149 réponses à ce sujet

[sevach]

PD ORTA wrote...

AntiChri5 wrote...

Yeah a plot does not make a game.

When judging which is the better game the number one issue to consider is gameplay. Nothing else really matters.

Yes, Mass Effect is a better story then Mass Effect 2. But Mass Effect 2 is a better game then ME 1.

Agreed. Gameplay is allways the most important factor, and in this respect ME2 is far in advance of ME1.

In an RPG, the plot, the story, the actual roleplaying... are an integral part of the gameplay, it's just as important as the combat, if not more... You talk about it like it's an afterthought.

I do agree that the combat in ME2 is better, but it doesn't make up for the very bad railroading and lack of roleplay.

[brfritos]

Solaris Paradox wrote...

brfritos wrote...

This a no spoilers section, but there's a certain squad mate, female, that can't be killed until the last part of the suicide mission.
If she's not loyal and you send her to lead the second fire team, she will die. Or you can let her be carried by the seeker swarms.

In this two situations she magically return from the dead, in exchange for another squad mate, of course.
You think this is acceptable?

This also indicates that you really don't have much choice in the game, only the ones that the devs force you to do.

Sounds like a glitch to me.

No, it isn't, is real.

Check Ecael guide if you want confirmation.
http://social.biowar...5/index/2933016

[lazuli]

Solaris Paradox wrote...
Krogan should not have omnidirectional superspeed. An object in motion stays in motion unless acted on by an outside force. Krogan should charge, stumble, and carry inertia like any other massive hulk enemy would, not rush up and circle-strafe like some wacko Sonic the Hedgehog FPS player would.

I much prefer the Krogan in ME2.  Yes, their charge is rather easily avoided.  But they're still a worthy opponent until you strip their defenses.  You can't emasculate them with the push of a win button anymore.  And, if nothing else, they are better animated now.  They were horrifying in ME1, but their limp-wristed melee attack animation left a lot to be desired.  "I got killed by... that?"

[Solaris Paradox]

Double post, ignore this.

Modifié par Solaris Paradox, 05 septembre 2010 - 03:24 .

[Solaris Paradox]

brfritos wrote...

No, it isn't, is real.

Check Ecael guide if you want confirmation.
http://social.biowar...5/index/2933016

You said she magically returns from the dead, not just that she can't die.<_<

[Harley_Dude]

Solaris Paradox wrote...

Kavadas wrote...

The AI is better?  Could of fooled me... I don't really notice any difference between either games whether it's squadmates or enemies.

Enemies don't run around like idiots because that happens to make console shooter controls hard to work with, and your squadmates have the sense not to shoot through the hallway wall in a vain attempt to attack the enemies in the next room. Also, they aren't constantly running back and forth to thwart my attempts to shoot around them, and aren't constantly positioning themselves between me and my target. I've also never encountered a case where my own squadmate and an enemy are hiding behind the same cover, completely unaware of each other's existence. It's happened in ME1, believe it or not.

I am playing ME1 as a vanguard on hardcore and have to agree with Solaris. It is freakin annoying trying to shoot anything with the shotgun. They must have used Barry Sanders for the motion capture. I'm glad I did the Insanity run with a soldier using the spray and pray assault rifle.

[Gorn Kregore]

tonnactus wrote...

AntiChri5 wrote...
But Mass Effect 2 is a better game then ME 1.

For people who like combat classes,yes.All other classes ar far more interesting in the first game,with far more possibilities then now.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

[Destroy Raiden_]

Yeah I didn’t like how every side quest bad guy bought their safe house from the same manufacture even the rooms where the same I knew when I walked in I could raid and prep for the fight in the next room the only one who did shop exclusively at the prefab safe house store was Major Kyle but only the building he was in was 1% different from most Cerberus facilities on the market.





Also Cerberus cells shopped at the same prefab under ground store too they did not change the layout for the various terrains you encountered.





If they allow multiple large planets exploration in 3 similar to how they did in 1 I’m not saying make every bad guys house different but maybe they could make up 3-4 different models and place them on different worlds that way we know there are more safe house makers in the galaxy.



