555 réponses à ce sujet

[darth_lopez]

mrsph wrote...

It's the game's official forum. That means that everyone here hates Bioware and everything Bioware does.

o.o is that what BW thinks of me? i must make ammends T-T i love you BW i love you all! 

ok but seriously some of us are actually great fans of BW and the work they've done...for me it's everything since Kotor. though Primarily Kotor ME and DAO.  contemplated neverwinter nights but sounds too complex for me. anywho.



i can agree with what the original OP is saying. i have made up my share of excuses to make ME 1 seem awesomer than ME 2 in my eyes it was only after realizing that i can't play ME 2 with out first playing a character in ME 1 that i noticed how awkward some of my complaints against it were  (story wise) and i abandoned them.

i still however find issues with the Gameplay Particularly the Minimized inflexible inventory system. and the Ammo clips (if they are really Heat sinks use a percentage not Ammo and allow for like 5-10 minute cool down on them instead of swaping them constantly come on guys stick with the lore you wright in not with the stuff that makes it shooter based '~' that's not to say make ammo unlimited again just make the count equivelent to the heat absorbed by the heat sink)  but that's all i can really say i dislike anymore.

once you play them both side by side with in a 75 hour period you realize how Important Number 1 is in introducing everything and how ME 2 was just as important by supplementing ME 1 with the necessary pawns and players for ME 3. It is story wise probably the perfect sequel to ME 1 and Prequel to ME 3. and i can't imagine any RPG sequel i have played that was actually just as good as the first and adds a few improvements.

[Zulu_DFA]

To all ME2 plot haters:



Guys, we have to hate the plot only where it's really bad.



"Killing" Shepard, making him work for Cerberus, even collecting and babysitting the motley crew of the fashion show contestants, then kicking the Collectors' butt only when and where TIM says to are all legit plot devices.



The problem is HOW it was all executed. And it was executed so badly, that it indeed makes little to no sense. See: Plot Holes.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

To all ME2 plot haters:

Guys, we have to hate the plot only where it's really bad.

"Killing" Shepard, making him work for Cerberus, even collecting and babysitting the motley crew of the fashion show contestants, then kicking the Collectors' butt only when and where TIM says to are all legit plot devices.

The problem is HOW it was all executed. And it was executed so badly, that it indeed makes little to no sense. See: Plot Holes.

I'd reward you with a PhD in plothology.

[DurkBakala]

smudboy wrote...

DurkBakala wrote...

smudboy wrote...

DurkBakala wrote...

Basically, get over it Smuddy!

Basically, get over what?

Everything you're so butthurt about.

I don't recall getting my feelings hurt, but thanks either way.

Your feelings come out of your ass?! I mean, we all know your words do but that's just crossing the line.

[glacier1701]

Il Divo wrote...

glacier1701 wrote...

Nothing in the above list adds anything to your knowledge about the Collectors/Reapers, gives you a weapon to combat the Reapers or changes the way the squadmember faces the remainder of mission. In ME1 talking to the squadmembers COULD change their outlook and in one case the outcome of an encounter. Not ONCE in ME2 can you persuade Miranda (for example) that Cerberus is wrong. She will always remain a cheerleader for Cerberus throughout the game. The same applies to everyone else. They have a fixed point of view which does not change even if you are romancing them.

I found this surprising because this was exactly how I felt about the Mass Effect 1 party. Garrus aside, the Mass Effect 1 party never undergoes any deep character development. Liara confronting her mother had great potential, but ultimately felt meaningless. Between Wrex, Kaidan, Liara, and Tali (especially) I felt the they were all relatively static characters who never underwent any changes.

I'd also like to point out that changing a squad member's perspective in Mass Effect 1 also does not add anything to your knowledge of Saren or the Geth.  

