112 réponses à ce sujet

[UsagiVindaloo]

For myself, my underplayed characters depend entirely on what class I'm playing. I tend to avoid "doubling up" too much. So when I played my soldier, I barely ever brought along Zaeed or Grunt because they had similar power sets (gave myself Fortification though!). This time, on my engineer, I rarely touch Legion, Tali or Mordin because I have the same power set.



I admit though that once I got Jack I pretty much never used Jacob again, and after I got Samara I used her more than Jack. Jacob's pull is very useful, but I guess I'm not a giant fan of the ammo power to go with it.

[Gavinthelocust]

I never use Jack, I am a Vanguard and having someone with nearly the same powers seems redundant.

[epoch_]

I don't think I've ever taken jacob on a mission outside of his loyalty mission and the mission to recruit a third team mate.



Miranda on the other hand, is quite handy.

[TMA LIVE]

Gavinthelocust wrote...

I never use Jack, I am a Vanguard and having someone with nearly the same powers seems redundant.

Yeah, same here. By being a Vanguard, Jacob, Jack, and Samara became useless to me. While people with Drone, Overload, and Warp became people I picked. On insanity, you learn to just not be picky, and start bring people that are right for the mission. If they have the same abilities as you, and you're fighting the right "wrong" people, then you're asking yourself to have a harder time playing. That's why I picked Maranda and Thane on most missions, despite the fact that I don't really like them.

But Jacob seems to be doomed to be "that guy that doesn't have much of a purpose". Yes, you can find a use for him if you really like him, but you'll always find someone who better for the job then him.

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 04 avril 2010 - 04:13 .

[glacier1701]

Throw_this_away wrote...

glacier1701 wrote...

So if that is ALL we know what would we do? Well it certainly would NOT be gather all these people who know next to nothing about shipboard sensors, electronic warfare and such like because obviously what is on the other side is the homeworld or worlds of the Collectors so we need to get some intel on that. 

Garrus gave us tech for better weapons... Jacob for armour, I forget who allowed us to develop better shields. 

How do we stop the collectors? One temptation was to send a mother-nuke into the omega relay... or nuke the relay itself.  But I figured we need their tech/lear why they were abducting people, and we need to be sure we finished the collectors/reapers off.  Using an army was not enough because no one would give it to us (the council). 

NOTE that the mission is completed REGARDLESS of these upgrades. While the ending is better with it it can still be done without it thus they are not essential in any way, shape or form. However the point is that we know NOTHING about what is on the other side. Recon for intel is the priority. The problem is that we CANNOT count on stealth since we already know it does not work against whatever the Collectors have as sensors. Indeed I'd be looking around to recruit whoever would be able to either increase my abiltity to see things from further away (sensor skills) or who could jam enemy sensors (electronic warfare - EDI did not have this ability apparently) or who had ideas on how to improve the stealth tech (research specialists). Yet NOT one of these avenues is pursued - we are going to rely on brute force to get what we need EVEN if that happens to be facing a fleet of Collector ships or planet loads of Collectors. That is not my idea of good planning to get intel and be able to better prepare plans to stop the Collectors.

Throw_this_away wrote...

I look at Shep and his/her squad as a special forces group... strength in skill, not numbers.  If we were to fight with armies, this would be a RTS like starcraft.  TIM gave us the dossiers because he identified these individuals as "the best."  He gave us the right to decide who we chose to use or not.  Loyalty missions were optional... personal requests by each squaddie (they just had a benefit in the end mission if you did them).    

Special Forces rely on stealth - we know that that approach is not usable as the Normandy can be detected. So why on earth would this be forced on us? The reason is that all along BioWare KNEW that we would be only facing 1 ship and a base - whereas as presented in game until we go through the best intel we got was that the location was inside/near the galaxy core. There was no info on whether or not we'd be looking at a planet or a fleet or nothing!!! The group we got did not address any of the problems we'd be potentially facing except for the one we actually did face. In other words we got what we got because BioWare knew what it was we were to face and gave us that and ONLY that. Its poor writing and plot development to do what they did but they did it anyways. And even then the characters we got are poor choices even for trying to infilitrate a base. Again looking at the skillsets that would be needed few of the squad we recruited had those types of skills or background. If as you say you thought of yourself as a Special Forces group why not use Special Forces people? They'd have the needed skills. You would not have had to worry about them working as a team and hence no need for these loyalty quests which served no purpose other than to beef up an otherwise uninspiring character story.

