815 réponses à ce sujet

[smudboy]

Jebel Krong wrote...

Frybread76 wrote...

Yeah, who needs a game in which the main story is the best part.

the main story is the most important part, and links all the other things together. mass effect 2 is just much bigger because there's so many more main missions & therefore, depending on how you play it it may seem less focused (though the unavoidable missions are a counter to that) and attempt to keep the pace up, at least - another thing me1 lacked.

smudboy wrote...

And how/where do the dossiers tell us who we need and why?

if you haven't played the game even once to already know the answers then i'm done with you and your pitiful attempts at baiting and flippancy.

Dude, you stated it.
"at least in mass effect 2 you are told to go after certain individuals because of the skills they bring."

Now, you said the dossiers are the answer.  And I'm asking you where in the dossiers does it tell us to go after certain individuals because of the skills they bring.

[Frybread76]

pacer90 wrote...

Frybread76 wrote...


Great.  Then ME2 shouldn't have been billed as a sequel to ME1, then.

You don't think the ME universe is relevant to Shepard's fight against the reapers? You don't think that not only building up the people and cultures around shepard as well as the enemy we are fighting seeming to be more insidious has any effect on how we percieve them in ME3?

I think the ME universe is cool and all, but it could have been woven into the main plot better.  In ME2, we get all these recruitment and loyalty missions in spite of the main plot missions.

[mopotter]

iakus wrote...

StarcloudSWG wrote...

I dont' know. In ME 1, we learned about the Reapers and stopped their Plan A.
In ME 2, we learned the Reapers had a Plan B and stopped that too.

In ME 1, we find out what exactly Sovereign was out to do:  Open dark space relay, usher in new cycle of destruction. 

What was Plan B?

Sure we learned about the Human Smoothie Project and the baby Reaper.  But what was it for?  What were they trying to accomplish? 

OK  I may have to quite drinking smoothie's for awhile.  Thanks, for that visual.  

[Frybread76]

Jebel Krong wrote...

Frybread76 wrote...

Yeah, who needs a game in which the main story is the best part.

the main story is the most important part, and links all the other things together. mass effect 2 is just much bigger because there's so many more main missions & therefore, depending on how you play it it may seem less focused (though the unavoidable missions are a counter to that) and attempt to keep the pace up, at least - another thing me1 lacked.

smudboy wrote...

And how/where do the dossiers tell us who we need and why?

if you haven't played the game even once to already know the answers then i'm done with you and your pitiful attempts at baiting and flippancy.

ME2 is much bigger than ME1 because there are more superfluous missions (recruitment and loyalty missions that have nothing to do with the Reapers/Collectors) compared to the main plot missions.

[Jebel Krong]

Frybread76 wrote...

I think the ME universe is cool and all, but it could have been woven into the main plot better.  In ME2, we get all these recruitment and loyalty missions in spite of the main plot missions.

loyalty AND main missions, there's not less in #2 than #1.

[mopotter]

StarcloudSWG wrote...

iakus wrote...

In ME 1, we find out what exactly Sovereign was out to do:  Open dark space relay, usher in new cycle of destruction.  

What was Plan B?

Sure we learned about the Human Smoothie Project and the baby Reaper.  But what was it for?  What were they trying to accomplish? 

Build a Reaper secretly, have it start sneaking about Alliance space, converting people into Indoctrinated servants, and eventually have the Alliance take over the Citadel, then open the front door from inside again. 

Sneaking around?  A giant human shaped reaper?  This was actually the main image problems I had with ME2.

[Frybread76]

Jebel Krong wrote...

Frybread76 wrote...

I think the ME universe is cool and all, but it could have been woven into the main plot better.  In ME2, we get all these recruitment and loyalty missions in spite of the main plot missions.

loyalty AND main missions, there's not less in #2 than #1.

I'm at work so I can't check the exact number of loyalty/suicide missions vs. main missions, but I bet the ratio is greater in ME1 than ME2.

