1700 réponses à ce sujet

[Nightwriter]

Jebel Krong wrote…

did you do them as a chain or did you go off and do other things in-between? i could see why if the latter, but the former...?

Oh, I definitely didn't do them in a straight line. Ditto for ME1's. I think for ME2's I always did one other mission before following up on a mission chain. Some missions I didn't even know were connected to other missions, like the saving the crashing ship mission being related to the Blue Suns mission chain.

MrFob wrote...

Ok, that is a matter of opinion I guess. For me at some point it got immersion breaking, which IMO has an impact on the story.

That is fair.

MrFob wrote...

But the recruitment/loyalty missions have some great story dialogue. You can explore the repercussions of the genophage with Mordin, You find Harkin again with Garrus (not to mention the brilliant part with Sidonis), even Jacobs mission, where you investigate the mystery about the missing ship and find some horrible truth, didn't you find these stories engaging? I mean, the format is an alternation between combat and dialogue, just like it was in ME1 (I am playing it again right now and I don't see anything else happening).

Oh, yes, I find those stories very engaging.

Don't get me wrong, I am not one of those people who is determined to be negative about everything you throw up to me. Loyalty missions had some GREAT storytelling. Very well done.

However, I am mainly referring to side missions right now, and only giving glancing mention to a few character missions. I am not addressing them all.

Jebel Krong wrote…

OK, there is less dialogue in the N7 missions, I agree, you have to read through Mails, etc. and I also hope they will change this again in ME3 but it is not true that you have no reasons. Often enough you are answering to distress calls (the ship under geth attack, The broken shiel generator, the downed freighter with the broken mechs, etc). Even more often, one mission will lead to the next, something that almost never happens in ME1. Now you may argument that you have no reason to fly to the planets in the first place so you should never do the scanning and therefore never even find the distress calls or other interesting stuff. However, again, this is not better in ME1. I still have to fly to the planets on my own, the difference is that once I enter orbit, Admiral Hackett miraculously calls me at that time and tells me to find an old nuclear booby-trap or you get -guess what - a distress call that turns out to be a geth trap (which results in a short combat before you go home). Often enough you'd just get text messages (like for the quests with the husk colonists in my precious post).
Long story short, I can see how you miss the dialogue but the missions themselves and their background info is IMO even better in ME2. The structure and gameplay of the mission are almost the same and the environments and level design are much more immersive in ME2.
As one last point I'd like to add that all in all, ME2 does have considerably more dialogue than ME1 had, it is just structured differently.

But... couldn't they have just had EDI talk to me the way Hackett had every time I scan a planet with an anomaly? Give me a rundown of what she found, allow me to interact with her a bit, ask her questions, have her tell me what Cerberus would like me to do and what I could do?

I just feel like these ME2 missions are missing a human element... (ironic I use EDI to add a human element, but still...)

Anyway, I'll talk to you when you get back, MrFob.

Pocketgb wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
The N7 missions in ME2 were completely lacking in any depth, polish or interesting aspects at all though.

Well ouch, that's a bit over-dramatic, isn't it?

Even I have to disagree that they were lacking in polish... superficially, on a sheer scenery level, the ME2 side missions were breathtaking. I kept thinking, "What a pretty place to not have a story in."

[Tasker]

Pocketgb wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
The N7 missions in ME2 were completely lacking in any depth, polish or interesting aspects at all though.

Well ouch, that's a bit over-dramatic, isn't it?

Maybe it was a little harsh, but he isn't wrong.

Anything that you need to go out of your way to find should be at least be a little bit interesting, the N7 missions were rubbish on all levels. 

Say what you will about the UCW missions of ME1, but at least you didn't have to go out of your way to find them.

Modifié par Orkboy, 21 octobre 2010 - 03:40 .

[Moiaussi]

Has anyone considered that it might have been a better game if ME2 was the first in the trilogy, with Shepard learning about the Reaper threat from TIM, fighting their agents, the Collectors, and learning about the Heretics and their impending threat to the Citadel?



