1700 réponses à ce sujet

[Frybread76]

Jebel Krong wrote...

well in all fairness we not be able to appreciate what me2 sets up till me3 arrives. i never said that me2 was perfect - it's far from, it, it's just closer in so many more ways than me1 is. the way the collector story unfolded was good, but the reaper was crap and made no sense, and it's appearance even moreso. however, taking the idea of building the team by recruiting all the different individuals and then having all their loyalty missions in addition to the main was absolute gold, imo, and not having them all connected to the main story helped further expand and establish the universe, with even more diverse locations, which had only been spoken of before. as long as the pattern isn't repeated again for me3 (i.e. please don't use the template AGAIN bioware), we should be able to take everything from me2 into me3 and really drive the main story to it's cnclusion, with plenty of material left to explore for new characters/gestating sidequests and, most importantly, our current squaddies and LIs.

The recruitment missions were fine, it's the loyalty missions that I thought were too much and disconnected from the main Collector/Reaper plot.

[Frybread76]

Jebel Krong wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Jebel Krong wrote...

no, it had a plot, just not the one you wanted. thankfully the game wasn't made for just you, or even me.

Why so bleak, man?

It's sad, but people who were unsatisfied with certain aspects of ME2 have to defend their dissatisfaction so much that it comes across like they didn't like anything about the game, which really isn't true at all.

I think I could go on forever about all the things I liked about the game, and I really admired its storytelling ability and the individual situations it presented me with. It doesn't get talked about cuz this is a disappointment thread.

Unfortunately, if you complain or criticize, you're likely to be labeled a hater, meaning you have to defend the fact that your complaints are legitimate points that you bring up because you really care about the game. But no matter how much you say it, there will always be some people who just won't listen, standard.

yeah but there's your attitude, then there's this particular brand of lunacy:

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

It barely had a plot. The plot was weak at best, it was all about the characters, who's issues had nothing at all to do with the overall plot. If ME3 brings back at least most of your squadmates in important roles, then i will see the reason why ME2 did what it did, to recruit a team to combat the reapers; but if ME3 scraps all the ME2 squaddies to little VS roles, and makes you recruit brand new squaddies, then ME2 will have felt like a giant waste of time, since it didn't advance the story, at all.

the first sentence doesn't even make sense, and you contradict yourself within it... 

Insults.  How mature.  Let me ask you this, would you be happy if ME3's structure was the same as ME2?

[Jebel Krong]

Frybread76 wrote...

Insults.  How mature.  Let me ask you this, would you be happy if ME3's structure was the same as ME2?

post something retarded or self-contradictory and you will get called on it, and i won't apologise for that, ever.

and no - not exactly the same structure again, i wouldn't be happy. however i do think they will do something reasonably similar, as it seems to be their "game template" for now. i expect at least a few new squad-mates, and probably missions for them, along with some for the current (surviving) squad-mates, and whomever your LI is. what could/would stop them doing the same thing again, too much, is of course the fact that you could have a lot of dead people and reconciling all that, without pulling the same "clean break" trick at the beginning of me2 again, will be tricky. i don't think people would accept another reset, either.

[SimonTheFrog]

What makes you think that there is a "game template"?

ME1 gave you the crew as a freeby on your quest for the holy Conduit. So it was pretty linear. In ME2 your mission is to build a team of specialists to fight the unknown beyond omega4-relay. I don't see a pattern yet... neither should you.

My guess is that there are enough crew members now for the third part, especially if you combine people from ME1 and ME2. If you killed all in ME2 the game will probably give you some generic NPC's as replacement. There, my next guess is that the story will again follow a more linear, dramatic course like in ME1 instead of the modular recruiting thing of ME2.

[Nightwriter]

Boys and girls, let us please not call Pacifien's attention to this thread.

I don't think there's any reason to worry ME3 will follow ME2's pattern. It's the end of the trilogy - you can expect story.

[Jebel Krong]

Nightwriter wrote...

Boys and girls, let us please not call Pacifien's attention to this thread.

I don't think there's any reason to worry ME3 will follow ME2's pattern. It's the end of the trilogy - you can expect story.

i think it will follow the template, just not with individuals but rather races/factions to unite against the reapers in a grand finale.

(the template is the same one BW has generally been using since the KOTOR days).

[Epic777]

As a wrote in a now locked thread:
I think me1 had a better story becauseof a few reasons:->Better antagonist in Sarenespecially when dealing with an army of face lasses, personality-less mooks such as the collectors, me1 krogan, geth, darkspawn, zerg, splicers, borg etc.You need a antagonist to be their face, their voice such as Shodan, Andrew Ryan, Kerrigan etc. Me2 does not mhave that and that's the one thing that was badly missed.