 This is not character development because the characters do not develop. Talking to them or not talking to them does NOT change anything UNLESS you decide NOT to run their loyalty mission or get their upgrades (and even then you only need 3 specific upgrades to avoid deaths). Even when you have run their loyalty mission the only change is an additional unlocked power and a change of clothes. Yet because of the way the combat SCALES to the combat abilities present having or not having that power is meaningless. I have done playthroughs where I have had squadmembers with 10 or 20 points still to allocate to powers and have not done so. It did NOT make the ending any harder to get through. I might say that in some cases it did seem a bit easier but that might be more due to familiarity with the end mission and not necessarily due to lack of full powers. Anyways the point is ME1 allowed the squadmembers to change over the course of the game. ME2 DOES NOT. That makes the ME2 squad less than it was in ME1.

Well, first arguments about gameplay in a plot/story-oriented discussion are rather meaningless. I could point out that Shepard in Mass Effect is an L3 while Kaidan is an L2, yet Kaidan's biotics are no stronger than Shepard's. We should keep this discussion strictly to plot.

But how can you say none of the characters develop? I can agree it's not as a result of the main plot, but that is hardly grounds to make your point, especially considering some of the romances. Jack and Thane are perfect examples of this. Jack has a great number of trust issues, which makes Shepard wanting to be close so foreign to her. Likewise Thane realizing that his relationship with Shepard makes him afraid to die is another great example. Miranda's/Grunt's/Tali's loyalty missions are also great examples of character development.

Edit: I'd also like to point out that upgrades to your ship are relevant to the out-come of the mission.

Opps - reread my post now that I am not rushed and it is kinda messed up. Well that happens when I rush things and do not proffread what I say. Welp too late to change it now.

[Il Divo]

Edit: Nevermind. It makes sense now.

Modifié par Il Divo, 18 juillet 2010 - 02:24 .

[stormrain]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

To all ME2 plot haters:

Guys, we have to hate the plot only where it's really bad.

"Killing" Shepard, making him work for Cerberus, even collecting and babysitting the motley crew of the fashion show contestants, then kicking the Collectors' butt only when and where TIM says to are all legit plot devices.

The problem is HOW it was all executed. And it was executed so badly, that it indeed makes little to no sense. See: Plot Holes.

Fan Dumb.

(Please know, I mean this is the most tongue-in-cheek and lighthearted manner possible).

[smudboy]

DurkBakala wrote...

smudboy wrote...

DurkBakala wrote...

smudboy wrote...

DurkBakala wrote...

Basically, get over it Smuddy!

Basically, get over what?

Everything you're so butthurt about.

I don't recall getting my feelings hurt, but thanks either way.

Your feelings come out of your ass?! I mean, we all know your words do but that's just crossing the line.

Since I have feelings, and I feel them in my body, then yes, I do have feelings coming out of my ass.

My words come out of my mouth, and you see them on your screen.  What exactly did I write, that's just crossing the line?

[Soviet Vodka]

While Smudboy made some excellent points in his videos, I also found there to be far to much nitpicking and I think that is somewhat "asking for it" with all of the hate from the forum.

Personally I agree that the plot in ME2 could have been much better executed, but there still is the fact that it is an INTERLUDE GAME in a predefined trilogy and thus, the plot needs to be a step down from the first game so that the awe is a face slap once we have our revelation in the third game.

Modifié par Soviet Vodka, 18 juillet 2010 - 03:37 .

[Nightwriter]

There are still ways they could have made this interlude game better and more substantial plot-wise.

First, they shouldn't have had the Council backslide on the Reaper menance. That's a step backward plot-wise; instead make them unable to make the galaxy see reason.

Then they shouldn't have introduced a new enemy whose defeat does nothing to change the progress of the real enemy.

Then they shouldn't have downsized us to saving humanity rather than the whole galaxy. That's a step down.

Then they should've made the whole game be about... politics. Oh, yes. War. War is starting everywhere. For no apparent reason. Ooh, mysterious. Who's behind it. People are acting funny. The turian Councilor just got assassinated by Executor Pallin, who has disappeared. The keepers are vanishing. The batarian Hegemony is mobilizing for war in the Terminus Systems. The volus have pulled out of their embassy, no one knows why, and the galactic economy is in crisis.