The story we got only works IF you know what is being faced at the end. BioWare knew what would be faced and gave us what we needed to get through that. Unfortunately they did not then give us a plot or story  to back that up.

[glacier1701]

Phaelducan wrote...

..snip....

Your argument isn't logical. You say that no one knew what was beyond the relay... so recruiting is a plot hole?
The Collectors HAVE to have a base/homeworld by logical deduction or they wouldn't have been able to build a ship in the first place.

Beyond that, the already have the Normandy with EDI, which is the ship part of the equation... now you need people who can board/land wherever it is the Collectors come from and take them out. That requires (in the ME universe) the best guns/omni-tools/biotic-amps for hire.

The plot isn't backwards, it's just very simple. Simple doesn't mean bad, either. Avatar had a very simple plot, and made billions of dollars. 

Could they have made a Cerebral mind-frag like The Game or The Usual Suspects? Sure, they just didn't. In this case, the plot involves finding intel on an enemy, then finding the best and brightest people around to go take care of the enemy, and in the process making sure said squad is grounded and focuses to maximize the chances of success and survival.

Not to be argumentative.... but Smud is really just Trolling at this point.

No I am not saying recruiting is a plot hole. The problem is that the people we are able to recruit do not solve the problem we were faced with. Lets see what that problem entails:

 (a) Collectors can see our ship despite the stealth tech built into.
 ( We do not know what is on the other side of the relay. Is it a planet, a lot of planets, a complete cluster of systems we have to explore or a whole new system of relays which have to be unlocked? The best guess is that we find the Collector Homeworld.
 © Is there or is there not a fleet just waiting on the other side of the relay ( aside from the lack of info on the system we are heading into)?
 

 The answer BioWare gives us is that we recruit people who cannot help us solve (a). They certainly cant help if we jump through and find a fleet there as in ©. And as for ( we have the problem of how do we reach the planet if our ship is detectable? We have no guarantee that we can fight to it, land, fight through the now alerted forces to wherever we need to go to do whatever it is we need to to stop the Collectors.

 
 Smud is not trolling. Not sure if you have seen other threads where the talk got into this area but so far no-one has any good answers for the fact that we got a lot of characters (most of whom do nothing) and no plot. Smud has pointed this out and the best most people have come up with is to say he is trolling or start up with personal insults because they cannot refute the arguements.

[marshalleck]

The recruitment in ME2 may or may not be pointless depending on what Bioware does with the characters in ME3.



If they all get Horizon cameos, then yes. ME2 suddenly becomes one monumental waste of time and narrative.

[TMA LIVE]

marshalleck wrote...

The recruitment in ME2 may or may not be pointless depending on what Bioware does with the characters in ME3.

If they all get Horizon cameos, then yes. ME2 suddenly becomes one monumental waste of time and narrative.

Christ, I hope that doesn't happen.

[kraidy1117]

As a Soldier Miri is useful, very useful. Miri and Mordin/Samara are the best for Soldiers. It all depends on your class tho Jacob is useless no matter what......

[DPSSOC]

marshalleck wrote...

The recruitment in ME2 may or may not be pointless depending on what Bioware does with the characters in ME3.

If they all get Horizon cameos, then yes. ME2 suddenly becomes one monumental waste of time and narrative.

And if that's the case I'm grabbing a torch and pitchfork and marching on Bioware.  Who's with me.

Though it's not a complete waste it can still set the scene for ME3.  Now if the new Normandy is destroyed and we die and get ressurected again and have lost any and all data/evidence about the Reapers and the Collectors are somehow back, then it was a complete waste of time and narrative.

[smudboy]

Phaelducan wrote...
Your argument isn't logical. You say that no one knew what was beyond the relay... so recruiting is a plot hole?
The Collectors HAVE to have a base/homeworld by logical deduction or they wouldn't have been able to build a ship in the first place.