That way, Shepard could have been reinstated as N7 and/or gained Spectre status after saving the Citadel and possibly the Council. ME2 wouldn't have felt so out of context because it would have been setting the context, with Shepard realizing that the threat by way of colonial abductions, and then in ME2, colonial destruction when the abduction plan failed.

[Nightwriter]

I can see how that might have been better, yeah, definitely.

[tonnactus]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...


The combat in ME2 was good enough to enjoy on its own, I cannot say the same of ME1's.

I could.Lifting a geth colossus was enjoyable on its own for sure. Or freeze a thresher maw with master stasis.

Or real sniping on ferros skyways for example(or the side missions sniping at the top of hill),not the indoor joke we have now.Real big distances up 300/500 meters.

[azerSheppard]

tonnactus wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...


The combat in ME2 was good enough to enjoy on its own, I cannot say the same of ME1's.

I could.Lifting a geth colossus was enjoyable on its own for sure. Or freeze a thresher maw with master stasis.

Or real sniping on ferros skyways for example(or the side missions sniping at the top of hill),not the indoor joke we have now.Real big distances up 300/500 meters.

fun on the pc maybe, but a torture on the box, the lags were inhumane...

[tonnactus]

azerSheppard wrote...



fun on the pc maybe, but a torture on the box, the lags were inhumane...

I dont have big lags on the box,but i installed the game anyway.

[Lunatic LK47]

tonnactus wrote...

azerSheppard wrote...



fun on the pc maybe, but a torture on the box, the lags were inhumane...

I dont have big lags on the box,but i installed the game anyway.

Uh, framerate problems still existed in the game, installation or not.

[Iakus]

Moiaussi wrote...

Has anyone considered that it might have been a better game if ME2 was the first in the trilogy, with Shepard learning about the Reaper threat from TIM, fighting their agents, the Collectors, and learning about the Heretics and their impending threat to the Citadel?

That way, Shepard could have been reinstated as N7 and/or gained Spectre status after saving the Citadel and possibly the Council. ME2 wouldn't have felt so out of context because it would have been setting the context, with Shepard realizing that the threat by way of colonial abductions, and then in ME2, colonial destruction when the abduction plan failed.

Thus why some have compared ME 2 to a reboot rather than a sequel.  Almost like Bioware's ashamed of ME 1 and wanted to start over.

[crooked]

iakus wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

Has anyone considered that it might have been a better game if ME2 was the first in the trilogy, with Shepard learning about the Reaper threat from TIM, fighting their agents, the Collectors, and learning about the Heretics and their impending threat to the Citadel?

That way, Shepard could have been reinstated as N7 and/or gained Spectre status after saving the Citadel and possibly the Council. ME2 wouldn't have felt so out of context because it would have been setting the context, with Shepard realizing that the threat by way of colonial abductions, and then in ME2, colonial destruction when the abduction plan failed.

Thus why some have compared ME 2 to a reboot rather than a sequel.  Almost like Bioware's ashamed of ME 1 and wanted to start over.

Which is really weird considering how much everyone loved the game.

[Pocketgb]

Orkboy wrote...
Anything that you need to go out of your way to find should be at least be a little bit interesting, the N7 missions were rubbish on all levels. 

Dialog wise? Yes. Story-wise? Meh, lots of the time. Gameplay wise? Can't agree. Not to mention they attempted to introduce some more variety to them via gameplay and appearance.

And the 'coordinates' being given to you isn't always considered a good thing, as many anti-Oblivion fans would have you know.

[Nightwriter]

crooked wrote...

iakus wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

Has anyone considered that it might have been a better game if ME2 was the first in the trilogy, with Shepard learning about the Reaper threat from TIM, fighting their agents, the Collectors, and learning about the Heretics and their impending threat to the Citadel?

That way, Shepard could have been reinstated as N7 and/or gained Spectre status after saving the Citadel and possibly the Council. ME2 wouldn't have felt so out of context because it would have been setting the context, with Shepard realizing that the threat by way of colonial abductions, and then in ME2, colonial destruction when the abduction plan failed.