Yeah.

[Il Divo]

Nightwriter wrote...

There are still ways they could have made this interlude game better and more substantial plot-wise.

First, they shouldn't have had the Council backslide on the Reaper menance. That's a step backward plot-wise; instead make them unable to make the galaxy see reason.

Interesting development would have been if they believed you at the start of Mass Effect 2, then changed their position entirely after Shepard died. That would've been a real kick in the balls.

[Nightwriter]

They pretty much did do that. At the end of ME1 they thank you for saving them from the Reapers and all signs said they believed you now and were appreciative.

Then after the attack on the Normandy they had a change of heart.

[glacier1701]

Nightwriter wrote...

There are still ways they could have made this interlude game better and more substantial plot-wise.

First, they shouldn't have had the Council backslide on the Reaper menance. That's a step backward plot-wise; instead make them unable to make the galaxy see reason.

Then they shouldn't have introduced a new enemy whose defeat does nothing to change the progress of the real enemy.

Then they shouldn't have downsized us to saving humanity rather than the whole galaxy. That's a step down.

Then they should've made the whole game be about... politics. Oh, yes. War. War is starting everywhere. For no apparent reason. Ooh, mysterious. Who's behind it. People are acting funny. The turian Councilor just got assassinated by Executor Pallin, who has disappeared. The keepers are vanishing. The batarian Hegemony is mobilizing for war in the Terminus Systems. The volus have pulled out of their embassy, no one knows why, and the galactic economy is in crisis.

Yeah.

Where is most of this stuff coming from? Is it the news on that Cerberus Network?

[Il Divo]

Nightwriter wrote...

They pretty much did do that. At the end of ME1 they thank you for saving them from the Reapers and all signs said they believed you now and were appreciative.

Then after the attack on the Normandy they had a change of heart.

At the start of Mass Effect 2, they already didn't believe you, hence why you were sent to find Geth. I'm saying it would've "upped the stakes" so to speak if they did believe you in Mass Effect 2's intro, then Shepard's death/disappearance caused them to have a relapse.

[Fiery Phoenix]

I really thought the Council believed me at the end of ME1 (especially the Paragon ending).

[Iakus]

Il Divo wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

There are still ways they could have made this interlude game better and more substantial plot-wise.

First, they shouldn't have had the Council backslide on the Reaper menance. That's a step backward plot-wise; instead make them unable to make the galaxy see reason.

Interesting development would have been if they believed you at the start of Mass Effect 2, then changed their position entirely after Shepard died. That would've been a real kick in the balls.

I would have found thier attitude so much easier to accept if, after two years, they had decided that the Reaper threat died with Sovereign, and the rest of them were permanently trapped in dark space.

[II Sl4sh3r II]

smudboy wrote...

DurkBakala wrote...

smudboy wrote...

DurkBakala wrote...

Basically, get over it Smuddy!

Basically, get over what?

Everything you're so butthurt about.

I don't recall getting my feelings hurt, but thanks either way.

@smudboy

The fact that you spent however long making that ME2 Analysis video and now continue to argue on the forums boggles my mind. You seem to literally hate ME2. Everything about it makes no sense to you, yet you feel the need to get on the forums and argue this to the death. If I saw you playing devils advocate once in a while maybe it would make sense to me. But it really doesn't. I'm in no way trying to attack you personally so don't think that I am. I just don't see the point in spending so much time on something you hate, especially a video game.

[smudboy]

II Sl4sh3r II wrote...
@smudboy

The fact that you spent however long making that ME2 Analysis video and now continue to argue on the forums boggles my mind. You seem to literally hate ME2. Everything about it makes no sense to you, yet you feel the need to get on the forums and argue this to the death. If I saw you playing devils advocate once in a while maybe it would make sense to me. But it really doesn't. I'm in no way trying to attack you personally so don't think that I am. I just don't see the point in spending so much time on something you hate, especially a video game.

