Dionkey wrote...
Squadmates:
Ah?
Main Plot:
TIM and Shepard both realize the collectors are a problem. To say they pull stuff out of his ass is a little far. The Colonies are an intro. You confirm its collectors, no need to keep running into them, you wont catch all of them. You then start your recruitment process and begin to prepare for the Omega 4 relay. But then you might say well why aren't they trying to stop you? They aren't all knowing or all seeing, any game that puts the same threat in front of you constantly is un realistic and just plain trying too hard. At this point you board the collector ship and figure out their protheans (Pretty easy to figure out) and then steal the IFF to cross the relay. They then board your ship and take your crew. Here is a sign of motive, you realize you have to act now. (At this point not only have they abducted multiple colonies but also killed you once, destroyed your original ship, took your crew and are working with the reapers. That is plenty of motive to a mediocre enemy). You go to the collector base, (possibley take some losses) figure out how the reapers are made and then give TIM the bird or cash in the reward.
-TIM is pretty much the plot giver. He pulls stuff out of nowhere. (Disabled Cruiser time! Derelict Reaper time! etc.)
-There's no reason to recruit soldiers for a mission whose parameters we know nothing of. A plot demands a reason, and a good one, to take a certain path over another (for example, doing recon before committing ground troops to do
something.)
-We figure out how Reapers are made?
-The Collectors simply don't know what to do with Shepard and his friends. Do they kill them? Destroy them? Capture them? Ignore them? They do this all over the place. We have no idea what the motives are of our alien opposing force, and we should. Especially why they're building a Human Reaper. If we don't understand the motives behind our bad guys, they remain completely enigmatic. In a story, you need a clear understanding of what's going on and why, or at least, why the protagonist and group are behaving a certain way to an unknown, let alone acknowleding that this is an unknown and they have no idea. Whereas good conflicts can be seen on various levels (physical, metaphysical, and ideological manners), instead, the only conflict is physical, and that magically works out in the end.
Nitpicking:
Thermal Clips, of course they dont make sense. Has any game EVER not had ammo around?
ME...
Sure they could put corpses or some battle signs beside them ( Which they have done, sometimes) but is it really necessary? If your doing a mission and you just randomly see bodies throughout the mission (Some which have very little combat or wouldn't fit in) you wouldn't call that poor design? It would happen both ways and to complain about something like this is to complain about why Shepard cant jump, its not really needed.
I wouldn't argue jumping, but I would argue crouching (see ME.)
The Blue Suns leaders are explained for the most part in quite a few missions. Sure not all of them but again, superhuman abilties were talking about. This would require Shepard always being able to explain why something is there, you are asking to much out of a simply placeholder, it doesnt have to make sense. If you really want BW to waste time on that then be my guest, but I would much rather have them make some fun missions and interesting twists.
The Blue Suns leader was retconned, that is to say, Zaeed was not previously the founder of the Blue Suns.
When it comes down to it ME2's plot wasnt bad, it wasnt that good either. But thats not why its there, its a filler. You don't need to be a English Major to tear it apart but at the same time all the real interesting story comes from the side characters.Look at it like this.
I think your definition of plot is different from mine. For example, a story is a series of events. ME2 had a story. THAT did it's job. A plot is something
on top of a story. It's the why of a story. ME2 tries to have a plot and fails, through illogic, lack of exposition, retconning, unclarity, and the massive number of holes it creates.
ME1: Main Threat, Motive
ME2: Support Characters, Semi Motive
ME3: (This is a theory of course) Testing the Alliance you have made throughout the other 2 and Shepards character himself.
Anyway thats my two cents. Sorry for the long wall of text. I broke it up the best I could.:happy:
The way I understand the concept is 1) Identify the main threat, 2) Learn about stopping the main threat, 3) Stop main threat. Now ME2 doesn't have to follow 2). Support characters and...semi-motives...are fine, but the support characters and their motives had nothing to do with the
overarching plot, or Shepard's motives. In fact, the LOTSB DLC did more of that then the entire game.
Retour en haut
