253 réponses à ce sujet

[KitsuneRommel]

tonnactus wrote...

The protean beacon has nothing to do with the plot,so ashleys guiding was irrelevant?

That's some deep connection right there. Garrus was investigating Saren, Wrex had done some work for him, Tali had information about him, Kaidan was serving under Shepard and didn't have a choice, Ashley basically replaced Jenkins and Liara was actually the only one with a REAL reason to be there.

Have you ever actually spoken to the characters in ME2 to find out why  they wanted to follow you? They didn't "work" for cerberus, they worked for shepard 

True for Garrus and Tali.No one else.Subject zero just want the datafiles.She dont care for humanity.

No one else? So Samara/Morinth, Grunt, Legion, and Thane worked for Cerberus too? In ME2 you recruited specialists. In ME1 you recruited people who just happened to be there.

Modifié par KitsuneRommel, 03 mai 2010 - 09:10 .

[tonnactus]

[quote]KitsuneRommel wrote...

[quote]tonnactus wrote...

That's some deep connection right there. Garrus was investigating Saren, Wrex had done some work for him, Tali had information about him, Kaidan was serving under Shepard and didn't have a choice, Ashley basically replaced Jenkins and Liara was actually the only one with a REAL reason to be there.
[/quote]
That is already more connection then most other have.



[Quote][Quote]


No one else? So Samara/Morinth, Grunt, Legion, and Thane worked for Cerberus too?

[/quote]

Yes,they work for shepardt.Just tell me what shepardt could offer them that no one else could do in exchange to risk their life.What should be their motivation to risk their life for humans.Most people outside the terminus systems dont even know that collectors exist.( most even dont know who shepardt is and how he look)
But shepard meet a asari justicar,who selden even leave asari space and agree to work with him.

Yes, that make sense.

Modifié par tonnactus, 03 mai 2010 - 09:26 .

[KitsuneRommel]

Yes,they work for shepardt.Just tell me what shepardt could offer them that no one else could do in exchange to risk their life.What should be their motivation to risk their life for humans.Most people outside the terminus systems dont even know that collectors exist.( most even dont know who shepardt is and how he look)

But shepard meet a asari justicar,who selden even leave asari space and agree to work with him.



Yes, that make sense.

Ok here be SPOILERS.







Thane is dying and he is trying to balance the scales before his death. Grunt fights for Shepard because he's his Battlemaster and that's what Krogan love to do. Legion is a robot. Who can say what they think. And where did it say that Justicars only help their own people? "Justicars swear oaths called the Oaths of Subsumation. These pledge protection of the innocent, the punishment of the guilty, and defence of common law and the norms of asari society". Shepard seems to have no problems going around the galaxy and helping other races.

[tonnactus]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

Yes,they work for shepardt.Just tell me what shepardt could offer them that no one else could do in exchange to risk their life.What should be their motivation to risk their life for humans.Most people outside the terminus systems dont even know that collectors exist.( most even dont know who shepardt is and how he look)
But shepard meet a asari justicar,who selden even leave asari space and agree to work with him.

Yes, that make sense.

Ok here be SPOILERS.



Thane is dying and he is trying to balance the scales before his death. Grunt fights for Shepard because he's his Battlemaster and that's what Krogan love to do. Legion is a robot. Who can say what they think. And where did it say that Justicars only help their own people? "Justicars swear oaths called the Oaths of Subsumation. These pledge protection of the innocent, the punishment of the guilty, and defence of common law and the norms of asari society". Shepard seems to have no problems going around the galaxy and helping other races.

You still dont answer my question.Why thane and samara should prioritize shepardt help request over other problems in the galaxy?
Again: Most people think collectors are myths. Most people dont even know how shepardt look.
But Thane and Samara trust him very fast without a lot effort.Just because he ask them basicly.

Modifié par tonnactus, 03 mai 2010 - 10:15 .

[KitsuneRommel]

tonnactus wrote...
You still dont answer my question.Why thane and samara should prioritize shepardt help request over other problems in the galaxy?
Again: Most people think collectors are myths. Most people dont even know how shepardt look.
But Thane and Samara trust him very fast without a lot effort.Just because he ask them basicly.

1. Who's to say Thane and Samara don't know more about the Collectors than your random Joe.
2. Shepard has proof that they exist and that they are abucting whole colonies.
3. Shepard's supposed to be this super-charismatic leader that people just love to follow.

[tonnactus]

KitsuneRommel wrote...