I LOVED THE MAKO I just didn’t love the knife edge Chinese waterway styled sheer cliff mountains some where great but when the terrains says I can only go over these mountains I cringe I love mountain exploration but at points balancing on a sliver of mountain can be nerve racking (scared of heights) and tedious.



Also if you bring back the mako faster recharge of shields and armor plating please! If you maintained it well it wasn’t an issue but if you had no time to pull back and wait for a recharge it was bad also if you keep on repairs don’t make the mako stop or unable to atleast shoot the guns while stuck for repairs sometimes those geth would hunt me down and I could do nothing!





I wish more prothean artifacts where there on the worlds that worked! In 3 I want more random prothean artifacts but instead of giving me text explaing what happened in the artifact I want to play it the easiest example I can give is in 1 where you find the first floating sphere artifact and put in the gift the consort gave you well then a wall of text pops us saying well this is how a caveman met a prothean well instead of text the should’ve allowed you to play as the caveman getting abducted and experimented on that would’ve been neater then at the end of his story toss you back into your body then a mini movie plays where you’re in fpv looking up at the blue sky and which ever two squad mates you picked are talking to you asking if you’re ok and help you get up you then get dialogue options to either lie and say you’re ok or to tell them you had a disturbing vision.



Yeah bad guys shouting the same line in 1 was annoying slightly better in 2 not so many “ I will destroy you” in one battle.



I loved the open empty terrain but I wish a few more battles between random pirates or maws or any other life form would occur I hope in 3 when we get to explore say 20 planets 6 of them have their own beasts and pirates to randomly encounter on them. I don’t want every world I land on to be a shoot quest though I get enough of that in the main story but a few would be good also now that you mention it more trees would be nice in fact if they had more worlds like Overlord’s planet but explorable for miles and miles like in 1 I’d so love that it’d be perfect!



The inventory in 1 should’ve been done like Final Fantasy 7 and most other FFs do where they say here is your item x 10 instead of physically listing all 10 of the same shotgun. ME3 should do a system like that for its inventory and give us more armor, guns, grenades, ect in the inventory to collect and use w/o DLC to do it.

[JeanLuc761]

Kavadas wrote...
I pretty much felt the same way about the equally worthless and yawn-inducing recruiting and loyalty missions which, unfortunately, comprises the overwhelming bulk of ME2's content and dwarfs the game's actual plot missions three or four times over.

I apologize if it seems like I'm just nitpicking your argument but I'd like to discuss a couple of points on this. 

Maybe I'm just misinterpreting, but a LOT of players (yourself included) seem to be under the impression that the recruitment and loyalty quests should be treated as side-quests and not relevant to the main plot.  IF that's the case, you missed the point of the game entirely because that mindset is wrong on every possible level. 

The whole purpose of the game, other than defeating the Collectors, was to build a team, connect with that team, and to introduce some important subplots that will require resolving in Mass Effect 3 (quarian/geth conflict anyone?)  All of the recruitment and loyalty missions are part of the main quest.  I honestly think people are looking at Mass Effect 2 the entirely wrong way; it wasn't about the overarching Reaper conflict, it was entirely about Commander Shepard and his squad, and their mission to stop the Collector's who served as Reaper agents.  Period.

Second point, and this just comes down to opinion; how did you possibly find the massive variety of recruitment and loyalty missions to be yawn-inducing? 

[lazuli]

Destroy Raiden wrote...
Yeah bad guys shouting the same line in 1 was annoying slightly better in 2 not so many “ I will destroy you” in one battle.

Slightly better?  Granted, there is still repetition in the enemies' taunts and battle cries, but there is so much more that they can say now.  They talk about the skills you are using.  They talk about the skills they are using.  They react to people losing shields.  They react to people falling in battle.  They know what group or faction they represent.  They comment on your weapon choice.  Harbinger has something to say about each of your squadmates.  It sounds like Bioware really listened to the criticisms about enemy voice work in ME1.  They've set the bar high for ME3.

