103 réponses à ce sujet

[UBER GEEKZILLA]

i agree with nightwriter..and by the way ALL the characters fit perfectly into the plot..what part of BUILD A TEAM TO FIGHT DONT U UNDERSTAND..if i was going into battle i could definalty use help from people as powerful as jack or grunt.

[Il Divo]

I guess I'll be the one to say it:



Kotor>all other Bioware games.



'Nuff said.

[Nightwriter]

Well... no. No, they didn't really fit perfectly into the plot. I don't understand why they're there. I understand why I need them (sort of), but I don't understand why they're agreeing to join me.

I feel the game progressed way too fast. Dossiers just appear in my journal like magic and I'm off to recruit them with no explanation. When I pick up these characters I feel like I'm completing a shopping list someone else wrote for me, preparing for a camping trip and dumping items into my cart off the shelf with the casual mutter of, "Meh, might as well get everything."

[Dave of Canada]

Apollo Starflare wrote...


I actually completely agree with this. I tend to prefer ME2 on the whole, but your point about Ashley's interest in you is well made. Offhand I remember Miranda's romance being a bit less immediate than Tali's though? At least it felt more like a natural progression. I would say the same for Garrus but I think most agree he suffered from a lack of scenes in between missions meaning the initial sparks don't have quite the same impact they could have (this is handled better in DAO with Zevran for example, similar flirting yet continued more consitantly).

I only mentioned Tali due to getting a lot of her from her fans.

[UBER GEEKZILLA]

you get those dossiers downloaded to you by the illusive man..he is recomening peoiple to join u throught the game

[Nightwriter]

... Yes I know that.

Why did he pick these people? Where did he get these files? What's his thoughts on each character? We are told none of this.

[Dave of Canada]

Nightwriter wrote...

Well I really don't think you can
criticize one game's romances over the other. ME1's romances were
ridiculously forced, and their implementation wasn't that great. Plus
you had characters like Liara becoming interested way too quickly. I
liked that the ME2 LIs needed to get to know you through their loyalty
missions before the romance started, but it felt very formulaic, and
many of the LIs were romance-or-nothin' characters.

Oh like I said, ME1 had it's flaws. I just hated the ME2 romances due to the way it worked.

[Gender neutral dialogue]
[Gender neutral dialogue]
[Gender neutral dialogue]
[Loyalty mission]
[Gender nautral dialogue, can confirm or deny romance]
[If romanced: "Meet you later, Shepard. ;)"] > Sex scene at Omega 4.
[If not-romanced: "I got calibrations or something."]

There's no hint of a romance before the loyalty mission and then it's immediately thrown on you to decide "Yes." or "No." regardless of your previous interactions with the character. I'd often insult Miranda but she still showed interest in me after the loyalty mission.

So
in ME2, they solve this by making the world's rich and colorful and
graphically amazing... then take away our ability to explore them (the
mako) and the sidequests which made the worlds memorable (Tooms,
Chairman Burns, Admiral Kahoku)?

I didn't mind the side-missions being short and amazing, ME2 just needed more of a reason to do it other than "Hey. Check this place out". I remember going through that one mission where you're on a ship killing Blue Suns and then loot the container at the end to complete the mission.

Maybe I just miss Hackett's short debriefings that gave context for each side mission.

Nightwriter wrote...

I feel the game progressed way too fast. Dossiers just appear in my journal like magic and I'm off to recruit them with no explanation. When I pick up these characters I feel like I'm completing a shopping list someone else wrote for me, preparing for a camping trip and dumping items into my cart off the shelf with the casual mutter of, "Meh, might as well get everything."

When I first started playing, I immediately went for Grunt. Let's just say, I was confused on what the hell I was doing until the end. I just woke up from being dead and instead of having anything special happen, I just land on a planet that has hostile mercs?

[KainrycKarr]

Barquiel wrote...

gameplay and graphics
I prefer ME2

exploration, inventory
both systems are flawed
too many redundant items vs no inventory system
very little exploration in both games

dialogue
no difference imo

But story and character-wise, I think ME2 is worse than ME1.

I mostly agree with this, though I find the ME2 characters...not necessarily better, but more interesting(IMO)

[TuringPoint]

Il Divo wrote...

I guess I'll be the one to say it:

Kotor>all other Bioware games.

'Nuff said.

I feel nostalgic about it, but I cannot say that I truthfully share your highest opinion of that game.

For one, it's become horribly buggy and unplayable on the computer in recent years.  For another, it was ridicuously linear and had combat which had very little dynamic quality of any sort to it.

Handmade loot worked well in KotOR though, I will say - and they had a good plot, except that it was very short and again - very linear.  Kotor was a refreshing experience.  I might argue that Jade Empire was better.