->All of the focus of me1 story was stopping Saren, hell you have no idea what Saren is really up to or even who the Reapers are until the the last parts of the game. The player knows Saren is looking for the conduit and again the player has no idea what that is but he has to find it. The rest of the me universe was 'skipped through', the genophage, geth and quarianconflict etc. Even Cerberus was given a casual glance.

->Everything came together, everything is wrapped up, why Saren needed krogan, rachni and geth, what the conduit was, who the reapers are. Importantly everything makes sense.

However I don't hate me2'story it is above average but not exceptional. Since it does not have the linear focus of me1 the player sees more of the me universe which I did like plus it avoids the planets of hats which I also like. (me1 leaned towards that;  asari being space elves, the krogan: space orcs).  I disagree is doesn't progress the story, as it answers the big question of why the reapers reap the galaxy every 50,000 years which is the most important question of me1. We know a little more about the reapers, their weaponry can be adapted, motivation, the fact all you are seeing of a reaper is its shell and also reaper indoctrinate subconsciously  Both games had good presentation which should underestimated. As story presented in the media has to be well told and well written. 

On a side note: for those exceptionallydissatisfied with the story how should it have been

Modifié par Epic777, 19 octobre 2010 - 03:52 .

[Nightwriter]

Half the people I talk to who rave about ME2 and say they like it more than ME1 list the fact that it breaks the pattern as one of the top reasons they like it so much.

I never understand this. If taking away the pattern means no story, I'd rather keep the pattern.

[Nightwriter]

Epic777 wrote...

 As a wrote in a now locked thread:

 I think me1 had a better story because
of a few reasons:
->Better antagonist in Saren
especially when dealing with an army of face lasses, personality-less
mooks such as the collectors, me1 krogan, geth, darkspawn, zerg,
splicers, borg etc.
You need a antagonist to be their face,
their voice such as Shodan, Andrew Ryan, Kerrigan etc. Me2 does not
have that and that's the one thing that was badly missed.

->All of the focus of me1 story was
stopping Saren, hell you have no idea what Saren is really up to or
even who the Reapers are until the the last parts of the game. The
player knows Saren is looking for the conduit and again the player
has no idea what that is but he has to find it. The rest of the me
universe was 'skipped through', the genophage, geth and quarian
conflict etc. Even Cerberus was given a casual glance.


->Everything came together,
everything is wrapped up, why Saren needed krogan, rachni and geth,
what the conduit was, who the reapers are. Importantly everything
makes sense

I agree.

Epic777 wrote...

However I don't hate me2'story it is
above average but not exceptional. Since it does not have the linear
focus of me1 the player sees more of the me universe which I did like
plus it avoids the planets of hats which I also like. I disagree is
doesn't progress the story, as it answers the big question of why the
reapers reap the galaxy every 50,000 years which is the most
important question of me1.

I realize this, but for some reason it didn't arrive very well. I think it was because the great answer to the mystery was delivered alongside the human goo baby Reaper, which kind of made you go "wat".

Epic777 wrote...

On a side note: for those exceptionally
dissatisfied with the story how should it have been?

I firmly believe that if we're just going to focus on the characters the game should be about important galactic events and instability featuring each of the characters.

[lazuli]

Epic777 wrote...
especially when dealing with an army of face lasses, personality-less
mooks such as the collectors, me1 krogan, geth, darkspawn, zerg,
splicers, borg etc.
You need a antagonist to be their face,
their voice such as Shodan, Andrew Ryan, Kerrigan etc. Me2 does not
have that and that's the one thing that was badly missed.

Harbinger.  You might think he's deficient or unsatisfactory as a villain, but he's certainly vocal, if nothing else.

And not that Epic777 is embodying this in his post, but I don't understand how ME2 has nothing to do with the plot.  It built on the motivation of the Reapers.  Many people are disappointed with what little was revealed, and some would have preferred to be left completely in the dark about what the Reapers hope to accomplish through destroying civilizations.  But just because you aren't satisfied with what ME2 revealed about the Reapers doesn't mean it's accurate to say it has nothing to do with the over-arching ME plot.

[Nightwriter]

That's just what we say to describe how lost and disconnected we felt in ME2.

I must say, when I was chasing after the Collectors, I did not really feel like it had anything to do with the Reapers.

[lazuli]

Nightwriter wrote...

That's just what we say to describe how lost and disconnected we felt in ME2.