Maybe they'll fix the endless screaming glitch though.

[tonnactus]

Solaris Paradox wrote...

Krogan should not have omnidirectional superspeed. An object in motion stays in motion unless acted on by an outside force. Krogan should charge, stumble, and carry inertia like any other massive hulk enemy would, not rush up and circle-strafe like some wacko Sonic the Hedgehog FPS player would.

Nonsense.There is nor rule that says that big enemies have to be slow and clumsy. A grizzly run faster then a human.
You couldnt outrun him...
What you want bioware already did in the sequel, with the result that i dont take krogans serious anymore.
MAss Effect: Damn, a krogan.

Mass Effect 2: Oh, a krogan.I could relax know. Shotguns at 100 meters didnt do any damage.Seems like mordins medicine make krogans also dumber,so they couldnt use assault rifles anymore.

When an enemy has the ability to run up to the player and keep up with them unerringly, even when the player uses Storm in an attempt to escape, the combat system should not automatically force you to use your totally ineffective close-range melee attack instead of firing your shotgun,

Thats right.

and the enemy should never be immune to knockdown.

Why not? And which enemy you ever knocked down in the sequel? A krogan has a mass of 200 pounds, and some of them could also use combat exoskleletons,which prevent knockdown.

Modifié par tonnactus, 05 septembre 2010 - 05:21 .

[tonnactus]

Solaris Paradox wrote...


When you got the "Ally" achievements, it was because you fully intended to use those characters for entire straight playthroughs.

A very good thing.Because they have something to say even in sidemissions.Was totally worth it.

[tonnactus]

PD ORTA wrote...


Agreed. Gameplay is allways the most important factor, .

Then Gears of War is a better game then Mass Effect 2.Fine.

[tonnactus]

Solaris Paradox wrote...


Sounds like a glitch to me.

No glitch,intended.Because this character give "advises" to shepardt.Maybee it was cheaper this way.

[tonnactus]

JeanLuc761 wrote...
  I honestly think people are looking at Mass Effect 2 the entirely wrong way; it wasn't about the overarching Reaper conflict, it was entirely about Commander Shepard and his squad, and their mission to stop the Collector's who served as Reaper agents.  Period.

Right. And some people like me find most of this this boring, tedious and pointless. Out of 12 "loyality" missions only 4-5 were good for me because they enlarge my knowledge/view of the Mass Effect universe.(lets see,grunt,samara,legion and tali/thats it)
All other missions are a complete waste of time.To hell with mirandas sister,garrus dumb revenge and thanes son issues. I dont play a science fiction game to get some soap opera with shooting inbetween.

And why i have to kill billions of mercs to recruit someone.Just speaking with them and then did them a favour would make more sense,like with kasumi and zaeed. Would leave more place for really important things,like longer main missions.

Modifié par tonnactus, 05 septembre 2010 - 06:03 .

[JeanLuc761]

tonnactus wrote...

JeanLuc761 wrote...
  I honestly think people are looking at Mass Effect 2 the entirely wrong way; it wasn't about the overarching Reaper conflict, it was entirely about Commander Shepard and his squad, and their mission to stop the Collector's who served as Reaper agents.  Period.

1)  Right. And some people like me find most of this this boring, tedious and pointless. Out of 12 "loyality" missions only 4-5 were good for me because they enlarge my knowledge/view of the Mass Effect universe.(lets see,grunt,samara,legion and tali/thats it)

2) All other missions are a complete waste of time.To hell with mirandas sister,garrus dumb revenge and thanes son issues. I dont play a science fiction game to get some soap opera with shooting inbetween.

3) And why i have to kill billions of mercs to recruit someone.Just speaking with them and then did them a favour would make more sense,like with kasumi and zaeed. Would leave more place for really important things,like longer main missions.

Divided your response up so it's easier to answer.