Although I much liked glacier's response, there are a few things in here that I just have to reply to.

Collecting people to help you "Fight the Reapers" isn't a plot hole.  It's who you collect and why which is completely illogical.  Aside from Mordin, it pretty much boils down to "because TIM said so."  Imagine if every character had an intro and explained why you needed them, like Mordin.  TIM: "Now that we have a countermeasure, we'll need to see how to kill a Collector.  We'll need a master Infiltrator to snipe enemies from afar and gain intel.  I recommend a mercenary by the name of Archangel."  Even if this story turns out to be false/a lie, or said person isn't properly used for that reason (which is yet another problem with ME2), or is reduced to a plot device, at least we have a reason to go get said person.  After that they'd be along for the ride.  Bonus if they have personal motivations to Fight the Collectors (i.e. Thane's son was killed by Collectors, etc.)  That TIM, or whomever, actually has two cents to rub together, and get someone for a logical reason, is VITAL to achieving our unclear, military goal.  The argument that "we'll be ready for anything", whereupon we get 11 ground troops, begs the question for me "are we going to fight a land war in Asia, in space?"

Why do the Collectors have to have a base/homeworld?  Couldn't the Reapers have built their ship considering they built them?   Looks like it came out of a mountain/meteorite, which would imply it came from a planet/space.  Considering these guys are 50k years old, any dozen of scenarios can explain how their Cruiser came about, and imply they have a massive civilization, let alone one base.  For something so large, ancient and sophisticated, we need exposition on how this ship came about, its capabilities, etc.  We need to know this, because that is VITAL to the plot: Fight the Collectors.

Beyond that, the already have the Normandy with EDI, which is the ship part of the equation... now you need people who can board/land wherever it is the Collectors come from and take them out. That requires (in the ME universe) the best guns/omni-tools/biotic-amps for hire.

So we are fighting a land war in Asia!  This is exactly what glacier meant when he said the plot was written backwards.  The writer knew what was going to happen at the end, and the level designers filled in the middle.

The plot isn't backwards, it's just very simple. Simple doesn't mean bad, either. Avatar had a very simple plot, and made billions of dollars. 

I love simple plots.  Give me an antagonist whose motives are clear.  Harbinger?  We don't even know that he is a Reaper.  He's pretty much an annoying, school yard bully that just won't go away: and we're not talking System Shock 2 Shodan annoying.  Just stupid annoying.  Shepard pulls that out of his ass that Harbinger=Reaper, and that's at the end of the story.  We know we have to Stop the Collectors because they're taking human colonies, and that's fine.  It's the steps we take to get to that point which are completely illogical.

ME2's plot is simple.  Simple as in an 8 year old wrote it.  The story is mediocre at best.

Just because a piece of media made millions doesn't mean we can laude it as a piece of art, or the great experience of our era.  All it means is that it's popular.  Look at Planescape: Torment.  That is a piece of art, and it's barely considered a video game, with dismal sales, yet it will stand the test of time because of its story and storytelling.

Unless you consider Gears of War art, then more power to you.

Could they have made a Cerebral mind-frag like The Game or The Usual Suspects? Sure, they just didn't. In this case, the plot involves finding intel on an enemy, then finding the best and brightest people around to go take care of the enemy, and in the process making sure said squad is grounded and focuses to maximize the chances of success and survival.

Not to be argumentative.... but Smud is really just Trolling at this point.

Man.  Comparing ME2 to The Usual Suspects...in order for ME2 to be successful as a story, it needs to be something that a 6 year old can comprehend, because of its huge scope and setting.  (See RedLetterMedia's analysis of Star Wars: The Phantom Menace.)  It already had a fantastic build up from ME1.  It completely rebooted and retconned it into a Gears of War title with the ME label.

The plot involves finding intel on the enemy?  When, and what intel was that?  What best and brightest people around did we get in order to constitute that intel?  What game were you playing man?  The only time this happens is with Mordin.  1 character, whose countermeasure gets reduced to a plot device.  Compare this to The Dirty Dozen, The Guns of Navarone, and The Seven Samurai.  ME2 is none of these things.

