1700 réponses à ce sujet

[JaegerBane]

Moiaussi wrote...
The White Star is a Cruiser rather than a Frigate. As an analogy to the Normandy, the Defiant from DS9 comes to mind, which I think is rated as either an escort frigate or escort destroyer. It is also upgunned for its size class and pretty much a pure warship (rather than any of the Enterprise's, which are primarily exporatory/first contact vessels).

I was thinking the same - everything from the disproportinate firepower, mission profile, experimental nature and the stealth/cloaking system to the liberal use of alien ideas and technology, but still a masterpiece of human engineering seems to equate the Normandy with the Defiant.

Frankly the only similarity I can think of between the White Star and the Normandy is they're vaguely the same shape and both happen to have stealth systems (although, in the case of the White Star, that's a standard Minbari ship upgrade rather than a one-of-a-kind-in-the-fleet thing like the Normandy and Defiant's stealth). Practically everything else about them is different.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 15 octobre 2010 - 04:29 .

[smudboy]

JaegerBane wrote...
I mean, really... what similariity do the Shadows/Vorlons/Any other First Ones share with the Reapers aside from being very old?

They are SufficientlyAdvancedAliens.  At one point the Bab5 ones want to destroy entire planets, whereas the Reapers at some points want to wipe out all organic life.  They're also very cryptic and serious all the time.

What does Clark's regime *really* share with Cerberus other than the fact they're both evil? What do B5 and the Citadel really share other than simply being space stations? The comparisons are *extremely* superficial.

HumansAreBastards.  They're lead by arguable monsters, HumanityIsSuperior.

And if you can't start listing the many similarities between Babylon 5 and the Citadel?  Well then.

[JaegerBane]

smudboy wrote...

JaegerBane wrote...
I mean, really... what similariity do the Shadows/Vorlons/Any other First Ones share with the Reapers aside from being very old?

They are SufficientlyAdvancedAliens.  At one point the Bab5 ones want to destroy entire planets, whereas the Reapers at some points want to wipe out all organic life.  They're also very cryptic and serious all the time.

How is this any different to other stuff like the Borg or the Chigs? And, more to the point, why is it a better comparison than, say, the Reapers/Inhibitors from Revelation Space?

HumansAreBastards.  They're lead by arguable monsters, HumanityIsSuperior.

That's just the point, though. Cerberus has far more in common with stuff like the Syndicate from the X files rather than a despotic human government seen in hundreds of sci-fi stories since 1984.

And if you can't start listing the many similarities between Babylon 5 and the Citadel?  Well then.

Uh.... let's see....

One is human space station built to improve ties. Another is alien space station built to serve as a trap.

One is indestructible, one is quite clearly not.

One is the seat of govenment for virtually the whole galaxy. One is a one-time trading outpost that did time as a rebel colony and then finally became the UN in space.

One is 10-20 times larger than the other.

One is a Torus design, the other is an O'Neill cylinder design.

One relies on techincal maintenance, the other is autonomous.

Beyond the fact that both happen to play host to a government and have a garden, there isn't a hell of a lot that relates them any more than any other space station in sci-fi literature.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 15 octobre 2010 - 04:39 .

[Moiaussi]

Started a new thread to discuss the whole 'similarites with B5 (and anything else)' bit

[smudboy]

JaegerBane wrote...
How is this any different to other stuff like the Borg or the Chigs? And, more to the point, why is it a better comparison than, say, the Reapers/Inhibitors from Revelation Space?

I'm not saying it is better or less better.  I'm saying there are similarities.

That's just the point, though. Cerberus has far more in common with stuff like the Syndicate from the X files rather than a despotic human government seen in hundreds of sci-fi stories since 1984.

3, actually.

It doesn't matter, those are the similarities.  I'm no asking you to like them.

Uh.... let's see....

One is human space station built to improve ties. Another is alien space station built to serve as a trap.

Yet it's never used as a trap, and instead is a galactic hub of the galaxy where people of different species come together under an...Alliance?

One is indestructible, one is quite clearly not.

Who cares?