In ME2, the main plot missions consist of Freedom's Progress, Horizon, Collector Ship investigation, IFF retrieval and the Suicide Mission.

In ME1, we have Eden Prime, Expose Saren on the Citadel, Therum (to find Liara) Feros, Noveria, Virmire, Ilos, and Confront Saren (which can be split up into a few parts).

[mopotter]

cachx wrote...

wizardryforever wrote...
I think a lot of the issues people have with the story stem from a combination of nostalgia and what I like to call "sequel syndrome."  In most media, even books, the first work in the series introduces the setting and the characters and the events.  That magic is lost in the sequel, since the character (though not necessarily the reader/watcher/player) will already know all of this stuff, so it seems like the setting isn't as rich somehow.  It's not quantifiable, and the story can be as good if not better, but because of the sequel syndrome, people will like it less.  I don't see how ME1's story was any more cohesive than ME2's story.  You know almost nothing about Saren or what his goals are, except that he hates humans and is somehow involved with what happens on Eden Prime.  He's looking for somethig called the Conduit and the Reapers, but we don't know what those are.  Yet we still feel compelled to stop him, and go to exactly four story worlds before the final confrontation begins.  We only talk to Saren three times in the whole game, and only twice in person.  I just don't get the "ME1's story was awesome, but ME2 has tons of plot holes!" argument.  ME1 had just as many plotholes, some of them just as glaring as the ones in ME2, but they get handwaved or otherwise glossed over.  Why?  Nostalgia, plain and simple.

Toss in some people that were rabid fans of Ash/Kaiden and Liara and hated on the game just because their favorite character didn't get enough minutes featured in the basic game (prior DLCs) and you got most of the hate crowd.

Of course, I have heard pretty sound arguments from people that prefer ME1, and that's perfectly fine. But when we have a thread more than 6 months after release, that consist basically on haters jerking each other off going on circular arguments for 400+ pages, then I just get a little concerned.

If discussions like that didn't exist, some users will just puff out of existence, Planescape Torment style.

I am a "rabid" fan of Kaidan, but I did not mind that he was not part of the crew in ME2.  I trusted Chris when he said they were left out so they would be available for ME3.  

Maybe some people have high intellectual reasons for wondering the forums and posting viewpoints, but I freely admit I'm here because I'm waiting for ME3 and get bored.  It's fun to come here and put in my 2cents worth even if the subject has been brought up so many times before.   

[mopotter]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Only 50% of people finished Half-Life 2 Episode 2 and that is a 4 hour linear game

Most people do not finish games.

I agree and I'm one of them.  

I did not finish - Resident Evil 5; Assassin creed 2 and Halo. I did finish, more than once, Morrowind, Oblivion, all BioWare games; FallOut 3.     If you start a game and don't care for something about it, you won't finish it.  

[Frybread76]

mopotter wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Only 50% of people finished Half-Life 2 Episode 2 and that is a 4 hour linear game

Most people do not finish games.

I agree and I'm one of them.  

I did not finish - Resident Evil 5; Assassin creed 2 and Halo. I did finish, more than once, Morrowind, Oblivion, all BioWare games; FallOut 3.     If you start a game and don't care for something about it, you won't finish it.  

Sometimes, people do not finish games because they do not like their character, so they quit and start a new game.

[mopotter]

wizardryforever wrote...

There was quite a lot of foreshadowing in ME2.  How about all that business with Dark Energy that everyone and their mother is suddenly interested in?  Like with Haestrom's sun.  There's no way that was thrown in there the way it was unless it has some major impact on ME3.  What about the Quarians, with their Admiralty split on how to handle the Geth?  I betcha we'll see Xen again in some form in ME3.  Or the Geth schism and Legion's loyalty?  That could definitely have major consequences in ME3.  Or the genophage, which was explored much more explicitly this time around.  We confirmed that the Rachni were indoctrinated in ME2, with the Rachni messenger, meaning we can count on their aid against the Reapers.