Thus why some have compared ME 2 to a reboot rather than a sequel.  Almost like Bioware's ashamed of ME 1 and wanted to start over.

Which is really weird considering how much everyone loved the game.

It does seem like EA beat them over the head with a "YOU NEED MORE BEWBS IN UR GAME" lecture or something.

Ugh. Benezia was enough for me to bear. You don't need to up the dosage.

[Slayer299]

Nightwriter wrote...
It does seem like EA beat them over the head with a "YOU NEED MORE BEWBS IN UR GAME" lecture or something.

Ugh. Benezia was enough for me to bear. You don't need to up the dosage.

Heh, actually I found Benezia too creepy to stare at her chest.

[Xeranx]

I think they created Benezia's look to be somewhat similar to that of her voice actress.

[Sanzee]

I miss the driving on planets

[Slayer299]

Xeranx wrote...

I think they created Benezia's look to be somewhat similar to that of her voice actress.

Really? 'Cause Mirina Sirits is *anything* but creepy too look at! 

[MrFob]

Cheers,

Nightwriter wrote...

Jebel Krong wrote…

did you do them as a chain or did you go off and do other things in-between? i could see why if the latter, but the former...?

Oh, I definitely didn't do them in a straight line. Ditto for ME1's. I think for ME2's I always did one other mission before following up on a mission chain. Some missions I didn't even know were connected to other missions, like the saving the crashing ship mission being related to the Blue Suns mission chain.

Well yeah, I can see how this breaks down the concept. However the game tries to guide you through these chains with the hints on the galaxy map and EDIs emails. I found it an improvement to try and link side mission together.

*snip*

Oh, yes, I find those stories very engaging.

Don't get me wrong, I am not one of those people who is determined to be negative about everything you throw up to me. Loyalty missions had some GREAT storytelling. Very well done.

However, I am mainly referring to side missions right now, and only giving glancing mention to a few character missions. I am not addressing them all.

MrFob wrote...
*snip*

But... couldn't they have just had EDI talk to me the way Hackett had every time I scan a planet with an anomaly? Give me a rundown of what she found, allow me to interact with her a bit, ask her questions, have her tell me what Cerberus would like me to do and what I could do?

I just feel like these ME2 missions are missing a human element... (ironic I use EDI to add a human element, but still...)

Anyway, I'll talk to you when you get back, MrFob.

Well yes, absolutely, a dialogue with EDI, TIM, or whoever would have been much better, definitely. I guess in that case it was just a budget/time/disc space problem. ME2 does have more dialogue than ME1 but it blurs the lines between main mission and side missions. So it uses its dialogue on the more important ones and does so quite successfully. It is a shame that the N7s got cut a bit in that way but still the Emails and occasional snippets are there to tell you what is going on. So as far as the side missions go, I maintain my opinion that they are improved in ME2. Maybe the fact that I did not feel the dialogues with Hackett in ME1 very meaningful has also to do with that. I also think there is of course room for improvement in ME3 and I have to say, the direction BW is taking as we can see it in DLCs like Overlord and LotSB is exactly the right one. I can understand that BW is working within the constraint of finite resources and given these limits, I think they put a hell of a lot of content into ME2 so I can't really complain if some smaller missions have to be explained by mails or PDAs.

Slayer299 wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...
It does seem like EA beat them over the head with a "YOU NEED MORE BEWBS IN UR GAME" lecture or something.

Ugh. Benezia was enough for me to bear. You don't need to up the dosage.

Heh, actually I found Benezia too creepy to stare at her chest.

Haha, you don't really have a choice when she is first shown aboard Sovereign.

Modifié par MrFob, 22 octobre 2010 - 05:48 .

[Terror_K]

Orkboy wrote...

Pocketgb wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
The N7 missions in ME2 were completely lacking in any depth, polish or interesting aspects at all though.