One is the seat of govenment for virtually the whole galaxy. One is a one-time trading outpost that did time as a rebel colony and then finally became the UN in space.

Seat of government?  UN of space?  Whoa, too different for my imagination!

One is 10-20 times larger than the other.

Who cares?

One is a Torus design, the other is an O'Neill cylinder design.

One relies on techincal maintenance, the other is autonomous.

So you mean people and things repair it?  A space station? 

Beyond the fact that both happen to play host to a government and have a garden, there isn't a hell of a lot that relates them any more than any other space station in sci-fi literature.

Fancy that.

[Darth Drago]

Jebel Krong wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...
*snip* nbot like the game has a lot of good written parts as it is of ourse.

indeed? the fact that it's the same group of writers who did both games, made the first one great and the second one rubbish? <_< i honestly don't know why (stupid) trolls are allowed to post their often outrageously inaccurate bile here, other than BW is more open to - even invalid - criticism, than you deserve.

Oh I’m sorry, did I hurt your little feelings that you have to resort to personal attacks on me? Be careful who you call a troll. If you think Mass Effect 2 is the godsend of writing then good for you. I don’t though. I think it stinks and that’s my f’ing opinion whether you like it or not. So bite me.

The lead writer on Mass Effect 1 was Drew Karpyshan.
The lead writer on Mass Effect 2 was Mac Walters with Drew Karpyshan below him.

Yes, both of these two and Lukas/Luke Kristianson, Chris L’Etoile and Patrick Weeks worked on both games but there are 4 new writers (Chris Hepler, Brian Kindregan, Malcolm Azania and Jay Turner) added that had no part in working on ME1 one of those likely to replace Mike Laidlaw. How much control a lead writer has in what gets put in the game probably varies from company to company or ego to ego. With Drew knocked down to just a writer and Mac in the lead spot for Mass Effect 2 it shows at least to me how unoriginal and stale Mac is in writing or adding content to the game.

Your argument about the same writer on both games is a joke right? George Lucas wrote all 6 Star Wars films and yet there are a lot of people who would say Episode 1 was the worst one made. So yes even using the same writer or group of writers can make a sequel or several sequels rubbish.

Modifié par Darth Drago, 15 octobre 2010 - 08:05 .

[Moiaussi]

Darth Drago wrote...

Your argument about the same writer on both games is a joke right? George Lucas wrote all 6 Star Wars films and yet there are a lot of people who would say Episode 1 was the worst one made. So yes even using the same writer or group of writers can make a sequel or several sequels rubbish.

Great example.

[Terror_K]

Moiaussi wrote...

The citadel doesn't really count in that there are other babylon stations. DS9 could be just as much an influence due to the proximity to the wormhole. Also the game is primarily set off of the station rather than on.

More the fact that both are centres of diplomacy in neutral space for all the major races. DS9 is not so much, dealing only directly with the Bajorans and Cardassians. There are no major represenatives on DS9 unlike B5 and The Citadel.

The White Star is a Cruiser rather than a Frigate. As an analogy to the Normandy, the Defiant from DS9 comes to mind, which I think is rated as either an escort frigate or escort destroyer. It is also upgunned for its size class and pretty much a pure warship (rather than any of the Enterprise's, which are primarily exporatory/first contact vessels).

More the fact that both The White Star and The Normandy are experimental, state-of-the-art vessels based on hybrid technology between two races. But if you include the Defiant's cloak I suppose that could count too. All three also get destroyed and then another replacement made.

The concept of Lazarus projects (and or Lazarus) predates B5 by rather a long time.

True. But both were actually called "The Lazarus Project" and both were used to bring back somebody to life who had been killed in an attack on their ship using pretty much the same means.

[Nightwriter]

Moiaussi wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...

Your argument about the same writer on both games is a joke right? George Lucas wrote all 6 Star Wars films and yet there are a lot of people who would say Episode 1 was the worst one made. So yes even using the same writer or group of writers can make a sequel or several sequels rubbish.

Great example.

But I heard George Lucas gave most of his ideas to other writers, who wrote a lot of the screenplay.

Meaning he can't really be credited as the writer of both sets of movies.