1) I won't argue that you found them boring as that's purely a subjective point of view.  What I will argue is the pointlessness of them.  The majority of the game is built around recruiting and bonding with your squad before you're sent into almost certain death.  The focus isn't the Reapers, it's the people you're with.  It's a very powerful storytelling device designed to lend weight to the consequences suffered by your allies.  As Bioware said themselves, "This is a much more personal story for Commander Shepard."  If you were expecting the game to deal soley with the Reaper plot, then you went into this game with the wrong expectations.

2) This can mostly be answered by "see above," but with a slight addition.  The loyalty missions do not have to be relevant to the Reaper plot in order to be relevant to the player.  If your 12 squadmates were simply disposable assets with cardboard cutout personalities, then players would have no trouble leading them into the suicide mission un-prepared.  Instead, Bioware focused almost the entire game on the characters.  It should mean something when something happens to your squadmates. 

3) The recruitment and loyalty missions ARE the main missions.  Why do people have such trouble with this.  They're clearly labelled "main quests" and they're the focus of 70% of the game.  As to why you have to kill so many mercs and whatnot, all of those mercs are against Shepard and the game would be boring as hell if you could simply talk your way through everything. 

[tonnactus]

JeanLuc761 wrote...

  As Bioware said themselves, "This is a much more personal story for Commander Shepard."  If you were expecting the game to deal soley with the Reaper plot, then you went into this game with the wrong expectations.

Right.But because this game is called Mass Effect, i expected that at least 50 percent of the game would be about reapers and the Mass Effect Universe. No daddy,sister and other issues with shooting inbetween.
Only 4 missions out of 12 did this for me.

As to why you have to kill so many mercs and whatnot, all of those mercs are against Shepard and the game would be boring as hell if you could simply talk your way through everything. 

Way out talking?  If i want to hire someone, i shouldnt kill billions of mercs just to speak with this person. A complete waste of time. It should have be done like with kasumi or zaeed.Talking,doing them a favor and they join.And in this way,50 percent of pointless crap could be cutted.
I liked it to have most of my squadmates right after the citadel like in the first game.Without a lot shooting.

[kregano]

tonnactus wrote...

JeanLuc761 wrote...

  As Bioware said themselves, "This is a much more personal story for Commander Shepard."  If you were expecting the game to deal soley with the Reaper plot, then you went into this game with the wrong expectations.

Right.But because this game is called Mass Effect, i expected that at least 50 percent of the game would be about reapers and the Mass Effect Universe. No daddy,sister and other issues with shooting inbetween.
Only 4 missions out of 12 did this for me.

You can't do 50% of the game about the Reapers because of the fact that 1) the Reapers are in Dark Space, 2) fighting the Reapers would mean the game would have to take place on a ship, meaning almost all the side characters would be useless (as would Shepard, aside from giving predetermined orders), 3) the only way that Shepard and the galaxy could possibly defeat the Reapers would probably be some sort of Deus Ex Machina, which would ****** off everyone, 4) the Reapers are literally one of the least interesting things about Mass Effect and we already know too much thanks to ME1.

[Kronner]

I completly agree with OP. While Mass Effect 2 still has some flaws and could use richer RPG elements such as more exploration, actual weapon customization, armor parts that actualy make difference on Insanity, a better upgrade system and enemies that use wide range of combat tactics, tech and biotic powers. That said Mass Effect 1 is not really close to ME2 when you compare them head to head.



The much more intense and better combat alone makes ME2 much better than ME1.

Paragon/Renegade interrupts also make the game better.

Graphics and audio, it is no contest. ME1 had serious problems with both.

Mass Effect 1 has better Citadel and party banter on main missions.

[tonnactus]

kregano wrote...


You can't do 50% of the game about the Reapers because of the fact that

You can if bioware made the collectors a serious threat.One ship,one base.And that was a danger for humanity?Really?

Modifié par tonnactus, 05 septembre 2010 - 08:21 .

[tonnactus]

Kronner wrote...

Mass Effect 1 has better Citadel and party banter on main missions.

And on some side missions...

[MassEffect762]

Merge with Dissapointment Thread?

[JeanLuc761]

tonnactus wrote...