I don't.

I do argue with those who try to argue back, to the point where their ideas distill into nonsensical imagination, falsehood, name calling out of retribution, or subjective enthusiasm with no meaning.  I either reply in kind, or dismiss them completely.  Through arguing, it clarifies what I know, and I end up learning things I've missed.  Really all there is to it.

Even if I did hate something, I see nothing wrong with that.  Love/hate is merely a stronger response to liking/disliking

Edit: On reflection, I wouldn't be here as much if there weren't so many errors to look at.  These errors generate questions, and are good grounds for discussion, I think.  This is why the crazy things that Zulu comes up with aren't totally in left field, because the holes leave much to interpretation, and he amongst others, provide a certain outlook.  It's also why people who see something positive with these holes aren't regarded as quacks, even if their interpretation can only be that one way they see it, when the next positive fellow sees it as something else, almost like their bias is making connections to fill in the void of "huh?" with something that makes sense to only them.

Modifié par smudboy, 18 juillet 2010 - 07:07 .

[II Sl4sh3r II]

smudboy wrote...
Even if I did hate something, I see nothing
wrong with that.  Love/hate
is merely a stronger response to liking/disliking.

What does this have to do with anything?

smudboy wrote...

II Sl4sh3r II wrote...
@smudboy

The fact that you spent however long making that ME2 Analysis video and now continue to argue on the forums boggles my mind. You seem to literally hate ME2. Everything about it makes no sense to you, yet you feel the need to get on the forums and argue this to the death. If I saw you playing devils advocate once in a while maybe it would make sense to me. But it really doesn't. I'm in no way trying to attack you personally so don't think that I am. I just don't see the point in spending so much time on something you hate, especially a video game.

I don't.

I do argue with those who try to argue back, to the point where their ideas distill into nonsensical imagination, falsehood, name calling out of retribution, or subjective enthusiasm with no meaning.  I either reply in kind, or dismiss them completely.  Through arguing, it clarifies what I know, and I end up learning things I've missed.  Really all there is to it.

Nonsensical imagination? Everyone has a different point of view. Someone mentioned the number 3 being on the table where the female Krogan was in Mordins loyalty mission. They perceived this as female Krograns being in ME3. I saw it as table 3.

You made a six part YouTube video that picks apart ME2 in every way, shape and form.... Before we go into that and before I can take anything that you type seriously... Let me ask this..
What do you like about Mass Effect 2?

Once again. I'm not trying to attack you personally I just don't understand the motives or logic behind anything that you've said. You're here criticizing ME2, making it out to have the worst story in history, yet you like the game?

Modifié par II Sl4sh3r II, 18 juillet 2010 - 07:18 .

[smudboy]

II Sl4sh3r II wrote...

smudboy wrote...
Even if I did hate something, I see nothing
wrong with that.  Love/hate
is merely a stronger response to liking/disliking.

What does this have to do with anything?

Um, because you're questioning me solely on why I hate something.  I do not hate ME2, or its plot.

Even if I did, so what?  That would just be a motivation upon which I would be using to argue said things I hated.

II Sl4sh3r II wrote...
Nonsensical imagination? Everyone has a different point of view. Someone mentioned the number 3 being on the table where the female Krogan was in Mordins loyalty mission. They perceived this as female Krograns being in ME3. I saw it as table 3.

Oh boy.

You made a six part YouTube video that picks apart ME2 in every way, shape and form.... Before we go into that and before I can take anything that you type seriously... Let me ask this..
What do you like about Mass Effect 2?

"Plot Analysis."

I like the characters.

Once again. I'm not trying to attack you personally I just don't understand the motives or logic behind anything that you've said. You're here criticizing ME2, making it out to have the worst story in history, yet you like the game?

