524 réponses à ce sujet

[Zahxia]

He didn't discuss gameplay, graphics, soundtrack/voice acting, level design, controls or DLC or so on. The main storyline isn't the entire game but it's as important to the experience as the above.

edit: logging out.

Modifié par Zahxia, 24 mai 2010 - 04:36 .

[ChanceRandom]

ChanceRandom wrote...

How is my reaction kneejerk? I watched his critiques, and Ive read most of the posts on this thread. Ive read repeated block after block of "I didnt like the plot because", and believe that if you dont like a thing, you shouldnt suffer a thing.

And he tore this game apart, I mean he left no stone unturned, no corner unswept, and no door unopened. He hates this game. So I simply suggest that he not play the game again, he may want to give great consideration before buying the next one, or maybe renting/borrowing it before spending his money on it.

Please allow me to apologize. The start of my second paragraph is to broad. He tore the plot of this game apart. And for me that is the heart of games like this. I agree that it is, at worst, a weak plot, but I dont believe it by any means is as bad as he makes it out to be.

[spacehamsterZH]

Group Theory wrote...
I agree with almost all of what you said, especially about Shepard's character being static after she was brought back to life. There was no change at all to her, which was very disappointing.

See, that particular criticism I really think is null and void. If Mass Effect were a movie or even if it were an action game that told its entire story through unchangeable cutscenes, it would make sense, but it's neither - it's an RPG. It tries to create the illusion that you are playing Shepard and deciding his/her behavior, so any attempt at character growth would seem like the game is forcing too many decisions on you. The whole point of the Paragon/Renegade system is that you can do this. And if it seems like every character but Shepard grows and changes, that only shows the Bioware writers are aware of this problem and substituted character growth elsewhere because the protagonist has to remain something of a blank slate.

My Shepard did have a character arc. In ME1, he was a common military grunt who was thrown into an extraordinary situation and just did what was necessary because it was the right thing to do. In ME2, through his interactions with the rest of his team, he slowly came to realize his potential and thus his responsibility as a leader. That's how I played him, the game allows for this possiblity, but you don't have to go that route. It's called roleplaying.

[mohelo]

And again BW fanboys viciously attack anyone who says ME2 story is bad. I have yet to read a good review which has good arguments as to why the ME2 plot is good. It seems that Americans think that a good story has lots of explosions and characters with horribly overboard personalities. It must be a character driven, dark second act, because the developers say so. ME1 was more character driven than ME2.

I´m out of this forum.

Modifié par mohelo, 24 mai 2010 - 10:45 .

[spacehamsterZH]

mohelo wrote...
It seems that Americans think that a good story has lots of explosions and characters with horribly overboard personalities.

Because everyone here who defends ME2 is American. Like, you know, me for example. And Bioware is located in the US.

LOL.

I´m out of this forum.

Door, ass, way out, you know. Buh-bye.

[Mister Mida]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

Because everyone here who defends ME2 is American. Like, you know, me for example. And Bioware is located in the US.

LOL.

If Canada has become part of the US withoug telling anyone, then you're right

[spacehamsterZH]

Mister Mida wrote...
If Canada has become part of the US withoug telling anyone, then you're right

Well, it must have, because Mohelo says so. And he also thinks ME1 is better than ME2, so he's smarter than... the Americans.

[Mister Mida]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

Mister Mida wrote...
If Canada has become part of the US withoug telling anyone, then you're right

Well, it must have, because Mohelo says so. And he also thinks ME1 is better than ME2, so he's smarter than... the Americans.

Uhm... well, that's gotta be his opinion then

Modifié par Mister Mida, 24 mai 2010 - 12:31 .

[onelifecrisis]

@OP



Good videos. I enjoyed watching them.



(btw, next time turn the music down - it's hard to hear your voice when the music is too loud!)



Cheers :-)

[Andrew_Waltfeld]

mohelo wrote...

And again BW fanboys viciously attack anyone who says ME2 story is bad. I have yet to read a good review which has good arguments as to why the ME2 plot is good. It seems that Americans think that a good story has lots of explosions and characters with horribly overboard personalities. It must be a character driven, dark second act, because the developers say so. ME1 was more character driven than ME2.

I´m out of this forum.

Viciously? Quite the oppsite actually, We're agreeing with you that it is indeed an weak story, however, an story is not just all of an game, it is an huge part yes - but to say the plot makes or breaks the game is totally stupid.