That said, I think ME2 is better than ME1.  I think Bioware could've achieved a lot more improvement with a lot less change than they ended up going with.  Thats how it seems to me.

Modifié par Alocormin, 16 août 2010 - 02:47 .

[UBER GEEKZILLA]

WOW are u kidding me...dave of canada you say that ME2 dosent make the romance sublot work right..but it works a heck of alot better then the romances in ME1..ALL the characters in ME1 were easy..cuz YOU JUST HAD TO DO PARAGON CHOICES ..at least in ME2 it mixes it aaround a bit. and nightwriter its not wierd that illusive man got the dossiers..how would you not hear about an assasin, a krogan doctor curing the genopage, a merc named archangel??ya know and besides the illusive man was probbaly smart and planned ahead by searching these peoples dossiers by the internet or something..i meen internet in the future is probaly crazy.

[Nightwriter]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Oh like I said, ME1 had it's flaws. I just hated the ME2 romances due to the way it worked.

[Gender neutral dialogue]
[Gender neutral dialogue]
[Gender neutral dialogue]
[Loyalty mission]
[Gender nautral dialogue, can confirm or deny romance]
[If romanced: "Meet you later, Shepard. ;)"] > Sex scene at Omega 4.
[If not-romanced: "I got calibrations or something."]

There's no hint of a romance before the loyalty mission and then it's immediately thrown on you to decide "Yes." or "No." regardless of your previous interactions with the character. I'd often insult Miranda but she still showed interest in me after the loyalty mission.

I have to agree with this. But both had their pros and cons.

ME1:
- I like the way ME1 handled sex scenes in that they weren't arranged. The scene just happens naturally and your'e not expecting it.
- I like the show of skin. Call me a perv. It was intimate and tastefully done.
- FORCED. The amount of effort required to escape the romance was not cool. I am not engaged by a romance that does not require my participation to complete.
- If you don't want to romance anyone, you have to avoid talking to them altogether.
- No variation on sex scenes.

ME2:
- Not as forced overall. Great improvement there.
- I know some people don't like the loyalty-unlocking-the-romance thing, but I like the idea of getting to know the character before they become attracted. I thought Liara becomes attracted to you far too quickly - you hardly know her.
- Unique sex scenes.
- Too formulaic. Something about this whole "I'll come by later" thing felt extremely transactional. Ick.
- Many characters like Jack were no improvement over ME1 in that if you  didn't want to romance them, you could never speak to them.
- Characters are having sex with their clothes on. I know you're tired of hearing this complaint, BioWare, but it feels like a bit of a step down.

Then there are things they both had in common that were bad, like the fact you could insult the character and not break the romance.

Modifié par Nightwriter, 16 août 2010 - 03:11 .

[lazuli]

Il Divo wrote...

I guess I'll be the one to say it:

Kotor>all other Bioware games.

'Nuff said.

But the combat.  The combat.

[MassEffect762]

Uh huh. Thanks for your opinion.

[Nightwriter]

Oh, and...

Dave of Canada wrote...

I didn't mind the side-missions being short and amazing, ME2 just needed more of a reason to do it other than "Hey. Check this place out". I remember going through that one mission where you're on a ship killing Blue Suns and then loot the container at the end to complete the mission.

Maybe I just miss Hackett's short debriefings that gave context for each side mission.

I missed Hackett so bad it wasn't even funny. He's the one who gave me the whole sense of what I was doing.

Dave of Canada wrote...

When I first started playing, I immediately went for Grunt. Let's just say, I was confused on what the hell I was doing until the end. I just woke up from being dead and instead of having anything special happen, I just land on a planet that has hostile mercs?

Rofl. Yes, my reaction to how fast the game moved can be summarized with my favorite gif...



^ This was my grasp of what was going on.

I was just like, what am I even doing??

[Il Divo]

lazuli wrote...

But the combat.  The combat.

Haha, alright I will concede that Kotor had its flaws, amongst which are the combat, glitches, and terrible movement scheme. But I dunno...there was something about Force Storming people to death that never got old. Plus, you get a lightsaber!

Modifié par Il Divo, 16 août 2010 - 03:22 .

[Nightwriter]

KOTOR was awesome. I had a firm and enthralled grip of the plot every step of the way.

[Dave of Canada]

Nightwriter wrote...

KOTOR was awesome. I had a firm and enthralled grip of the plot every step of the way.

I think I loved KOTOR due to how brilliant the plot twist was. Whatever backround you had created for your character wasn't cast aside, you could've believed that your character was a slaver-turned-soldier and it would still make sense in the context of the plot because the Jedi had programmed you with a fake life.