1. Who's to say Thane and Samara don't know more about the Collectors than your random Joe.

Why they should know more then random joe?

2. Shepard has proof that they exist and that they are abucting whole colonies.

So if he had such good proove.Why not showing the evidence to anderson?At least the alliance should care that human colonies get abducted.More then an assasin or a asari justicar.This is just the good writing of Mass Effect 2.Citadel security dont know how geth look.I better stop before i get to frustrated.

3. Shepard's supposed to be this super-charismatic leader that people just love to follow.

I know.The great guru i guess.

[TJSolo]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

Ok here be SPOILERS.



Thane is dying and he is trying to balance the scales before his death. Grunt fights for Shepard because he's his Battlemaster and that's what Krogan love to do. Legion is a robot. Who can say what they think. And where did it say that Justicars only help their own people? "Justicars swear oaths called the Oaths of Subsumation. These pledge protection of the innocent, the punishment of the guilty, and defence of common law and the norms of asari society". Shepard seems to have no problems going around the galaxy and helping other races.

The Thane thing, has nothing to do with the plot.
What you say about Grunt is entirely after the fact of the loyalty mission. There is still no answer to why Grunt is relevant to the plot.
Samara sounds like a straight up deal of reciprocation and her justice morales.
They mostly work independent of the plot and are not tied to it.
This can be good, bad or niether for people. Me I prefer to have character recruitment and involvment be relevant to the plot in most cases. The involvment with the plot can vary and even the amout of time it takes to reveal how involved they are can vary.
When the majority are detached it makes the game as a whole feel shorter because I am discounting character missions from the plot.

[tonnactus]

TJSolo wrote...

What you say about Grunt is entirely after the fact of the loyalty mission. There is still no answer to why Grunt is relevant to the plot.

At least he is build with collector tech.

[KitsuneRommel]

TJSolo wrote...

This can be good, bad or niether for people. Me I prefer to have character recruitment and involvment be relevant to the plot in most cases. The involvment with the plot can vary and even the amout of time it takes to reveal how involved they are can vary.

The problem is that you'd need people with a) knowledge about the collectors and ability and willingness to fight. They could have made the crew entirely out of people form Cerberus but I don't think that would've been very interesting.

tonnactus wrote...

At
least he is build with collector tech.

Oh, right! That's a huge tie-in right there.

[RyrineaNara]

Kaidan has a lot too do with the plot of the mission he doesn't just work for Commander Shepard he is the Shepard team mate, and or Lover/Friend. Ashely guiding us too the Prothen beacon had more to do with the story than most it started the chain events that lead us to discovering the REAPERS THREAT. Kaidan also help fight off the Geth on Eden prim, and is one of two teammates that you have to choice between two of them on Vimmeir.

[sillymonkboy]

VA_FyreHeart wrote...

IMHO whether you prefer ME1 or ME2 is really dependent on what type of game you prefer. If you're more an RPG fan, you're going to prefer ME1. If you're a shooter fan, you're going to prefer ME2. 

I always find myself a paradox whenever I peek in on these ME1 vs ME2 threads.

I'm a diehard RPG fan.  Have been since the 1977 TSR Dungeons & Dragons 3-Volume Set.  I never liked shooters.  Still don't for the most part.  Yet, I prefer ME2 to ME1.  They're both fantastic games and I really enjoyed them both, but I have a definite preference for ME2.

Personally, I'd have liked to see ME2 with a bit of the ME1 inventory & gear system.  Not all of it, mind you.  There was just way too much unnecessary gear in ME1, but something somewhere between two would be nice.  I'd also like the individual skill pointing system from ME1 as ME2 tends to result in left over wasted skill points.

 Story-wise, the issue isn't ME1 story vs ME2 story, because they are actually just chapters in one long story.  It strikes me as a pretty common formula for trilogies.  Episode 1: Big story that feels even bigger because you are being bombarded with so much new info/setting/background at once and a moderate plot twist.  Episode 2:  Somewhat smaller story with the major focus on deep, multiple character development with smaller (scope-wise) but still important  plot development and a smaller plot twist.  Episode 3:  Ties everything together with the final part of plot development and the now deeply developed characters and a series of small advances/setbacks and/or small plot twists that culminate in a truly epic battle against seemingly insurmountable odds where the hero wins when seeming on the brink of defeat.

Oh, and I like the direction Liara is moving in, but they really should have given her a much more compelling reason for not re-joining Shepard.  All LI "reunions" were handled nonsensically in ME2, imo.