Please allow me to apologize. The start of my second paragraph is to
broad. He tore the plot of this game apart. And for me that is
the heart of games like this. I agree that it is, at worst, a weak plot,
but I dont believe it by any means is as bad as he makes it out to
be.

I agree with this statement. This is the second arc of an trilogy, Halo had an decent story arc, however, the second act like most trilologies falters because there is no third part out yet. People had the same exact qulams about halo 2 ending as they did with ME2, it left things open, like it should. It isn't tiny little packages all wrapped and neat. They are suppose to link together, not be compacted modules. Any person who gets Me2 will more than likely get ME1 because they will realize just how much **** they miss by not doing so. Hell, anyone who gets Me2 I think would have to get ME1 simply so they start connecting the dots and know what the **** is going on.
                                                      
                                         (ur here looking over the edge)
                                                                   ||
                                                                   V
Good solid begining = Second part =                                     =End

We're stuck here, looking at the incomplete bridge and going... ok, so we have two parts of the puzzle, and the third part is not yet made. Second Piece looks wobbly though considering there isn't an third part to help wrap things up.  As I am sure will happen is that ME2 will link up nicely with ME3 and everyone will go oooooooOooohhh... that's why this and this happened.

Of course this has been discussed to death, but what the hell,  I might make my own plot analysis for just ****s and giggles.

Modifié par Andrew_Waltfeld, 24 mai 2010 - 04:30 .

[Ecael]

mohelo wrote...

And again BW fanboys viciously attack anyone who says ME2 story is bad. I have yet to read a good review which has good arguments as to why the ME2 plot is good. It seems that Americans think that a good story has lots of explosions and characters with horribly overboard personalities.

Wait, what if I attack anyone who says both ME1 and ME2 are bad? And then attack both ME1 and ME2 at the same time? Is that a division by zero?

I DON'T UNDERSTAND!

[Andrew_Waltfeld]

Ecael wrote...

We should make that a campaign logo. XD

[Privateerkev]

Liked the attempt at real analysis. Didn't agree with all of it but I prefer your youtubes to the slew of "ZOMG!!! ME2 sucked because BW didn't make the game exactly how I envisioned it!!!!!" threads...

[smudboy]

Andrew_Waltfeld wrote...

btw, Human bodies don't splatter at 1,000 MPH or whatever, they go at Terminal Velocity if i remember correctly. His/Her death, was basically him/her drifting away and then entering the planet's Astromsphere, otherwise, if that was true, skydivers wouldn't have much of an body remaining when they jumped. I agree with you assessment that  the planet was not earth like, and more than likely, resulted in the body being able to be kept in realtive somewhat intact but from what I remember from Issac Newton's law..... s/he be going at terminal vericvoity.

I agree with your point about Cerbersus bringing you back was an little bit silly... but hey, they were the ones that spent  4 billion credits to bring me back. Though training an army of people is like arming an bunch of boyscouts, and then you have sheppard and his team facing him..... the boyscouts are screwed.

http://exploration.g...ket/termvr.html

Calculate Shepard's velocity given an Earth or Mars atmosphere.

Alchera has slightly less gravity, (0.85 g) and slightly less atmospheric pressure (0.83 atm), yet having a "thick atmosphere of methane and ammonia."  We don't know the core, but it must be a heavy metal, and has some small, if not meager magnetosphere, or else there'd be no atmosphere; and, Shepard = firey atomic re-entry (so it's more similar to Mars.)  Aside from determining the drag coefficient, air resistance and the sort, you'll get a value somewhere between 350-750 miles/h (assuming Shepard takes up 5 sqft and weighs 200 pounds.)

However Shepard is not starting at free fall, and we have to assume there are no other objects or air resistance stopping or slowing their descent.  Shepard's moving at the "Velocity Of Detonation", or whatever explosion pushed them into space.  Explosive forces range from 1800-10300m/s, but we'll just go with 3000m/s.  That's roughly 11,000 miles/h, in space.

Terminal velocity for Alchera would've already been achieved before Shepard even entered the atmosphere.

Compound that with the angular velocity the planet is spinning at while being pulled toward it, and you've got a mush of organic material after smashing into a frozen icey planet.  How their helmet, let alone the Mako and pieces of the Normandy is still intact, is anyone's guess.

Modifié par smudboy, 24 juillet 2010 - 01:22 .

[Group Theory]

Privateerkev wrote...

Liked the attempt at real analysis. Didn't agree with all of it but I prefer your youtubes to the slew of "ZOMG!!! ME2 sucked because BW didn't make the game exactly how I envisioned it!!!!!" threads...

