No one here knows **** about exploration in games unless they've played a game that both didn't require you to do it and made it worth your time when you did. In most games that offer "exploration," it's actually a thinly-veiled chore which has you trekking unnecessarily long distances to reach objective A, after which that area serves no purpose and is, therefore, not worth giving a second look.
In ME1, exploration was always dictated by a side mission. If not that, all you had to do was claim resources, find artifacts, and harvest merchant trash from sources that made you go, "What the **** are bleeding-edge weapon mods compatible with modern technology doing on a two thousand year old Turian probe?" Maybe the people who scream like children about the heatsink system in ME2 breaking with lore should think about some of the inconsistencies in the
FIRST game, of all places.
AND if not that, you were just there to gaze out at the craggy vistas. There is nothing wrong with that, of course, but many of the whiners in this thread have decried high-fidelity graphics as a "poor way to improve a game."
Son, I am disappoint. God gave you a brain, and if you don't believe in God, then just try and use the cognitive force in that tissue that bacteria wrought for you in the womb.
It's 2010. 1080p is just about standard. To be perfectly blunt, I don't think you'd buy Perfect Dark from the Xbox Live Marketplace for its full original price of $70 if it originally came out today looking the same way it did back in 2001,
you hypocrites. Like it or not, graphics are an important part of games. Even now people complain about how Shepard animates, how he/she doesn't sit flushly with surfaces, etc.
Graphics are important because they play as much a part of the immersion in the world as dialogue. I never feel like I am a part of Just Cause 2's story because its RIDICULOUS dialogue and voice acting is too idiotic to be taken seriously.
You can't even say that the gameplay suffered because that actually
improved. Story, characters, music, all that is far more subjective.
ME1 is as linear as ME2. It just gives you more mission objectives for Noveria and Feros to accomplish that aren't even necessary unless you're going for achievements or credits that soon devalue beyond belief. Sure, you could choose to do Noveria or Feros or Therum in whatever order you want, but you get the same order choice with the allies in ME2.
It's easy enough to make sense of Illium and why there were so many important aspects in that one area right there. It's a port. Ports tend to be very busy, and they often also hold offices to international (or in this case, intergalactic) movers and shakers, the sort of which Liara became. You can't even say that the transition to Thane's recruitment mission wasn't handled well because the Dantius towers were pretty damn far from your landing point. (Plus, that is probably one of my favorite scenes in the game, the ride to the towers.)
The one thing I will agree on, though, is that the Citadel in ME2 was bull****. I liked the wards alright, I thought they were even better and livelier than in ME1, but the lack of Presidium access with the exception of the failure that was the embassy balcony was utter disappointment.
Lastly, I don't see what this bull**** about how ME2's gameplay design team focused on making a good shooter aspect that could stand on its own without being dependent on stat-heavy RPG-side elements being a bad thing is about. Is there some logical explanation for this line of thought? Mass Effect was planned from the beginning to have a lot of shooting in it, being that you're playing a goddamn Space Marine in the middle of a violent survival struggle and all. You'd think it would come across to people as basic sense that BioWare would WANT to have a good shooter engine in place for its gameplay, but that notion seems to be buried under the composting layers of biased, "ruined forever!" CRAP in these buzzword-flingers' brains. God forbid they try to take something away from some of the genre-makers in the industry in an effort to improve their own product.
Modifié par FlyingWalrus, 24 avril 2010 - 01:42 .
Retour en haut