[JaegerBane]

smudboy wrote...
Who cares?

Presumably you do, Smud. Your point seems to rest on that the similarities are everywhere. But when the differences are pointed out your response is 'I don't care'. If you don't care about any and all differences between the materials then the assertion there are more similarities than differences is effectively talking nonsense.

What other 'similarities' are going to come up? That they're both set in space? That they both have humans in it? That they are both set in the future? That they're both written in english?

Modifié par JaegerBane, 16 octobre 2010 - 04:03 .

[smudboy]

JaegerBane wrote...

smudboy wrote...
Who cares?

Presumably you do, Smud. Your point seems to rest on that the similarities are everywhere. But when the differences are pointed out your response is 'I don't care'. If you don't care about any and all differences between the materials then the assertion there are more similarities than differences is effectively talking nonsense.

What other 'similarities' are going to come up? That they're both set in space? That they both have humans in it? That they are both set in the future? That they're both written in english?

Yes, because we're describing similarities.  By virtue of it being a different piece of media it's going to be different.  It's no great wonder that artists get inspired, borrow and steal from other artworks.  Finding patterns in things is easy.  Now if you don't like the exercise, more power to you.  I believe the original poster found a whole bunch with Bab5 and ME2; to list the differences is the nonsense.

[TMA LIVE]

Nightwriter wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...

Your argument about the same writer on both games is a joke right? George Lucas wrote all 6 Star Wars films and yet there are a lot of people who would say Episode 1 was the worst one made. So yes even using the same writer or group of writers can make a sequel or several sequels rubbish.

Great example.

But I heard George Lucas gave most of his ideas to other writers, who wrote a lot of the screenplay.

Meaning he can't really be credited as the writer of both sets of movies.

Correct. George Lucas wrote the "stories" of each movie. New Hope, Phantom Menace, and Revenge of the Sith are the only ones he wrote without another writer. And with Empire Strikes Back, he wasn't the writer at all. People also seem to overlook that George also didn't direct Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi.

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 16 octobre 2010 - 04:20 .

[Frybread76]

TMA LIVE wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...

Your argument about the same writer on both games is a joke right? George Lucas wrote all 6 Star Wars films and yet there are a lot of people who would say Episode 1 was the worst one made. So yes even using the same writer or group of writers can make a sequel or several sequels rubbish.

Great example.

But I heard George Lucas gave most of his ideas to other writers, who wrote a lot of the screenplay.

Meaning he can't really be credited as the writer of both sets of movies.

Correct. George Lucas wrote the "stories" of each movie. New Hope, Phantom Menace, and Revenge of the Sith are the only ones he wrote without another writer. And with Empire Strikes Back, he wasn't the writer at all. People also seem to overlook that George also didn't direct Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi.

Yes.  Lucas also didn't write the novelizations of the movies.

[smudboy]

If a story sucks, it sucks. It doesn't matter who wrote it, or that they wrote something great beforehand, or that it's coming from something good or bad.

I still don't think the issue is the writers, though. It's the lack of power the writers have over production, and the direction the production took. If the production occurred after all the writing took place, I'd be horrified.

[TMA LIVE]

Frybread76 wrote...

TMA LIVE wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...

Your argument about the same writer on both games is a joke right? George Lucas wrote all 6 Star Wars films and yet there are a lot of people who would say Episode 1 was the worst one made. So yes even using the same writer or group of writers can make a sequel or several sequels rubbish.

Great example.

But I heard George Lucas gave most of his ideas to other writers, who wrote a lot of the screenplay.

Meaning he can't really be credited as the writer of both sets of movies.

Correct. George Lucas wrote the "stories" of each movie. New Hope, Phantom Menace, and Revenge of the Sith are the only ones he wrote without another writer. And with Empire Strikes Back, he wasn't the writer at all. People also seem to overlook that George also didn't direct Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi.

Yes.  Lucas also didn't write the novelizations of the movies.

Scripts. Not novels. You know, the thing people read on set to get direction, and memorize dialogue?

And by story, I mean the 4 page treatment you write before handing it to someone else to write 120 pages of screenplay.