I must say, when I was chasing after the Collectors, I did not really feel like it had anything to do with the Reapers.

So it's all about feeling then?  We know basically from the start that the Collectors were working for the Reapers.  And later on in the game we learn that the Reapers converted the Protheans into Collectors.  I agree that the Collectors didn't feel terribly immediate, but I'm not sure why that is.  All the pieces are there.  I guess if some loyalty missions involved Collectors it could have worked out better.

[Epic777]

On a side note I have edited my post and damn people jumped on my post like a hobo on a ham sandwich

[Nightwriter]

Epic, two people responded to it.

You've hit the big times, kid.

lazuli wrote...

So it's all about feeling then?  We know basically from the start that the Collectors were working for the Reapers.  And later on in the game we learn that the Reapers converted the Protheans into Collectors.  I agree that the Collectors didn't feel terribly immediate, but I'm not sure why that is.  All the pieces are there.  I guess if some loyalty missions involved Collectors it could have worked out better.

I totally agree.

That's the thing, we're told there's a connection, but we're not really shown. We're told the Collector threat is important, but we're not really shown. We're told they're going to attack Earth, but we're not really shown. We're told we need to do this and that, but we're not really shown.

So basically ME2 breaks the show-don't-tell rule in many ways. And that's a pretty important rule.

[Moiaussi]

Frybread76 wrote...

But if this was a WWII movies Shepard's team would have been made up on soldiers whose job it would be to serve under their commander and fight their enemy.  The squad mates in ME2 don't have that obligation because they aren't military and they aren't Cerberus.  Several of them are friends of Shepard's, several can be love interests, one has a man-crush (or woman-crush?) on Shepard, some are mercs who were paid to accompany Shepard and one is a Jedi who pretty much abandons her 400-year-old search for a vampire who has murdered across the galaxy to fight the Collectors.

We can say that some of them would still have served Shepard because of the threat posed by the Collectors.  However, the Collectors were only targeting human colonies in the Terminus Systems at the time of ME2.

In a lot of WWII movies, the squad members 'aren't military' either, not yet, especially if the movie starts in boot camp. They are merely a bunch of people who either signed up to 'fight them Germans' or were drafted. Those who are drafted don't want to be there, and don't have any reason to be there other than that they are ordered to be. Even those who chose to be there are usually not porfessional soldiers.

This is even more so in a Vietnam movie.

The point is that they don't have any more reason to be there other than 'collectors are killing colonies' aka 'commies are taking over the world' (vietnam) aka 'germans are taking over the world' (WWI or WWII) or similar for other wars. There doesn't have to be any deeper reason. In fact, if they all had ties to the enemy other than the reasons for war, the movies would come across as very unnatural. Note that WWI and Vietnam had no direct threats to the US (unless you count a threat to US trade and shipping with Britain 'a direct threat to the US' at a time Britain was already at war with Germany).

[lazuli]

Nightwriter wrote...
I totally agree.

That's the thing, we're told there's a connection, but we're not really shown. We're told the Collector threat is important, but we're not really shown. We're told they're going to attack Earth, but we're not really shown. We're told we need to do this and that, but we're not really shown.

So basically ME2 breaks the show-don't-tell rule in many ways. And that's a pretty important rule.

Except on my first playthrough I did feel that the Collectors were a bit more immediate.  I didn't know the structure (after this many missions, Horizon; after this many, Disabled Collector Vessel).  And if you walk around the ship the nameless ensigns talk about recent Collector attacks.  Again, though, this is all telling.  Showing would have been nice too, even if it were a cutscene depicting an attack like the extremely memorable cutscene before Eden Prime in ME1.

[Moiaussi]

Nightwriter wrote...

I totally agree.

That's the thing, we're told there's a connection, but we're not really shown. We're told the Collector threat is important, but we're not really shown. We're told they're going to attack Earth, but we're not really shown. We're told we need to do this and that, but we're not really shown.

So basically ME2 breaks the show-don't-tell rule in many ways. And that's a pretty important rule.

This I agree with, and there is no reason to conclude they are going to attack earth anyway simply by the number of pods. There is no way that a cruiser class hull could carry even a decent sized city's entire populace just around part of the inner hull, let alone all of Earth's. The writers really have trouble with concepts of scale. Near as can be told, from populations we see in game, the Alliance is 'Earth and some outposts.' How it manages to compete even with the Volus or Hanar or Elcor strains belief, especially since in the Earthborn background, Earth is portrayed as overpopulated and violent.