"In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response[1] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion."

So far most of my posts on these forums have been about plot and story.  I am completely on topic, I argue with people who can't answer my questions, or call me names/childish because I ask simple questions.  Once I got flippant with another poster because he completely disregarded every thing I said after a few days of long posts, and made stuff up along as he went, which caused me to take the entire conversation into joke/have me stop arguing with him.  I don't care if they respond emotionally or not, but that's up to the reader.  I know, these questions I ask can't be answered, which is why I ask them: people simply can't realize these flaws in ME2's story, or they make up their own excuses or reasons as to why: which is not what a story is supposed to do.  A good story should be clear, concise, simple, punchy.  It should never make you go "huh?  what?"  Which is the general feeling of ME2's main plot.

Modifié par smudboy, 04 avril 2010 - 06:16 .

[Phaelducan]

"In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response[1] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion."



You ask questions, when presented with answers, you ignore them and ask the same questions again. When presented with an off-site reference, you ignore it, and ask the same question again.



That's purposefully ignoring information and circumventing the topic (not to mention extraneous), to the purpose I can only assume of provoking an emotional response.



You are additionally misrepresenting block quotes, which is inflammatory. Notice you say "Man. Comparing ME2 to The Usual Suspects" when I clearly said that Bioware COULD have done that... but didn't (notice what I did there? I said they Didn't do something...).



If you aren't a troll, you certainly have troll-like tendencies, and your posts look a heck of a lot like trolling. Just because Glacier backs you up doesn't change your context or how you are trying to make your points.



Beyond that... you clearly don't like the story, and that's fine, more power to you. It's beneath both of us to continue this nonsense as we both know it isn't going anywhere. Cheers.



To Glacier, your argument is still flawed.



(a) Collectors can see our ship despite the stealth tech built into.

( We do not know what is on the other side of the relay. Is it a planet, a lot of planets, a complete cluster of systems we have to explore or a whole new system of relays which have to be unlocked? The best guess is that we find the Collector Homeworld.

© Is there or is there not a fleet just waiting on the other side of the relay ( aside from the lack of info on the system we are heading into)?



From the get go it is set-up that you most likely aren't going to survive going through the Relay, and that any work you do is only to increase chances of stopping the collectors.... not returning home. You recruit people based on the premise that you will probably get smoked in the process.



No, you don't know what is waiting, but TIM has dossiers assembled based on his best guess of what is needed. How is that any worse than going to Ilos without knowing what the Conduit is? Characters in books, games, or movies make decisions all the time based on their best information, which if often wrong or inaccurate... that doesn't invalidate the entire plot. Hell look at Ender's Game, he wiped out the Buggers under a completely false pretense... which in turn was based on a faulty understanding of the species. It happens... all....the....time.



If you want to hate the game, hate the game, no one cares, but I recommend giving up trying to convince everyone else of your own narrow parameters of what constitutes a valid plot.



Beyond that.... this dialog is completely absurd. I'm not going to convince you of anything, and you aren't going to convince me of anything here today. For the record, we are both off-topic anyway.



Cheers, I now grant you the last word, as I'm out. Happy gaming.

[Mallissin]

Miranda is the best overall support character in the game. Warp and Overload. She's in most of the best combination for monster types.



Barriers (Collectors, Eclipse, Biotics) = Miranda and Thane.

Shields (Mechs, Geth, Blue Suns) = Miranda and Garrus.

Armor (Husks, Bloodpack, Animals) = Grunt and Zaeed/Mordin (preferably Zaeed for concussion blast and inferno grenade)

[Xaijin]

Subjectively speaking, you can't. People either like them or they don't.



Objectively is rather straight forward, give them better powers or abilities.



Here endeth the lesson.

[Xaijin]

Which I already covered in the first sentence.

Modifié par Xaijin, 04 avril 2010 - 08:10 .

[pineappledan]

Are there seriously people that believe that every character should be equally matched in every situation? so if you are going into a level with blue suns mercenaries it would be just as good to bring mordin as it would to bring garrus, who has overload? this is silly-talk. people that think that are silly. the reason you have different characters is because they have different skills.