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 16 octobre 2010 - 04:34 .

[Frybread76]

TMA LIVE wrote...

Frybread76 wrote...

TMA LIVE wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...

Your argument about the same writer on both games is a joke right? George Lucas wrote all 6 Star Wars films and yet there are a lot of people who would say Episode 1 was the worst one made. So yes even using the same writer or group of writers can make a sequel or several sequels rubbish.

Great example.

But I heard George Lucas gave most of his ideas to other writers, who wrote a lot of the screenplay.

Meaning he can't really be credited as the writer of both sets of movies.

Correct. George Lucas wrote the "stories" of each movie. New Hope, Phantom Menace, and Revenge of the Sith are the only ones he wrote without another writer. And with Empire Strikes Back, he wasn't the writer at all. People also seem to overlook that George also didn't direct Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi.

Yes.  Lucas also didn't write the novelizations of the movies.

Scripts. Not novels. You know, the thing people read on set to get direction, and memories dialogue?

And by story, I mean the 4 page treatment you write before handing it to someone else to write 120 pages of screenplay.

Memorize, not memories, professor.

And Lucas did not write the novelizations himself.

[TMA LIVE]

Frybread76 wrote...

Memorize, not memories, professor.

And Lucas did not write the novelizations himself.

Typo. And you mean scripts. Don't know what that is, look it up.

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 16 octobre 2010 - 04:44 .

[Frybread76]

TMA LIVE wrote...

Frybread76 wrote...

TMA LIVE wrote...

Frybread76 wrote...

TMA LIVE wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...

Your argument about the same writer on both games is a joke right? George Lucas wrote all 6 Star Wars films and yet there are a lot of people who would say Episode 1 was the worst one made. So yes even using the same writer or group of writers can make a sequel or several sequels rubbish.

Great example.

But I heard George Lucas gave most of his ideas to other writers, who wrote a lot of the screenplay.

Meaning he can't really be credited as the writer of both sets of movies.

Correct. George Lucas wrote the "stories" of each movie. New Hope, Phantom Menace, and Revenge of the Sith are the only ones he wrote without another writer. And with Empire Strikes Back, he wasn't the writer at all. People also seem to overlook that George also didn't direct Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi.

Yes.  Lucas also didn't write the novelizations of the movies.

Scripts. Not novels. You know, the thing people read on set to get direction, and memories dialogue?

And by story, I mean the 4 page treatment you write before handing it to someone else to write 120 pages of screenplay.

Memorize, not memories, professor.

And Lucas did not write the novelizations himself.

Typo. And you mean scripts. Don't know what that is, look it up.

No, I mean novelizations, which is not what you guys were talking about but I just threw that fact in there.  Sorry if it caused confusion, but it further proves that Lucas really is not the genius or master storyteller he wants people to believe he is.  He came up with the ideas and characters and such, but then let other better storytellers flesh out the details.

[Pacifien]

1. Trim out the excessive quotes in your posts. People are reading the same thread as you, they don't need the past five posts quoted back at them all the time. 2. Return the discussion to Mass Effect 2, please. There is an Off-Topic Forum if you want to continue with the other discussions.

[TMA LIVE]

Frybread76 wrote...

No, I mean novelizations, which is not what you guys were talking about but I just threw that fact in there.  Sorry if it caused confusion, but it further proves that Lucas really is not the genius or master storyteller he wants people to believe he is.  He came up with the ideas and characters and such, but then let other better storytellers flesh out the details.

Whatever. Sorry if I sounded rude.

Anyways, I think the main problem with ME2 is that the writers had to write within what Casey and crew want. They wanted the Normandy to get destroy, Shepard's abilities scaled to level 1, a gap of time to go by, and for Shepard to have to recruit a team for a suicide mission where Shepard can die. Plus give a reason why ME1 LI's can't come with you. And the Reapers don't show up till the third game.

Now someone can probably still write up a better story around all that, but it didn't happen. Or maybe the story was originally better, but things got cut. Who knows.

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 16 octobre 2010 - 04:58 .

[Babli]

TMA LIVE wrote...
Or maybe the story was originally better, but things got cut. Who knows.

