No.
1: They didn't introduce a different enemy. Almost from the beginning it is clear that the Reapers are working through the Collectors, just as Sovereign worked through Saren in the first game. The Reapers are a far-off threat who work insidiously and methodically through proxies to bring about their slow but imminent arrival and victory. It is how they have always been presented.
2: I don't really think this is a particularly relevant concern. I really don't feel that the cohesiveness of a trilogy lies in keeping a completely constant cast of characters. Just look at the George Martin "Thrones" books -- characters rise and die off constantly, and yet the story is maintained. Even so, comparing Han Solo to Udina or Hackett is misguided at best -- Han Solo is a main character, Udina and Hackett are supporting cast. Not many characters were actually left behind in ME2, it is just that new ones were introduced. I think that it makes sense in the context of the plot, and I have no problem with it. Indeed, your suggestion that they should have basically switched ME1 and ME2 around and introduced the ME1 squad later is no better in terms of continuity. It is simply your preference, it does nothing to address your very own concerns.
3: I very much disagree with this idea. In ME1 you start off barely knowing how to shoot a gun, and a SIGNIFICANT number of your skill points are spent on just making your weaponry reasonably accurate and powerful. In ME2 you start off as a very, very capable soldier. Sure, your special powers don't start out honed to a fine edge, but it has been two years and you've been raised from the ashes of a broken corpse. Even so, you still start out light-years ahead of where you were in ME1.
"BUT!", you may argue.
"But in ME1, by the end you could massacre dozens of enemies without so much as ducking for cover! Now you have to hide behind boxes just because a could geth show up!" To which I reply, "Exactly, which is exactly why the gun mechanics and combat in ME2 is far and away better. You should be thanking them, not complaining."
The fact of the matter is that the continuity in ME is just fine, and the problem is really with people's expectations. Realistically, Bioware cannot create three games that cannot be played as individual pieces, because publishers simply will not allow such a thing . But Bioware has done a fine job of continuing the stories of the characters from the first game while developing their characters (even if some people don't like the way some of them are developing *cough*Liarafans*cough*). In ME3 everything will come together, and everyone will realize what a good job they've done. I can see where they're going, I like it, and I have confidence in Bioware. They always deliver a gaming experience that is head and shoulders above other developers, and I don't see them petering out on the finale to their piece de resistance.
Modifié par Pauravi, 28 août 2010 - 01:26 .
Retour en haut