Miranda with her squad health/dmg bonus, and overload and warp, makes her easily the most versatile and useful squad member. she's like your swiss army knife for stripping defenses.

everyone else has situational efficiency:

I bring Garrus for levels with people who have shields.

I put area incinerate on mordin and took him on every husk level

I brought thane to collector missions because he has warp and ridiculous amounts of damage, made even more awesome by miri's squad bonus

There are certain people that never leave the base because, IMO, they have useless skillsets. Jacob is the best example because he is like a vanguard, but his moves are basically all the moves vanguards try to ignore in favour of more useful things. My experience with Tali is she just wastes medi-gel. It's as if they gave her a different AI than all the other squad members so that she avoids cover. spends more time dead than alive

other than that, all situational. OP, I would encourage you to switch up your lineups depending on the mission, you might find it makes them easier and more enjoyable

[pineappledan]

XtremegamerHK47 wrote...

That wouldnt fix it. I dont know what others do, but I take out squaddies that I like, rather than who is better in a fight. IE Tali and Garrus.

@ Xtreme:  I'm guessing you don't play at very high difficulty settings.  you realize taking certain people out on missions doesn't make them more loyal, or give any sort of extrinsic reward?

Modifié par pineappledan, 04 avril 2010 - 08:24 .

[Xaijin]

Insanity is just fine with Garrus and Tali.

[smudboy]

Phaelducan wrote...
You ask questions, when presented with answers, you ignore them and ask the same questions again. When presented with an off-site reference, you ignore it, and ask the same question again.

That is because I find the answers insufficient for given reasons I reply with.  Also consider that some of the questions I asked are unnanswerable, hopefully making others to "take the hint."

The off site reference, that is, the wiki reference to ME2's plot, does not answer the question I require from you.  That wiki article simply lists everything that happens in the story.  A plot is more than the sequence of events of a story.  It is also the "why" of a story, that is, the motivations behind a character, characters, series of scenes, or general "fuel" that keeps the story going.  (Which is where we get several terms like pacing, plot points, and plot devices.)

It is that thing that keeps the door open.

Which is why I constantly ask why we need x character, why we're preparing for a land war in Asia, etc.

That's purposefully ignoring information and circumventing the topic (not to mention extraneous), to the purpose I can only assume of provoking an emotional response.

If you're frustrated that's okay.  So am I.  These questions nag me too.

Believe me, I don't ignore information or your ideas, or anyone that replies to me.  Unless I truly feel I can learn nothing from them, and they from me.

You are additionally misrepresenting block quotes, which is inflammatory. Notice you say "Man. Comparing ME2 to The Usual Suspects" when I clearly said that Bioware COULD have done that... but didn't (notice what I did there? I said they Didn't do something...).

Yes, but when you say "COULD have done that", I automatically think what would happen if they did.  (aside: "The blue ball and the red ball are tasty."  Doesn't that make you want to know how balls of color taste?)  That would be a heck of an exercise, for a setting and world such as ME is, would probably confuse a lot of people, and definitely crank up production time.  I'm not saying it's impossible, or shouldn't be tried, I just don't think it'd be successful on a few levels.  (A space opera neo-noir video game?  Whoa.  Bit avant-garde for the average viewer, probably moreso than Blade Runner.)

Also notice how I didn't go into any details about if they did.  I just wrote "Man.  Comparing ME2 to The Usual Suspects..." I then went along with your next sentence, what ME2 actually did, and then your next sentence after that, which was about finding intel on the enemy (which you failed to respond to.)

Am I going too fast here?

If you aren't a troll, you certainly have troll-like tendencies, and your posts look a heck of a lot like trolling. Just because Glacier backs you up doesn't change your context or how you are trying to make your points.

You mean by using logic, reason and references?  I'm a big boy.  glacier just happens to share similar ideas, and is objecting to the same comments you're making.

Beyond that... you clearly don't like the story, and that's fine, more power to you. It's beneath both of us to continue this nonsense as we both know it isn't going anywhere. Cheers.