Well ouch, that's a bit over-dramatic, isn't it?

Maybe it was a little harsh, but he isn't wrong.

Anything that you need to go out of your way to find should be at least be a little bit interesting, the N7 missions were rubbish on all levels. 

Say what you will about the UCW missions of ME1, but at least you didn't have to go out of your way to find them.

I don't think it's overly harsh at all. Okay, I'll admit that each one was set in a fairly unique area that looked good, but in some ways that was as much a detriment as it was a positive aspect. They all felt so manufactured and many simply felt gimmicky. Most were set in narrow, small areas that channeled the player too much and completely stopped anywhere feeling epic or grand, let alone feeling like a real place rather than just a small level in a game. Everywhere was a little too fabricated or designed to be special, and when everywhere is special nowhere is. The UNC worlds may have been drab and samey, but they were vast and more like most real worlds would be. The universe doesn't feel vast and empty when everywhere you go is small and populated and feels man (or alien) made.

Most were either combat missions where Shepard silently shot at equally silent mercs to collect datapads or were little gimmicky "puzzle" locales that felt fake and gimmicky. Funnily enough these are the types of things I'd like to have seen more in the main gameplay itself, but when you isolate it like that it stands out and comes across as forced.

The main issue though was the integration and presentation. While the locales themselves were given a good amount of attention, the rest wasn't. It's like they suffer the complete opposite problems of ME1. The UNC missions had samey locations, but they were at least well integrated into the universe which made them feel more like real curcumstances and less like objectives in a game. We had proper dialogue, not just in choices but from Shepard, NPCs and even companions. We got proper set-ups and conclusions, we got threads tying to other threads and locations and people, we had decent moral choices, we had interesting NPCs and antagonists, etc. In ME2 we have silent Shepard and his/her equally silent companions getting only emails and finding only datapads with next to no dialogue at all, which even becomes farcical when you have mercs sending urgent orders to each other via datapads. It's like the developers put absolutely no effort into integrating these things into the game and just decided to throw them in there and rely on text to convey everything. And, overall, almost none of the N7 missions felt meaningful or important in any way and never felt like they would pay off down the line. They were all basically like sending Shepard to rescue cats from trees or smack a random mugger on the bonce.

Even if I'm going to a samey looking UNC world, I feel more connection to a character who actually told me about his missing brother and whom I get to see react when I tell him than I do from an email. I feel more for a character being killed by Cerberus when I've actually met and spoken with him than I do when he's just a name in a message. I feel more for a colony in danger when I've met some of the people related to the disaster and heard the stress and worry in their voices than I do when the place is no more than a word in a report and I've met nobody related to it at all.

[Pocketgb]

And this is all compared to ME1's copy-pasted areas with barely-varied gameplay?

I'm admitting to the faults so there's no need for emphasis. ME2 wasn't a step back nor a step forward, it just stayed in place.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 22 octobre 2010 - 07:44 .

[Revan312]

I think anymore my biggest problem besides the story arc of ME2 which goes absolutely nowhere for the series as a whole is that the entire fluidity and continuation of gameplay is absent in ME2. This extends to the side missions.



The little things like elevators, small dialogues before, during and after side missions, the need to drive to the side objective on the planet, actually having to go through the airlock of the ship, meetings with the squad after major missions etc. All of those are absent and replaced with loading screens and "mission reports" which just make the game seem that much more like a by the numbers, level by level game rather than a free flow experience.



Even though those things could be tedious after a while, they still added to the realism of the universe and allowed me to suspend disbelief much better than "you solved Jacob's problem, credits acquired 45000, platinum acquired 2000" etc



It's amazing how much atmosphere is lost with such seemingly minor changes.



And as a side note, I preferred the eye candy of ME1's side missions more than ME2's as I enjoyed seeing massive moons or stars in the background as I climbed mountains, though that's subjective. To me it simply seemed much more vast and grand than the enclosed areas in the sequel...

