DAI has one of Bioware's stronger party casts.
I think DA: I unquestionably has a better cast across the board. Drack is decent and Jaal and PeeBee are okay, but the rest are blaaaaaaand city.
0
Options
HeatwaveCome, now, and walk the path of explosions with me!Registered Userregular
I've noticed a lot in MP that the background noise from people's headsets are really loud.
Is this a problem on my end or their end?
Could it actually be my headset mic picking up noise from my headset? I have Origin setup for push to talk so I would have thought not, but I'm just not sure.
The noise is really distracting and overpowers the sound from the rest of the game.
I've noticed a lot in MP that the background noise from people's headsets are really loud.
Is this a problem on my end or their end?
Could it actually be my headset mic picking up noise from my headset? I have Origin setup for push to talk so I would have thought not, but I'm just not sure.
The noise is really distracting and overpowers the sound from the rest of the game.
It's them. You'll have to mute them one by one until you catch the noisy one. And the UI does not make this easy.
I think the game may default to voice activation, but I'm not sure. But there are a lot of people who run speakers and end up having a constant open mic, and are oblivious to it even when you TELL THEM DIRECTLY.
I recommend just muting them and be done with it.
+4
Options
HeatwaveCome, now, and walk the path of explosions with me!Registered Userregular
Thanks, guys. Will mute next time I'm playing with randos.
Pretty much the moment I enter a game and hear open mic sound, it's mutes for everyone
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
Speaking of voeld the game decided i was not allowed to manual save on Voeld, even though i completed my priority mission there* and was just knocking out side content. I tried switching the mission i was tracking and everything. Eventually just went back to my ship.
*
the moshae is terrible and i hate her.
You know, I saved her, I saved her people, and I shot the dude that captured all of them. We get back to the ship, and she's going off on me and how I'm such a horrible person and I'm just using everyone to get what I want. Fuck you lady.
Posts
Normal looking folks get zero representation in games beyond NPCs
Registered just for the Mass Effect threads | Steam: click ^^^ | Origin: curlyhairedboy
Sort of. The quality/quantity of content is always an inverse sliding scale, because budgets in both time and money are a constant. People are complaining about quantity, because the flip side is, with less quantity the quality would (or should) have gone up.
It's pretty clear even with Bioware games. Smaller tighter games with less content (ME2, DA2 (rushed dev issues aside)) featured a lot more memorable (quality) characters and scenes, whereas much more ambitious games, feature less memorable (quality) characters and scenes. For example, I remember damn near everything about my ME2 companions years later, but I honestly can't remember shit about my DA:I companions or honestly even much of the main plot. I'm never going to forget busting through Omega and finding out Archangel was one of my best bros all along. I think the only DA:I stuff I kinda remember was some Qunari shenanigans with Bull.
Or according to that one video, what EA Burachest or whatever did to it.
Pretty accurate!
(Mild spoilers)
W3's problem was needlessly adding tons of filler mini-quests when they already had heaps of strong content. There was no way to differentiate the X marks for buried treasure (or whatever the two or three other common disposable quest types were) and more involved side content on W3's map (outside of Skellige, where presumably nothing marked in open water was worth examination), but there were like 6000 of them, so if you were prowling for interesting stuff, you'd inevitably have to check out lots of those on the way in the process of elimination. I found them pretty fatiguing considering the game already took like 120 hours to beat!
"More stuff" isn't always better, especially if it dilutes stronger content.
I don't know that I would count ME2 as a "small" game but that's not entirely the point I was trying to make. A better example is the quest that Simpsonia was (correctly) complaining about a few pages back. Go scan a bunch of minerals on a bunch of different planets and get... a few hundred credits and some XP. That's a pretty terrible quest! But what if it gave you an upgrade to the Nomad every time you scanned all the minerals on a particular planet instead? That'd make it a pretty good quest. Is it as a good as the Archangel recruitment mission in ME2? Of course not. Had it been designed with a better effort:reward ratio, though, it'd be something worth doing for reasons beyond just completionism.
Then again, I also don't seem to have all the list of complaints everyone else does, so I can only hope that "fixing all these problems" doesn't screw my experience up like it usually does.
Hmm...I would actually argue DAI has one of Bioware's stronger party casts.