[Onyx Jaguar]

KOTOR 2 > KOTOR 1

just like ME 2 > ME 1

and Fallout 2 > Fallout 1, even if it had Macgyver and Monk

Halo 2 > Halo 1
Half Life 2 > Half _life 1

Half Life 2... 2 > Half Life 1... 1
Metal Gear Solid 3 > Metal Gear Solid 2 C-C-C-c-c-c-ombo breaker

Warcraft 2 > Warcraft 1
Diablo 2 > Diablo 1

Fake Super Mario Bros 2 > Real Super Mario Bros 2

Beware the two, they are coming

Galaga > Galaxian

Kingdom Under Fire: Crusaders (2) > Kingdom Under FIre 1

So what I am saying is that 2 is always better unless its not

Left 4 Dead 2 > Left 4 Dead 1
Quake 2 > Quake 1
Doom 1 > Doom 2 OSHI

Unreal Tournament 2003 (2)... Eh..., outdated by 2004 (3) BUT it is kind of like 2003... 2

Modifié par Onyx Jaguar, 16 août 2010 - 03:34 .

[Il Divo]

Dave of Canada wrote...

I think I loved KOTOR due to how brilliant the plot twist was. Whatever backround you had created for your character wasn't cast aside, you could've believed that your character was a slaver-turned-soldier and it would still make sense in the context of the plot because the Jedi had programmed you with a fake life.

If there is a single, all time greatest "WTF" moment I've ever had during a story, it probably was Kotor's plot twist.

[Tyrael02]

I'm glad everyone in this forum sees some semblance of reason, threads with a title even remotely similar to this inspire retarded ME1 fan-boy/girl-ism that impossible to reason with. Good points from most here.

Modifié par Tyrael02, 16 août 2010 - 03:39 .

[Water Dumple]

I largely agree with the topic post, but like others have said, one thing just doesn't quite hold up in ME2: The arc of the story. In ME1, the conflict starts at the beginning as normal, then advances through different areas tied to several themes, while still introducing a few new themes along the way; to put it simply, it starts with Saren and the Heretics as the antagonists, but then you see that both the individual and the group are simply a faced diversion from the real threat: The Reapers. This is developed through the whole game, making the climax really feel like a climax.

In ME2, the story arc is less of an arc and more like...three bricks. The introduction to the conflict, [spacefiller recruiting], several more plot missions from TIM, [spacefiller recruiting and loyalty missions], and then the suicide mission. With the exception of the middle brick, every bit is great, from the characters to the gameplay mechanics. However, the story isn't actually progressed during that time. So there's a large hole in the middle of the game once the antagonists have been identified, which makes the climax feel epic and different but not exactly as well-anticipated as we might have hoped. I'm fine with there not being a single central antagonist or antihero, but the collectors simply need to be developed more throughout the game.

That said, it's hard to complain when the gameplay is top-notch and ME2 seems to actually be intended as a more character-driven than story-driven game. But if story is really your thing, then sure, ME1's is superior.

[Onyx Jaguar]

I know, the actual Super Mario Bros. 2 was complete rubbish

As was X-Com 2. Yeah I know the hardcore fans dug it, but paying full price for a "Hard mode" seems ridiculous to me.

As to why ME 2 is > ME 1?

Well my vote will always go for stability.  However ME 2 seems tailored made for my playing preferences.

Let me put it this way, when a game seems to have developed ****ing loading screens that appeal directly to my tastes then you can just assume that I developed the game through sheer will.

The combat was comfortable and responsive.

The missions gave me rewards I could use in situations.  I could mix and match squadmembers on the go to change my playstyle.

The game is extremely stable.

ME 1 to me was much better in music, even though ME 2 was more consistant, ME 1 still had great highs.  And at the end when ME 1 picks up it is phenominal.  That is when the storyline clicks and everything comes together.

ME 2 is a much more level experience.

Modifié par Onyx Jaguar, 16 août 2010 - 03:42 .

[uberdowzen]

Pretty much agree with what the OP said. ME1 did have a better story than ME2 (my current analogy is to compare it to Iron Man 1 and 2, 1 was a very well constructed action movie whereas 2 tried to do far too much. Although both Mass Effect game's plots are better than those of both Iron Man films put together) and I do miss having an inventory, just not ME1's inventory (which was a crime against nature).

[DarthCaine]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

KOTOR 2 > KOTOR 1

This is the only comparison where I strongly disagree

[uberdowzen]

Il Divo wrote...

I guess I'll be the one to say it:

Kotor>all other Bioware games.

'Nuff said.

Can't let this stand . Dragon Age: Origins, Mass Effect 1 (depite it's flaws) and then KOTOR. Although bare in mind that this is like comparing different kinds of bacon, they're all fantastic. And salty.