The setup for ME3 wasn't in the Collector missions.  We learned much more useful information in recruitment and loyalty missions.  I'm inclined to say that the Collector missions really were more of a background story.  Although learning the Collectors' plans to build a Reaper (no matter how contrived that is) is valuable information.  Now we can learn more about the Reapers from the base or its wreckage.  This is not insignificant.

Really, Lord of the Rings is more of the exception than the rule when it comes to trilogies.  A more appropriate analogy would be to compare it to the original Star Wars trilogy (as much as I dislike Star Wars).  The comparsion of ME2 to The Empire Strikes Back is striking.

I think your right about the dark energy and the Quarian/Geth relationship being important.  And, I hadn't thought about the loyalty missions this way, something for me to ponder.  

I am a star wars fan, [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/grin.png[/smilie]saw the first one Ep IV somewhere around 20 times when I was 27.  I was addicted, still am.  I didn't like the Empire Strikes Back as much, not because it wasn't good, but because it left me hanging for 3 years waiting to find out what happened to Han.   

Modifié par mopotter, 16 octobre 2010 - 02:23 .

[spacehamsterZH]

Frybread76 wrote...

spacehamsterZH wrote...

Only marginally related, but my biggest issue with ME1 as far as the story and the overall structure of the game goes, everytime I play it, is that everything outside of the main story missions feels like a chore. 2/3 of the time, I'm basically playing these dumb copy/paste Mako sidequests that the game somehow makes me feel obligated to do, just waiting until I can take a crack at the next story mission. Say about the recruitment and loyalty missions in ME2 and their, uh, tenuous connection to the main plot what you will, but at least they're fully fleshed out stories with dialogue and cutscenes and not just a couple of text boxes summarizing the plot for you.

Yeah, who needs a game in which the main story is the best part.

Yeah, because that's what I said, right? Groan. Learn to read, please? Yes, the main plot of ME1 is not only its best part, it's also better (though far from perfect) than ME2's "the shocking discovery of the human smoothie-powered giant terminator" story. But the bottom line is, it's a videogame, and I spend between 60 and 70 percent of the time playing it dealing with stuff that has next to nothing to do with this main plot and is repetitive and often frustrating because of the crappy combat mechanics, Mako controls and unwieldy inventory. ME1 has 4-5 interesting, fully fleshed out missions - in ME2, every recruitment and loyalty mission plus the main story missions is like that.

[smudboy]

mopotter wrote...
The setup for ME3 wasn't in the Collector missions.

And it should have been.

We learned much more useful information in recruitment and loyalty missions.  I'm inclined to say that the Collector missions really were more of a background story.  Although learning the Collectors' plans to build a Reaper (no matter how contrived that is) is valuable information.  Now we can learn more about the Reapers from the base or its wreckage.  This is not insignificant.

Or we can not go on any side stories and blow up the base, and ME2 is completely insignificant.

(as much as I dislike Star Wars)
I am a star wars fan, 

[Vendetta11]

Man oh man... there is a lot of hatin' going on in a thread that is supposed to be all duckies and bunnies................



O_o

[wizardryforever]

Smudboy, mopotter screwed up the quote process, everything above the last two paragraphs in his/her post was stuff that I wrote in the first few pages of the thread, hence the contradictions.

[Nozybidaj]

smudboy wrote...

pacer90 wrote...

Think of it as an anthology of short stories that may not add to your fight against the reapers, but they form the universe that you are set in. You know what you are fighting for much better now imo.

They could've done that while they added to our fight against the Reapers.

I am?  I'm trying to save the galaxy from the Reape--err, something?  Oh wait, Jacob has a long lost dad.  Oh wait, Thane is a long lost dad.  Whom no one tells us why we need. etc.

So basically we are all agreeing now that ME2 had nothing to do with the overarching story of fighting the Reapers.  At least we got something out of this thread. 

[Killjoy Cutter]

Who were the Collectors working for, again?

[Frybread76]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

Frybread76 wrote...

spacehamsterZH wrote...