[Nightwriter]

I believe ME1 did do a better job of showing and not telling.

Not only this, but I believe there was something more motivating about having to fight for the right to go after Saren. The Council denies you at first, you must push to achieve action. This gets you involved.

In ME2, not only is the threat not clearly identified during the attack of the Normandy, but rather than pushing to retaliate, like with Saren, TIM pretty much introduces the Collectors to you through dialogue and tells you the whole plot of the story, as well as how to act. "These are the bad guys; you don't like them; that's who you're going after; it's important; that's why I'm necessary; that's why your friends don't like you anymore; that's why the Council won't help you; that's why these people are necessary; go get them."

Modifié par Nightwriter, 19 octobre 2010 - 04:36 .

[Frybread76]

Jebel Krong wrote...

Frybread76 wrote...

Insults.  How mature.  Let me ask you this, would you be happy if ME3's structure was the same as ME2?

post something retarded or self-contradictory and you will get called on it, and i won't apologise for that, ever.

and no - not exactly the same structure again, i wouldn't be happy. however i do think they will do something reasonably similar, as it seems to be their "game template" for now. i expect at least a few new squad-mates, and probably missions for them, along with some for the current (surviving) squad-mates, and whomever your LI is. what could/would stop them doing the same thing again, too much, is of course the fact that you could have a lot of dead people and reconciling all that, without pulling the same "clean break" trick at the beginning of me2 again, will be tricky. i don't think people would accept another reset, either.

So you're the Bioware forums policeman?  Do they know this?

[Moiaussi]

Nightwriter wrote...

I believe ME1 did do a better job of showing and not telling.

Not only this, but I believe there was something more motivating about having to fight for the right to go after Saren. The Council denies you at first, you must push to achieve action. This gets you involved.

In ME2, not only is the threat not clearly identified during the attack of the Normandy, but rather than pushing to retaliate, like with Saren, TIM pretty much introduces the Collectors to you through dialogue and tells you the whole plot of the story, as well as how to act. "These are the bad guys; you don't like them; that's who you're going after; it's important; that's why I'm necessary; that's why your friends don't like you anymore; that's why the Council won't help you; that's why these people are necessary; go get them."

Pretty much. Frankly I would have preferred that you start with wrap ups for any ME1 characters departing (Wrex going back to his homeworld was very believable given his ME1 background, and the VS could have been simply reassigned ala various Star Trek characters, Garrus could have made Spectre and given new duties, etc), followed by introductions to to a new unit hand selected by either the Spectre commander (newly appointed? Perhaps Anderson as an apology now that they have more reason to believe he really was set up by Saren?) or by Hackett, or perhaps even by the Council.

Then loyalty missions could involve incidents over the course of investigating the collectors with more room for the collectors to be feel more important and/or learn more about them. There could still have been strays added to the unit (such as Grunt), but that could have been investigating Okeer's links to the Collectors rather than recruiting Okeer. Speaking of which, Okeer did have links to the collectors, but that whole point was sort of treated as irrelevent by the plot, like the writers actually were going somewhere interesting, then forgot they were doing so in favour of 'OOOH, they'll like a Krogan!'

[Frybread76]

Moiaussi wrote...

Frybread76 wrote...

But if this was a WWII movies Shepard's team would have been made up on soldiers whose job it would be to serve under their commander and fight their enemy.  The squad mates in ME2 don't have that obligation because they aren't military and they aren't Cerberus.  Several of them are friends of Shepard's, several can be love interests, one has a man-crush (or woman-crush?) on Shepard, some are mercs who were paid to accompany Shepard and one is a Jedi who pretty much abandons her 400-year-old search for a vampire who has murdered across the galaxy to fight the Collectors.

We can say that some of them would still have served Shepard because of the threat posed by the Collectors.  However, the Collectors were only targeting human colonies in the Terminus Systems at the time of ME2.

In a lot of WWII movies, the squad members 'aren't military' either, not yet, especially if the movie starts in boot camp. They are merely a bunch of people who either signed up to 'fight them Germans' or were drafted. Those who are drafted don't want to be there, and don't have any reason to be there other than that they are ordered to be. Even those who chose to be there are usually not porfessional soldiers.

This is even more so in a Vietnam movie.

The point is that they don't have any more reason to be there other than 'collectors are killing colonies' aka 'commies are taking over the world' (vietnam) aka 'germans are taking over the world' (WWI or WWII) or similar for other wars. There doesn't have to be any deeper reason. In fact, if they all had ties to the enemy other than the reasons for war, the movies would come across as very unnatural. Note that WWI and Vietnam had no direct threats to the US (unless you count a threat to US trade and shipping with Britain 'a direct threat to the US' at a time Britain was already at war with Germany).