I'm a man.  I am a logical man.  Set apart by other logical men.  Aparently by his ability to make youtube videos.

I did not say it had the worst story in history.  I said it has one of the worst plots in the history of video game sequels.  I then go on to define the terms plot, and story.  (Once again, the first line of my video series is quoted wrong...)  Other people believe this is wrong.  However, I am not other people, nor have I played every sequel video game in the history, because their plots are not even worth mentioning.  ME2 makes the effort and fails.

[Teknor]

II Sl4sh3r II wrote...

The fact that you spent however long making that ME2 Analysis video and now continue to argue on the forums boggles my mind. You seem to literally hate ME2. Everything about it makes no sense to you, yet you feel the need to get on the forums and argue this to the death. If I saw you playing devils advocate once in a while maybe it would make sense to me. But it really doesn't. I'm in no way trying to attack you personally so don't think that I am. I just don't see the point in spending so much time on something you hate, especially a video game.

Smudboy get his kicks from excessive whinage just like any other pathological whiner. There is nothing for your mind to boggle. 

[II Sl4sh3r II]

@smud
Warning: What I'm about to say might be perceived as a personal attack...

I see you just like to hear yourself talk/see what you've typed.

Before I bow out I just want you to know that you're looking at ME2 in a narrow minded manor. If it was a true sequel the reapers would have taken over, or be dead. This is not the case because it is the second part of a trilogy. Yes it's stand-alone but at the same time the story keeps moving. I, for one, think they did a fantastic job to please *almost* everyone.

Now I will kindly go back into my hole.

[smudboy]

II Sl4sh3r II wrote...

@smud
Warning: What I'm about to say might be perceived as a personal attack...

I see you just like to hear yourself talk/see what you've typed.

Before I bow out I just want you to know that you're looking at ME2 in a narrow minded manor. If it was a true sequel the reapers would have taken over, or be dead. This is not the case because it is the second part of a trilogy. Yes it's stand-alone but at the same time the story keeps moving. I, for one, think they did a fantastic job to please *almost* everyone.

Now I will kindly go back into my hole.

Who doesn't?

What narrow minded manner would that be?

If it was a true sequel, then the Reapers would have taken over, or be dead?  Okay?  A "true" sequel would've developed the plot further, not been some side story, with little side stories off to the side.  "You boil the water.  You put the packet in."  Instead we erradicate random opposing force #2, found out they were once Protheans, and now Reapers stupidly use organics to procreate for some reason, and were doing so with humans for some reason.

If it's stand alone, then it doesn't follow continuity, and thus is not a sequel.

That's a problem then: you cannot please everyone.  Great works of art are done at the expense of the client, but are made because of a singular, creative vision, made manifest by a passionate champion of that vision, the producer.  Anyone on the development team could've easily, and probably did, say mineral collecting was bad in execution.  But I'm not even concerned about game play: I want all this "awesome stuff" they put it to at least be connected.

[Il Divo]

Just to throw in my 2cents: It's better to argue/discuss Mass Effect 2 than it is to argue/discuss whether or not we should be arguing/discussing Mass Effect 2.

[The Unfallen]

Mass Effect 2 was incredibly predictable, unlike Mass Effect, this is an element I did NOT like about Mass Effect 2. I remembered how Sovereign took control of Saren through his implants, and Harbinger's voice, and taunts were sort of a dead giveaway, so I saw this coming. However, it did manage to capture a level of epic that the first did not achieve in my opinion, Mass Effect 2 is one of my favorite games of all time, because it is one of the few games to get my heart racing and my ass on the edge of my chair. Literally. Anyway, I don't think you can really compare ME 1&2 because in the end, the trilogy forms one overarching storyline and to separate what should be seen as parts of one storyline the story cannot stand and thus collapses completely, sure there are elements of ME 1 that I like better than ME 2 and vice versa, but its all one storyline and thus one cannot really be better than the other. I just look at it as 'Mass Effect', that is all it is to me. And it is collectively, badass.