Not one line about movie night? Missed opportunity.
Nah, that'll just piss people off too.
Registered just for the Mass Effect threads | Steam: click ^^^ | Origin: curlyhairedboy
Would piss people off more "Why don't they just show me everything I should see!"
pleasepaypreacher.net
Technically speaking, 'what Asari look like' is a bit up for debate
The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Remnant are quite doable. The big problem with the Kett is the prevalence and damage output of their tier 2-3 units; if an Anointed sees you and shoots you, you're 99% going to go down unless you have cover right there, or saw it first. Unfortunately, due to the stacks of Destined, all the Anointed are currently invisible and untargetable, so whoops you're dead.
If I had to guess, it'll be a shield HP nerf to Anointed, or put the Destined invisibility on a timer/cooldown as opposed to continuous effect. There's always 2-3 of them in a spawn group, and the AI likes to cluster up, so you have this permanent invisible deathball shooting sniper miniguns and shotguns across the map. Suspect they might also tweak Anointed/Destined damage output as well, since "just take cover!" doesn't work when you're coated in invisible dogs, the Anointed is also invisible, and was halfway across the map anyway.
Honestly, with Remnant all I'd want is maybe a slight tweak to laser tracking/damage. It's very close to "whoops you're dead" at the moment, even if you dodge. Maybe also a slight drop to Breacher spawn frequency from the Assemblers.
Edit: Also, for the love of god, FOOTSTEPS.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Somehow I don't think they'll buff everything that needs buffing.
PSN: ShogunGunshow
Origin: ShogunGunshow
Probably not, but I can't imagine they'll be upping the difficulty when most people feel its too high right now.
What they really need is weapon classes getting bonus's. Like AR's should get their single player component of a stacking debuff for damage dealt to a target, pistols should do more head shot damage, and shotguns should get a bonus for how close you are.
You could even buff snipers by having them acquire a bonus damage the further you are from the target.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Edit: The stacking debuff is totally a thing. Any class with Munitions Training has it at R6. Human soldier + Revenant (even shitty one) plus max dakka + max Munitions is a lot of hurty bullets. Yeah you have to use a lot of bullets, but I've got a 99 round magazine here, and 700 spare, so yeah I'm totally just holding the trigger down it's all good. On Bronze (don't judge, level 6!) a full clip in Overcharge with a Revenant 2 will do ~50% of a Fiend's HP, which is pretty respectable I think. ARs just seem to suck out of the box, but once you get some synergy/ranks going feel way better.
I mean annointed are sniper meat, their head is like sputnick and again they are slow as shit, but with all the harrassing units like wraiths who are also stealthed they can just as easily chunk you.
pleasepaypreacher.net
It just needs more granularity. Like, dropping the busy work into a 'Tasks' category was a good start. Bow, mark them in the UI before I take them, categorize everything by type (fetch and gather, rescue and retrieval, assault, defense, whatever go nuts) and category (remnant, kett, etc) and location and reward type and then let me filter after the fact based on those things and prompt me with map clutter and quest tracking bloat only on the shit I actively want to do.
It's not a problem that it exists. It's a problem that it won't go away. Shit, I mark I'm no interested in it, don't even count it in the 100% progress calculation. Make it like it doesn't even exist.
Registered just for the Mass Effect threads | Steam: click ^^^ | Origin: curlyhairedboy
What the shit, Bioware? You let me romance freaking point-zero-zero-two-bit journalists but not someone on my ship? Minor pet peeve, that's all I'm sayin'.
I think DA: I unquestionably has a better cast across the board. Drack is decent and Jaal and PeeBee are okay, but the rest are blaaaaaaand city.
Is this a problem on my end or their end?
Could it actually be my headset mic picking up noise from my headset? I have Origin setup for push to talk so I would have thought not, but I'm just not sure.
The noise is really distracting and overpowers the sound from the rest of the game.
Steam / Origin & Wii U: Heatwave111 / FC: 4227-1965-3206 / Battle.net: Heatwave#11356
It's them. You'll have to mute them one by one until you catch the noisy one. And the UI does not make this easy.
I recommend just muting them and be done with it.
Steam / Origin & Wii U: Heatwave111 / FC: 4227-1965-3206 / Battle.net: Heatwave#11356