Over at the Mass Effect forums this past Saturday, Patrick Weekes discussed, though subtly, on how they intend to improve the sequel of Mass Effect.

He first went into detail on the cons in Mass Effect.

me1 was action-heavy. personally feel that we did our best work not when we went all talky, but when we picked careful spots to put in impact of choices, interaction.

citadel and uncs weren’t as well received. personally think content was fine. problem was the mix and the impact. too much talking at citadel, talk loses impact, feels gamey. too much combat and driving on uncs, not enough choice, not enough emotional impact — fights don’t feel emotionally gripping as result.

After this he went into detail on what they are planning to do within Mass Effect 2 when combining the Combat and Dialog.

so we’re going with what works. mix of combat and impactful emotion that was present on our best me1 levels. fewer areas of “kill kill kill don’t ask why”, fewer areas of “talk talk talk no there is no killing available.

- levels that are combat heavy but have integrated side moments with good roleplaying feel (like manuel or various virmire prisoners in me1). make more side quests react to what’s happening on the level — more emotional tie in.

- levels that are combat light, but that have either a few specific combat points for counterpoint or a natural end-point that guides player to action (difference between citadel, which many people felt too talky, and port hanshen, which is just as talky but has some combat to spice things up and a goal pulling Shepard forward to combat area)

- levels where we do a lot of ambient sounds and level building to set up a compelling and intense situation without breaking flow of action, then use relatively few conversations to powerful effect (feros, virmire, ilos)

How he concludes his post is exciting as I can not wait to see how they can improve and top the choices and tension that is found in Mass Effect.

not about more combat. about better combat, so it works better to drive tension, and about better mix of combat and conversation, so neither conversation nor combat starts to feel tired, cookie cutter.

we have some awesome choices. we have some wrenching moments. we have fun side stuff to cleanse the palate. combat improvements are going to make those even better as counterpoints. improved mission design will make them have best possible impact.

He then went into detail on the two most complained about places in the game, the Citadel and the UNCs.  While he doesn’t exactly say how they plan to improve these issues, he does basically say that they are working on it.

people complained about uncs being dull, cookie cutter. really complaining because no hook — combat not unique, no big goal at end that makes it unique. also too long between talking points, emotional payoff.

same problem with citadel. people got fed up with talking but felt like they had to stay, keep talking. no push to move on, too much of one thing.

any time players unhappy, annoyed, feel need to “power through” part they don’t enjoy for any reason (completionist, levelling, achievements, working toward good part), designers know we have something to fix.

can still have killfests. just shorter, with hook, payoff. will still have areas with talking/roleplaying emphasis. just not all in one area with nothing else to cleanse the palate. balance, moderation.

The most disappointing feature to me in the first game were the UNCs and I hope to still have that sense of exploration without the dullness of what we find.

Josh T. Announcements, Console, Games, News, PC, xbox 360