For some reason when I read your post I thought: "Real analysis? Where did anyone talk about real analysis?" And then I realized we're talking about the video analysis and not mathematical analysis.

[ChanceRandom]

"The News of My Death Has Been Greatly Exaggerated "



Since it seems peole keep trying to put this game into the scope of reality, you should take into consideration that most people, upon seeing a suposedly walking corpse, would probably put it down to rumors and lies, the fact that Sheppard had died. The only person that saw him fall was Joker. He didnt actually see him die. So as soon as Sheppard showed up people think "He didnt die, the alliance is trying to hide him for some reason," As society, we do it all the time. There are people who still think the Moon Landing happened when it was obviously a Hollywood filming set up by the Government to justify the exorbanant cost of a failing Space Program. Ok thats a joke, but it is an example of real thinking. People twist facts, or alter their perceptions, so that whats in front of them can fit into their little realities. But I do admit that Shepard should have had some kind of reaction. "I was dead?" seems kind of meh.....

[finnithe]

You know, maybe the arcs developed in Grunt's, Legion's, Tali's and Mordin's will have an effect on ME3. ME3 looks to be an army-gathering game, and those quests had a lot to do with some important species (Quarian vs Geth, Krogan vs. Krogan).

[tonnactus]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

However, other points made such as the bizarre hint during the suicide mission to pick the most experienced person, pointing you towards Samara and your techy's death. Perfectly true. Happened to me even on my first runthrough.

Why Samara? Just because she has the most ability in combat doesn't make her the most able for the leader jobs.

Why jacob?Why miranda?What they ever accomplished to make them good leaders?Did you know this?

[Images]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Images wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

However, other points made such as the bizarre hint during the suicide mission to pick the most experienced person, pointing you towards Samara and your techy's death. Perfectly true. Happened to me even on my first runthrough.

Why Samara? Just because she has the most ability in combat doesn't make her the most able for the leader jobs.

What word do you use? What word do Miranda and I use?

Combat Experience does not equal leadership experience.  Experience and ability do not help them in this regard.

I'm not arguing that it does. I have no opinion on the subject.

Miranda does however. And tells you that the role requires someone WITH THE MOST EXPERIENCE.

THAT is my point. Now would you please answer it instead of ranting about your guitar playing days back on the ranch.

[Images]

Zahxia wrote...

He didn't discuss gameplay, graphics, soundtrack/voice acting, level design, controls or DLC or so on. The main storyline isn't the entire game but it's as important to the experience as the above.

edit: logging out.

That would be why the thread for this video is titled

A Video Plot Analysis

And before I get people saying I'm simply drumming support for the ÓP. I'm not. Like I say, I agree with some of his points and don't to some others. What I find odd is the level of venom and vitriol directed at him. Its odd that no one has questioned the elements of my original statement disagreeing with Smudboy's findings but have found rabid discontent with the parts that I find righteous.

I still love ME2. Its sense of place and characters can be astounding. Just look at Omega. Hell, I've piled 3 characters through it that are ME1 veterans and am doing so now with a 4th! But I for one was often left scratching my head at how the narrative rolled along and some of the unexplained character choices.

[InvaderErl]

http://en.wikipedia....s_Back#Reaction

Of particular interest:

"Some critics had problems with the story but admitted the film was a
technical achievement. For instance, Vincent
Canby of The New York Times wrote a largely negative review.[26]
Judith Martin of The Washington Post complained of the film's
"middle-of-the-story" plot, which featured no particular beginning or
end"


And, "Empire is now considered the most morally and emotionally complex
of the Star Wars trilogy.[29]
Roger
Ebert, in his 1997 review, called the film the strongest and "the
most thought-provoking" of the original trilogy."

Modifié par InvaderErl, 24 mai 2010 - 09:13 .

[Azint]

"Character-Driven Story"

There's your problem.

[kraidy1117]

Azint wrote...

"Character-Driven Story"
There's your problem.

Not everyone relises that the point of ME2 was the characters.

[kraidy1117]

tonnactus wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

However, other points made such as the bizarre hint during the suicide mission to pick the most experienced person, pointing you towards Samara and your techy's death. Perfectly true. Happened to me even on my first runthrough.

Why Samara? Just because she has the most ability in combat doesn't make her the most able for the leader jobs.

Why jacob?Why miranda?What they ever accomplished to make them good leaders?Did you know this?

Miri has been leading risky Cerberus projects for a long time and since she is still alive that means they where all succes, plus she was made to be perfect. That would mean she has leadersgip ablities.