[Pocketgb]

Much of that does ruin my enjoyment of ME2, but there was still much in ME1 that disappointed me as well. They fixed a problem only to cause another, and like I said awhile ago (which everyone may've easily overlooked) that was *my* disappointment with ME2: The series moved forward in some respects, backwards in others.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 22 octobre 2010 - 08:15 .

[Jebel Krong]

Nightwriter wrote...

It does seem like EA beat them over the head with a "YOU NEED MORE BEWBS IN UR GAME" lecture or something.

Ugh. Benezia was enough for me to bear. You don't need to up the dosage.

benezia was worse than anyone in me2, and she looked really out of place to everyone else, too.

Slayer299 wrote...

Xeranx wrote...

I think they created Benezia's look to be somewhat similar to that of her voice actress.

Really? 'Cause Mirina Sirits is *anything* but creepy too look at! 

you obviously haven't seen her act... can you say 'goldfish'? [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/sick.png[/smilie]

[Jebel Krong]

Nightwriter wrote...

Jebel Krong wrote…

did you do them as a chain or did you go off and do other things in-between? i could see why if the latter, but the former...?

Oh, I definitely didn't do them in a straight line. Ditto for ME1's. I think for ME2's I always did one other mission before following up on a mission chain. Some missions I didn't even know were connected to other missions, like the saving the crashing ship mission being related to the Blue Suns mission chain.

well then you have little to complain about - that's like saying i watched the first act of [insert film here], then a load of episodes of [something else], and when i stuck [insert film here] back in i couldn't remember who anyone was or what was going on?! 

if all that failed, you could still look at the journal to catch up, there's enough info there to make it clear who/what/why - even special forces have to do a bit o research before missions, occasionally. 

Nightwriter wrote...

First off, I found both Grunt's recruitment mission and Miranda's loyalty mission a bit hard to follow, but never mind that.

going back to this, how was either mission difficult to follow, exactly? it's not like they were split up, and although miranda's has more characters, they are all introduced in cut-scenes and their motivations fully explained (the important ones, anyway). i don't see how either were more complicated than recruiting garrus in me1...

btw, i didn't write this:

Jebel Krong wrote…

OK, there is less dialogue in the N7 missions, I agree, you have to read through Mails, etc. and I also hope they will change this again in ME3 but it is not true that you have no reasons. Often enough you are answering to distress calls (the ship under geth attack, The broken shiel generator, the downed freighter with the broken mechs, etc). Even more often, one mission will lead to the next, something that almost never happens in ME1. Now you may argument that you have no reason to fly to the planets in the first place so you should never do the scanning and therefore never even find the distress calls or other interesting stuff. However, again, this is not better in ME1. I still have to fly to the planets on my own, the difference is that once I enter orbit, Admiral Hackett miraculously calls me at that time and tells me to find an old nuclear booby-trap or you get -guess what - a distress call that turns out to be a geth trap (which results in a short combat before you go home). Often enough you'd just get text messages (like for the quests with the husk colonists in my precious post).
Long story short, I can see how you miss the dialogue but the missions themselves and their background info is IMO even better in ME2. The structure and gameplay of the mission are almost the same and the environments and level design are much more immersive in ME2.
As one last point I'd like to add that all in all, ME2 does have considerably more dialogue than ME1 had, it is just structured differently.

Modifié par Jebel Krong, 22 octobre 2010 - 08:47 .

[GodWood]

It does seem like EA beat them over the head with a "YOU NEED MORE BEWBS IN UR GAME" lecture or something.



Ugh. Benezia was enough for me to bear. You don't need to up the dosage.

One of my most hated features of Mass Effect 2

[Xeranx]

Slayer299 wrote...

Xeranx wrote...

I think they created Benezia's look to be somewhat similar to that of her voice actress.

Really? 'Cause Mirina Sirits is *anything* but creepy too look at! 

I was actually referencing your comment and nightwriters post you quoted.  I remember seeing an interview of Ms. (?) Sirtis before going through ME again.  When I saw Benezia's opening I got it.  Or at least I thought I did.