In just about any WWII movie I've seen the movies were about the squad mates of a U.S. military unit, which is why I found your comment confusing.

And even those who are drafted are not in very similar situations to Shepard's crew, since draftees are forced to fight.  They have no choice.  They are soldiers serving under a commander because they were drafted, that is their reason.

Shepard's crew mates don't have a reason other than the Collectors are targeting human colonies, which doesn't affect any of the aliens except for Samara because she's a Jedi.  The other aliens stick with Shepard for their own flimsy personal reasons or they are his friends from ME1.

And, IMO, Jack wouldn't stick around if she was true to her character.

[Epic777]

I will mention this, in my previous posts one of the reasons why I liked me1 story more partly because it was it was so focused on finding the conduit. However as a result the rich universe me had was largely ignored (me1 learned towards the planet of hats). While in me2 it lost the focus (a bad thing) it did explore the me universe more (a good thing).

[Nightwriter]

Moiaussi wrote...

Pretty much. Frankly I would have preferred that you start with wrap ups for any ME1 characters departing (Wrex going back to his homeworld was very believable given his ME1 background, and the VS could have been simply reassigned ala various Star Trek characters, Garrus could have made Spectre and given new duties, etc), followed by introductions to to a new unit hand selected by either the Spectre commander (newly appointed? Perhaps Anderson as an apology now that they have more reason to believe he really was set up by Saren?) or by Hackett, or perhaps even by the Council.

Then loyalty missions could involve incidents over the course of investigating the collectors with more room for the collectors to be feel more important and/or learn more about them. There could still have been strays added to the unit (such as Grunt), but that could have been investigating Okeer's links to the Collectors rather than recruiting Okeer. Speaking of which, Okeer did have links to the collectors, but that whole point was sort of treated as irrelevent by the plot, like the writers actually were going somewhere interesting, then forgot they were doing so in favour of 'OOOH, they'll like a Krogan!'

It's true, it was kind of frustrating the way they tease you with Grunt's plot relevance, why tell us he's made from Collector technology if it doesn't really mean anything? 

Anyway, yeah, you've nailed the kind of story I would have preferred. I felt like the story they gave us was just an excuse to bring the characters together.

[Moiaussi]

Frybread76 wrote...

In just about any WWII movie I've seen the movies were about the squad mates of a U.S. military unit, which is why I found your comment confusing.

And even those who are drafted are not in very similar situations to Shepard's crew, since draftees are forced to fight.  They have no choice.  They are soldiers serving under a commander because they were drafted, that is their reason.

Shepard's crew mates don't have a reason other than the Collectors are targeting human colonies, which doesn't affect any of the aliens except for Samara because she's a Jedi.  The other aliens stick with Shepard for their own flimsy personal reasons or they are his friends from ME1.

And, IMO, Jack wouldn't stick around if she was true to her character.

Draftees are forced to fight, but not to fight well, and not everyone accepted the draft in the first place. Some hid and/or fled to other countries that didn't have the draft. Jack is arguably drafted. Its not like Shepard shot up a base then was likely to simply let her walk (especially if paragon). So is Zaheed on the paragon side of his loyalty mission.

Samara is already paramilitary and considers the collector threat within Justicar jurisdiction. Thane is likewise paramilitary and signs up for similar idealistic reasons. "Gonna go fight some collectors' isn't that different really than 'gonna go fight Germans' or 'gonna go fight commies.' You are forgetting the fact that the soldiers in those movies were not soldiers just before the start of the movie (sometimes even not soldiers at the start of the movie).

Reasons for RL people joining the military are often just as flimsy 'impress my girl', 'woohoo get to shoot stuff', 'save the world, rah rah', etc etc etc... they don't need any deep ties to the war, there is simply a war and they want to go.

Jack is as free to go as any draftee, and as free to go as any of the convicts in The Dirty Dozen. She doesn't because (1) she might get shot, and (2) because Shepard is actually a good leader  and depending on the shepard, the first person to ever show a legitimate concern for her as something other than a weapon (a theme borrowed from other sci-fi, especially anime).

[Nightwriter]

Moiaussi wrote...

"Gonna go fight some collectors' isn't that different really than 'gonna go fight Germans' or 'gonna go fight commies.'

I didn't care for that much. It was so random. You know that if someone had come along two seconds before you with a similar cause they'd just as soon have hopped on that train instead. Doesn't really matter to them.