I like the story.  It is mediocre.  It is the plot that is rubbish.

[kregano]

pineappledan wrote...

XtremegamerHK47 wrote...

That wouldnt fix it. I dont know what others do, but I take out squaddies that I like, rather than who is better in a fight. IE Tali and Garrus.

@ Xtreme:  I'm guessing you don't play at very high difficulty settings.  you realize taking certain people out on missions doesn't make them more loyal, or give any sort of extrinsic reward?

Yeah, Hardcore and Insanity really restrict your choices when it comes to squadmates. Since every enemy either has shields, armor, or barriers on top of their health, even varren and husks (which I find to be ridiculous), you end up using the same people pretty much the whole game. I'm playing a Vanguard right now on Hardcore and I keep Miranda and Mordin with me at all times. I know I'll never use Tali or Legion outside their loyalty missions because their skill sets suck - they don't have any actually useful tech powers like Overload and AI hacking can't work unless the target's defenses have been stripped. Adding one more skill would've made them worthwhile to use.

[WillieStyle]

smudboy wrote...

The off site reference, that is, the wiki reference to ME2's plot, does not answer the question I require from you.  That wiki article simply lists everything that happens in the story.  A plot is more than the sequence of events of a story.  It is also the "why" of a story, that is, the motivations behind a character, characters, series of scenes, or general "fuel" that keeps the story going.  (Which is where we get several terms like pacing, plot points, and plot devices.)

Several people have explained the motivations behind various plot points in the game (as does the linked synopsis).
You find the motivations unsatisfactory.  You find the decisions made by the major players (particularly Shepherd and TIM) unwise.
That's all well good.  However, a mature person would realize that:
1) Not liking the plot isn't the same as there being no plot.
2) Asking the same question repeatedly and pretending it hasn't been answered simply because one doesn't like the answers given makes one look infantile.
3) Being infantile is a bad thing.

[WillieStyle]

kregano wrote...

pineappledan wrote...

XtremegamerHK47 wrote...

That wouldnt fix it. I dont know what others do, but I take out squaddies that I like, rather than who is better in a fight. IE Tali and Garrus.

@ Xtreme:  I'm guessing you don't play at very high difficulty settings.  you realize taking certain people out on missions doesn't make them more loyal, or give any sort of extrinsic reward?

Yeah, Hardcore and Insanity really restrict your choices when it comes to squadmates. Since every enemy either has shields, armor, or barriers on top of their health, even varren and husks (which I find to be ridiculous), you end up using the same people pretty much the whole game. I'm playing a Vanguard right now on Hardcore and I keep Miranda and Mordin with me at all times. I know I'll never use Tali or Legion outside their loyalty missions because their skill sets suck - they don't have any actually useful tech powers like Overload and AI hacking can't work unless the target's defenses have been stripped. Adding one more skill would've made them worthwhile to use.

First of all, ME2 is soloable on Insanity (easily with a little practice) so no squadmates are essential.
Even if you insist on picking the optimal (or near optimal) squadmate for each mission, you won't end up playing the entire game with Miranda and Mordin.
-AI hacking is AMAZING against Geth.  Strip the shields of a Geth hunter and then chain-Hack it for a near indestructable tank with high-dps who isn't charging you.  Tali and Legion trivialize Geth-heavy missions.
-In shield-heavy missions (against Blue-Suns for instance) Zaeed's disruptor ammo is amazing.
-Against enemies with Barriers (Eclipse Vanguards and Collectors for insance) Samara and Thane are very effective.
-Squadmates with Pull (Jack, Samara, Jacob) are extremely effective in most missions.  Pull doubles your damage done, so you can stip armor,barriers,shields from a pack of enemies, cast pull field, and then kill them much faster than you otherwise would.  Pull is especially nice because while they're floating in the air, they aren't fireing back at you or ducking behind cover.
Pull can also be used to setup warp explosions which are very effective for clearling a large number of enemies quickly.
-Grunt's charge is highly effective against husks.
etc.

Modifié par WillieStyle, 04 avril 2010 - 09:14 .