Probably this. They cut out a lot of material. When all DLCs will be out, game will be much better.

Still better than case of Mafia 2.

[Dasim4]

Just finished ME2 for the first time last night. Overall I enjoyed it. I missed some of the inventory. Primarily I didn't like the lack of armors and weapons. I liked the scanning method to pick them up much better than actually collecting things the way we did in ME1 but it wasn't fleshed out enough.

Planet Scanning was a giant black hole of suck. Hated it. They should have allowed for more upgrades for the scanner where eventually you could scan a whole planet. It really annoyed me that no matter whether the panet was first labled Rich or Poor you had to scan the entire planet to deplete it. A poor planet should have had 1 or 2 deposits just like a rich planet has once it drops to Poor. That way you would have the chance to get lucky, hit the deposits quickly, and get the hell off that lousy planet. Regardless it was boring as hell and I hope for ME3 they come up with a way to make planet exploration interesting because so far they have failed miserably at that part of both games.

Recruiting team mates was fine by me. I actually enjoyed finding them and doing their missions. The big issue I had with this was that the game was very imbalanced as far as primary and secondary missions went. There was a lot of build up time but when it finally came down to time for the main missions they were over way too quickly.

Finally the giant Robot ending was nothing short of laughable. I was so disappointed by the ending of the game. All that build up to the Collector base only to find they were building a giant Terminator robot. I mean could it look any more like a Terminator endoskeleton? And then to be able to take down such a huge monstrosity, regardless of it's condition, with a few machine gun bullets, was inexcusibly cheap and silly. I really couldn't believe they went in that direction with it. And the whole end fight, aside from the robot, was nearly an exact duplicate of an earlier mission. This was all very poorly done and felt rushed like they ran out of ideas and just threw the last part together.

At the end of ME1 I had the feeling that it would make a great movie. If they made ME2 into a movie I would end  up laughing at the giant robot part. It's just stupid.
 
In the end though it was a good game with a very poor, letdown of an ending. I also don't feel like going through it the way I did with ME1 because one of the main reasons for doing that was the hunt for awesome armors and weapons. Unfortunately that was mostly removed this time around.

[Iakus]

Babli wrote...

TMA LIVE wrote...
Or maybe the story was originally better, but things got cut. Who knows.

Probably this. They cut out a lot of material. When all DLCs will be out, game will be much better.

Still better than case of Mafia 2.

I find the concept of "story costs extra" to be unbearably sad.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Someone claimed in another, now-closed, thread that one of the flaws in ME2 is that Shep went through the Omega 4 relay without any plan to deal with an entire world of Collectors if they found a planet.



The problem with that criticism is that, after the disabled Collector vessel mission, it was revealed that the Omega 4 relay connects to an area where the probability of finding planets is effectively zero. The conclusion is reached that they'll be dealing with a base, not a planet.



Now, if you want to say that they had no idea if they'd be dealing with a multitude of bases, you'd have a little more ground to stand on.

[Iakus]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Someone claimed in another, now-closed, thread that one of the flaws in ME2 is that Shep went through the Omega 4 relay without any plan to deal with an entire world of Collectors if they found a planet.

The problem with that criticism is that, after the disabled Collector vessel mission, it was revealed that the Omega 4 relay connects to an area where the probability of finding planets is effectively zero. The conclusion is reached that they'll be dealing with a base, not a planet.

Now, if you want to say that they had no idea if they'd be dealing with a multitude of bases, you'd have a little more ground to stand on.

Actually, I believe the arguement is that TIM starts building the team (with Shepard as his gofer) without knowing what's on the other side of the Relay.  I have said that it would have made far more sense, story-wise, if the information gained on the Collector Ship had been obtained much sooner.  Say, during Freedom's Progress.  Or even if TIM had it since the beginning of the game.  Either way, he sends Shepard dossiers based on that information.

And I have said that a much cooler twist ending would have been that there was a second Collector base that Shepard never learns of, or doesn't learn about until the very end.  And it's building a dark space relay.  With teh Reapers waking up, that would have been far more ominous.