JeanLuc761 wrote...

  As Bioware said themselves, "This is a much more personal story for Commander Shepard."  If you were expecting the game to deal soley with the Reaper plot, then you went into this game with the wrong expectations.

Right.But because this game is called Mass Effect, i expected that at least 50 percent of the game would be about reapers and the Mass Effect Universe. No daddy,sister and other issues with shooting inbetween.
Only 4 missions out of 12 did this for me.

The characters and their relation to the protagonist doesn't qualify as being part of the Mass Effect Universe?  Clearly I've missed something here.

I get that you came into Mass Effect 2 with different expectations and you're understandably disappointed.  That said, I encourage you to look at it this way.  Operating under the assumption that the squadmates we met in Mass Effect 2 will stick with us in Mass Effect 3, Bioware accomplished exactly what they needed to in ME2.

1)  We learned more about how the Reapers operate (Protheans, final boss, operating through "agents", etc)

2) By focusing on the characters rather than the over-arching plotline, Bioware has given us something tangible to care about for the finale. 

There's a scene near the end of the game where Mordin tells Shepard that he called his nephew.  He did that because it gave him something physical, something personal, something worth fighting for.  The galaxy is too large for any one person to understand or even feel emphathy for.  But if he can find something smaller to fight for, something to care about...then it's all worth it. 

That's exactly what Bioware did in Mass Effect 2; they gave you a reason to care.  They gave you something (or someone) to fight for.  I don't have feelings for the galaxy as a whole...but I care for my friends and squadmates.  It's them I'm fighting for.

[Solaris Paradox]

...Wanting the second game to focus mainly on the Reapers is an unrealistic expectation. The grand revelation that there is a sentient fleet of evil starships bent on repeatedly wiping out all life in the galaxy has already revelate-ed itself in Mass Effect 1. There isn't a lot of story you can get out of "There's this big fleet of evil, big, powerful things and they're gonna F***. YOU. UP." Even the final game in the trilogy is probably going to go the Dragon Age route of focusing on political things and struggles between different races and factions, uniting the galaxy, etc., before some big final battle against the Reapers that happens during the final tenth or so of the game. Once the cat's out of the bag, it can only stay interesting for so long. This cat's out in darkspace, so it's going to sit in the background until it's called out to play.



Focusing on the characters rather than the world for part of the experience isn't necessarily a bad thing. You're under-counting the number of missions that expand on the world, however. While less "in your face" about that particular aspect, Thane's loyalty mission and Mordin's loyalty mission both contributed something of their own--Thane's mission contributed something to the player's understanding of the current state of galactic politics and law enforcement (as well as some insight into the criminal element); Mordin's digs deeper into the ethics of the genophage and the moral dillemma faced by those responsible for its proliferation. Jack's digs a little deeper into some of Cerberus's less admirable operations. Stuff doesn't have to jump up and down and shout "Hey, look at me! I'm expanding on the culture and mindset of an alien species! I DEMAND PIE," to make a worthwhile contribution to the depth of a fictional universe. Sometimes the subtler touches mean just as much as the major ones. Hell, even Jacob's mission shows how horribly wrong being marooned on an unknown alien world can go if the crap is allowed to hit the fan and spray all over the place. There are little things like that speckled all over this game.



More on-topic, it's still more interesting than driving across the same barren terrain and fighting the same lame-o mooks in the same four buildings over and over again.



Also, I never said krogans should be slow. I just said krogans shouldn't be able to turn on a dime at sixty miles per hour. or circle-strafe without regard for inertia. Because it's not possible to do that. Physics, you know. The heavier you are, the more weight you swing around, the harder it is to keep precise control at high speeds.

[brfritos]

Solaris Paradox wrote...

brfritos wrote...

No, it isn't, is real.

Check Ecael guide if you want confirmation.
http://social.biowar...5/index/2933016

You said she magically returns from the dead, not just that she can't die.<_<

You're nitpicking, man...

If she is carried by the seeker swarms in the next scene she appears like nothing had happen.

She magically return from the dead.