[TJSolo]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

This can be good, bad or niether for people. Me I prefer to have character recruitment and involvment be relevant to the plot in most cases. The involvment with the plot can vary and even the amout of time it takes to reveal how involved they are can vary.

The problem is that you'd need people with a) knowledge about the collectors and ability and willingness to fight. They could have made the crew entirely out of people form Cerberus but I don't think that would've been very interesting.

Right, tie ins are good and help the story move along at a convincing pace.  For the ME2 only cast let's say Mordin, Grunt, Legion, Jacob, and Miranda have decent tie ins. Samara is close, real close when you find out about her history with slave traders.
My issue is that signing up people for a land war in Asia(ME2s suicide mission) is entirely too easy and convenient seeing as so many of the crew have no type of vested interest. in the plot.
The problems you listed are handled by the writer. Recruitment is too easy and gaining loyalty is too easy. I don't even need to interact ever with a character to get the loyalty mission, just wait for the game to queue it up. Then there is passing the loyalty missions as long as the mission is completed, loyalty is gained in most cases. Convenient and easy.

[tonnactus]

KitsuneRommel wrote...


The problem is that you'd need people with a) knowledge about the collectors and ability and willingness to fight. They could have made the crew entirely out of people form Cerberus but I don't think that would've been very interesting.

It would better if they never included that cerberus crap.Maybee it would be interesting if shepardt had a choice of either work with them or not,or even to destroy this organisation after he got what he need.But this wasnt included.

[CalJones]

I just finished ME2 (I got wrapped up in Dragon Age for, well, ages...so only just got around to this).

Overall I liked it, but preferred the first game.

My first impression was that Bioware has stripped away a lot of the RPG elements (inventory, character interaction) to lure in the FPS crowd. I can deal with the lack of inventory, but I find it sad that you can't talk to your crew as much (two conversations with your old friend Garrus if you don't romance him, is just pitiful!).

There are a lot of characters in this game, most of whom end up redundant. I would have settled for fewer characters with more to say for themselves. The characters are actually pretty interesting, but you never really get to know them. They need more conversations on the Normandy, and they need to banter with each other.

Planet scanning = dull and it makes my shoulder ache. I actually enjoyed pootling about in the Mako on the different worlds in ME1 (I'm on PC so controlling the Mako is not too much of a pain).

Whilst I'm glad there are no cookie cutter buildings in this game, the actual planet-side N7 missions are very short and don't feel that satisfying.

The main missions themselves are pretty good, on the whole, but still a lot smaller than, say, a Noveria or a Vermire. I miss the epicness of those.

The main thing that I miss, though, is any kind of dramatic decision making. ME1 threw some pretty hard choices at you: kill the rachni queen or let her go...bring the dangerous batarian terrorist to justice or save the workers and let him escape...save the council or let them die...leave Kaiden or Ashley behind. The only decision that comes close to that in ME2 is the final one. I just didn't feel ME2 had nearly as much emotional impact.

And yes, as others have said, renegade no longer means cold, calculating and ruthless. It just means be a jerk.



I did like how the smaller decisions were implemented via newscasts and emails. That attention to detail was nice.

I liked the characters, overall, even though they were underwritten.

I liked the opening, and the suicide mission.

But the middle of the game felt scrappy and incoherent.

Don't get me wrong - I did enjoy ME2. But ME1 felt far superior as a game.

[bjdbwea]

tonnactus wrote...

It would better if they never included that cerberus crap.Maybee it would be interesting if shepardt had a choice of either work with them or not,or even to destroy this organisation after he got what he need.But this wasnt included.

I would go even further. The whole story should've been completely different. It should've been about finding out more about the reapers (preferably with the old crew), and trying to find a way to stop them. That's what Shepard said at the end of ME 1, but nothing of it happened in ME 2. It was all just a big distraction, in effect a stand-alone game, but not a proper continuation.

[Iakus]

bjdbwea wrote...

tonnactus wrote...

It would better if they never included that cerberus crap.Maybee it would be interesting if shepardt had a choice of either work with them or not,or even to destroy this organisation after he got what he need.But this wasnt included.

I would go even further. The whole story should've been completely different. It should've been about finding out more about the reapers (preferably with the old crew), and trying to find a way to stop them. That's what Shepard said at the end of ME 1, but nothing of it happened in ME 2. It was all just a big distraction, in effect a stand-alone game, but not a proper continuation.

Agreed.  If ME was supposed to be a trilogy, I'd expect more of a connection between the volumes. 

[uberdowzen]

tonnactus wrote...