Only marginally related, but my biggest issue with ME1 as far as the story and the overall structure of the game goes, everytime I play it, is that everything outside of the main story missions feels like a chore. 2/3 of the time, I'm basically playing these dumb copy/paste Mako sidequests that the game somehow makes me feel obligated to do, just waiting until I can take a crack at the next story mission. Say about the recruitment and loyalty missions in ME2 and their, uh, tenuous connection to the main plot what you will, but at least they're fully fleshed out stories with dialogue and cutscenes and not just a couple of text boxes summarizing the plot for you.

Yeah, who needs a game in which the main story is the best part.

Yeah, because that's what I said, right? Groan. Learn to read, please? Yes, the main plot of ME1 is not only its best part, it's also better (though far from perfect) than ME2's "the shocking discovery of the human smoothie-powered giant terminator" story. But the bottom line is, it's a videogame, and I spend between 60 and 70 percent of the time playing it dealing with stuff that has next to nothing to do with this main plot and is repetitive and often frustrating because of the crappy combat mechanics, Mako controls and unwieldy inventory. ME1 has 4-5 interesting, fully fleshed out missions - in ME2, every recruitment and loyalty mission plus the main story missions is like that.

Yes, ME2 missions are "fully fleshed" out with details that mean nothing to the main plot.

Only Mordin's recruitment mission has anything to do with the main plot of ME2.  Okeer's does somewhat, but we don't learn much and he doesn't make it back to the Normandy to be a factor.  Tali's recruitment mission MIGHT have something to do with the Reapers, but we don't know yet.

[Frybread76]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Who were the Collectors working for, again?

The Reapers, but did we learn anything new about them or how to stop them?

[Iakus]

pacer90 wrote...

Frybread76 wrote...


Great.  Then ME2 shouldn't have been billed as a sequel to ME1, then.

You don't think the ME universe is relevant to Shepard's fight against the reapers? You don't think that not only building up the people and cultures around shepard as well as the enemy we are fighting seeming to be more insidious has any effect on how we percieve them in ME3?

This isn't (ncesessarily) that all these stories are bad.  The genophage, the quarian/geth conflict, and so on are important to the Mass Effect universe.  Some of the loyalty mission stories were, I think worthy of expanding into a separate game.

That's the point:  separate game

The Mass Effect Trilogy is supposed to be "Shepard's story" not "Guest Starring Commander Shepard" not "Narrated by Commander Shepard"  Shepard is not supposed to be Watson to TIM's Holmes.  Shepard is supposed to be finding out how to defeat the Reapers, and help people in his/her spare time, not the other way around.

If there had been seperate games chronicling Samara's hunt for Morinth, Legion's campaign against the Heretics, the politics of the Migrant Fleet, those might have been games I'd have purchased.  The problem is, they don't fit into Shepard's fight against the Reapers.  At best, it's peripheralto the main stroyline.  Not that there was much of a main storyline to begin with.

[Iakus]

Nozybidaj wrote...

So basically we are all agreeing now that ME2 had nothing to do with the overarching story of fighting the Reapers.  At least we got something out of this thread. 

Common ground!

[Nozybidaj]

iakus wrote...

Nozybidaj wrote...

So basically we are all agreeing now that ME2 had nothing to do with the overarching story of fighting the Reapers.  At least we got something out of this thread. 

Common ground!

Of course there is another option, that the Reapers are not in fact any longer the overarching story. 

This was a reboot afterall.  Maybe the story is now about Cerberus and the Reapers are just background, a plot device, to give Cerberus something to do.  If the 3rd game ignores ME1 as well and continues the story of the second game, the second game immediately makes much more sense.  The assumption seems to be that ME3 will be about stopping the Reapers, but that assumption may be entirely wrong.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Frybread76 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Who were the Collectors working for, again?

The Reapers, but did we learn anything new about them or how to stop them?

I thought Shep stopped the Collectors, though. 

[Nightwriter]

But not the Reapers. Also I am not wearing rose-colored glasses. I am not.