KitsuneRommel wrote...


The problem is that you'd need people with a) knowledge about the collectors and ability and willingness to fight. They could have made the crew entirely out of people form Cerberus but I don't think that would've been very interesting.

It would better if they never included that cerberus crap.Maybee it would be interesting if shepardt had a choice of either work with them or not,or even to destroy this organisation after he got what he need.But this wasnt included.

What about ME3? Who says you're not going to get a chance to destroy cerberus, or if you choose to side with them against the alliance. ME3 could be really interesting if they bring in some kind of Alliance or Cerberus mechanic, which I suspect they will. Remember if you can't do something in ME2 that it's just because ME3 has to more or less start in the same situation. ME3 is going to go off in a lots of different directions.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The Mako was fun.

Stat-driven combat makes more sense.

[KitsuneRommel]

CalJones wrote...

And yes, as others have said, renegade no longer means cold, calculating and ruthless. It just means be a jerk.

Eh. That's EXACTLY what it was in ME1 too. A lot more schoolyard bullying than being an evil genius.

What about ME3? Who says you're not going to get a chance to destroy
cerberus, or if you choose to side with them against the alliance. ME3
could be really interesting if they bring in some kind of Alliance or
Cerberus mechanic, which I suspect they will. Remember if you can't do
something in ME2 that it's just because ME3 has to more or less start in
the same situation. ME3 is going to go off in a lots of different
directions.

I wouldn't get my hopes up too high. There's simply too many big decisions in ME1 and 2 for them to bring them all to a satisfying conclusion.

[DaringMoosejaw]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The Mako was fun.
Stat-driven combat makes more sense.

I HATED the Mako. I've actually been considering going back to ME1 and finishing my Renegade so I could port him to ME2, but the thought of one last playthrough having to, for hours, climb over 40 bland mountain ranges in that freaking slow damn car /AGAIN/ makes me avoid it. If I could port the Hammerhead over to ME1...that would be the best.

[KitsuneRommel]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The Mako was fun.

It was nice though most of the planets sucked and combat was too easy with it. At least it was a LOT better than planet scanning even though neither made much sense in the plot.

Stat-driven combat makes more sense.

Here I have to disagree. It makes no sense for a trained war hero (for example) soldier to be so crappy at using his guns in the beginning. It works better in games like Fallout 1 and 2 where you just decide where you want to aim and the computer rolls where you actually hit.

If I could port the Hammerhead over to ME1...that would be the best.

That would be even better.

Modifié par KitsuneRommel, 04 mai 2010 - 10:44 .

[uberdowzen]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

I wouldn't get my hopes up too high. There's simply too many big decisions in ME1 and 2 for them to bring them all to a satisfying conclusion.

Nah, it will. They've got 2 years minimum to make the game and this time around there's very few engine changes to make, so they can focus on story, whereas with ME2 they spent most of their time fixing up the game mechanics and graphics.

[Iakus]

uberdowzen wrote...


What about ME3? Who says you're not going to get a chance to destroy cerberus, or if you choose to side with them against the alliance. ME3 could be really interesting if they bring in some kind of Alliance or Cerberus mechanic, which I suspect they will. Remember if you can't do something in ME2 that it's just because ME3 has to more or less start in the same situation. ME3 is going to go off in a lots of different directions.

It's possible that Bioware will pull a rabbit out of its hat and has the whole storyline already plotted out,  In that case, everything from both games, combined with ME3, will come together in the end, and everyone will be (mostly) satisifed,  That would be quite a rabbit though.  It'd be the frakking Easter Bunny!

[uberdowzen]

iakus wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...


What about ME3? Who says you're not going to get a chance to destroy cerberus, or if you choose to side with them against the alliance. ME3 could be really interesting if they bring in some kind of Alliance or Cerberus mechanic, which I suspect they will. Remember if you can't do something in ME2 that it's just because ME3 has to more or less start in the same situation. ME3 is going to go off in a lots of different directions.

It's possible that Bioware will pull a rabbit out of its hat and has the whole storyline already plotted out,  In that case, everything from both games, combined with ME3, will come together in the end, and everyone will be (mostly) satisifed,  That would be quite a rabbit though.  It'd be the frakking Easter Bunny!

Yeah ME3 will tie up all the loose ends.

[Terror_K]

They worked out the overarching story and the important elements of all three games before ME1 was even out. One of the reasons Drew left is because his work was basically done: he'd written the basic storyline for all three games already; it was just up to Mac and the others to flesh it all out and write the remaining stuff.