815 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

wizardryforever wrote...


That's the mystery.  Something I hope we find out more about in ME3.  Just because it ends with a mystery doesn't mean that it's a plothole, just that it's something that will be explained later.  It is meant to be something we wonder about until the next installment, not whine about how it wasn't explained.

And yet ME 1 (with my rose colored glasses) managed to end it's particular arc of the story in a more or less self contained manner.  Sovereign and Saren dead, dark space relay kept closed, etc.  All major plot points addressed, with a promise of  continued adventures later, a vow to "find a way to stop the Reapers"

Of course, we all know how that worked out.  Kaboom!

So what makes you think anything from ME 2 will be addressed in ME 3 in anything other than an email or a cameo? 

[Iakus]

StarcloudSWG wrote...

As for whom they'd indoctrinate.. everyone they could. Susceptible species. Vorcha in particular already seem to have been on "the list" of useful tools.

A vorcha is going to sneak into the Council chambers and open the dark space relay?  Or an army of them will attack the Citadel?  Citadel security's not as great as it could be but it's not that bad

No, Sovereign already tried the "indoctrinate a bunch of people" trick twice.  It didn't work either time.

[DarthCaine]

Here's your plot hole free ME1:
http://social.biowar...5/index/2844283

Of course, it doesn't matter what anyone says, haters still gonna hate

Modifié par DarthCaine, 06 octobre 2010 - 04:35 .

[wizardryforever]

iakus wrote...

wizardryforever wrote...


That's the mystery.  Something I hope we find out more about in ME3.  Just because it ends with a mystery doesn't mean that it's a plothole, just that it's something that will be explained later.  It is meant to be something we wonder about until the next installment, not whine about how it wasn't explained.

And yet ME 1 (with my rose colored glasses) managed to end it's particular arc of the story in a more or less self contained manner.  Sovereign and Saren dead, dark space relay kept closed, etc.  All major plot points addressed, with a promise of  continued adventures later, a vow to "find a way to stop the Reapers"

Of course, we all know how that worked out.  Kaboom!

So what makes you think anything from ME 2 will be addressed in ME 3 in anything other than an email or a cameo? 

The first installment of almost any trilogy is more or less self-contained, whereas the second is invariably setting up for the finale.  The only one I can think of that isn't is the Lord of the Rings.  And yes, I did read the books before the movies came out.

My faith (or optimism if you prefer) in Bioware is that they will not be that moronic.  Seriously, do you expect Bioware to not tie up all loose ends in the finale?  They have done nothing to suggest that they would be that stupid.  Cue cheesy Darth Vader line "I find your lack of faith disturbing."

Modifié par wizardryforever, 06 octobre 2010 - 04:39 .

[Therion942]

wizardryforever wrote...



My faith (or optimism if you prefer) in Bioware is that they will not be that moronic.  Seriously, do you expect Bioware to not tie up all loose ends in the finale?  They have done nothing to suggest that they would be that stupid.  Cue cheesy Darth Vader line "I find your lack of faith disturbing."

BioWare's idea of tying up loose ends thus far has been unsatisfactory e-mails and 30 second cameos. If that's fine by you, great, but others would like something with a bit more substance.

[cachx]

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.

[wizardryforever]

Therion942 wrote...

wizardryforever wrote...



My faith (or optimism if you prefer) in Bioware is that they will not be that moronic.  Seriously, do you expect Bioware to not tie up all loose ends in the finale?  They have done nothing to suggest that they would be that stupid.  Cue cheesy Darth Vader line "I find your lack of faith disturbing."

BioWare's idea of tying up loose ends thus far has been unsatisfactory e-mails and 30 second cameos. If that's fine by you, great, but others would like something with a bit more substance.

Covered this, didn't we?  ME2 is not the finale, I would be disappointed if everything we did had an immediate impact on the galaxy.  That smacks of lazy writing with no long-term story arc and discontinuity issues across the board.  What do you expect from the middle game in a trilogy?  Since when is the middle part of a trilogy ever the best part in terms of story?  Try never (maybe almost never).

Modifié par wizardryforever, 06 octobre 2010 - 04:51 .

[Xeranx]

DarthCaine wrote...

The haters are just a vocal minority, the majority prefers ME2 over ME1

http://social.biowar...596/polls/1670/
http://social.biowar...596/polls/4081/
http://social.biowar...093/polls/1659/

GameSpot User Scores:
ME1: 9.1 360, 8.9 PC
ME2: 9.4 360, 9.3 PC
(you can check other sites if you want, in every last one ME2 has a higher user score)

Sales

My mini review

Disliked:
-No armor for squad mates
-Effects of ME1 choices (though every realist saw this coming, it's the same in every BioWare game)
-Too many squad mates (by the time I recruited them all, I forgot about the ones I already have)
-Scanning (still, I'd rather scan a planet than go up 90 degrees hills just to get to an even more annoying minigame)
-Glitches
-No helmet toggle
-No skipping opening scene (still, it's better than ME1 where NO scenes were skippable)
-Box-art (worst ever)
-Very little armor parts
-A few unexplained plot holes
-Arnold Schwarzenegger (though not much worse than Zombie Cyborg Jumping Frog)

Liked:
-No mako
-Easier to manage equipment
-More cinematic
-More emotional
-Better written new interesting characters (ME1's squad mates were the most boring characters BioWare has ever made)
-Shepard speaks more often thus giving him more personality
-More Humor (than in ME1)
-Profanity (the more, the merrier I say)
-Better environments
-More atmospheric (Afterlife, Omega, Illium)
-Much better music (than  ME1's)
-Every weapon is different
-Biotics are awesome (unlike ME1)
-Better Powers
-Awesome combat
-New xp system
-Much better side quests
-Ammo
-Tougher decisions (thought still not tough enough, BioWare should take cues from The Witcher)
-Better easter eggs

"Roughly 50% of the people who started Mass Effect 2 finished the game"

Modifié par Xeranx, 06 octobre 2010 - 05:10 .

[wizardryforever]

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.

Yeah, basically.  I'm astonished that some of these people still hang around these boards if the game is really that bad.  I mean seriously, if you hate the game as much as you say you do, then why stick around for months to complain to people who don't care?  This kind of activity seems to scream troll, or at the very least someone who likes to have their ego stroked, even by themselves.

[Iakus]

wizardryforever wrote...

The first installment of almost any trilogy is more or less self-contained, whereas the second is invariably setting up for the finale.  The only one I can think of that isn't is the Lord of the Rings.  And yes, I did read the books before the movies came out.

Good to know.  The books are better.

But another feature in trilogies is that they (usually) form a single cohesive story made of three parts.  My faith in the Mass Effect series was badly shaken when Shepard did not in fact go out to find a way to stop the Reapers, and was killed and ressurected then whisked away to work for Cerberus to handle the Collectors

Frodo did not take a side trip to Umbar to help deal with Gondor's corsair problem.

The middle section of a trilogy is supposed to connect the series, the origin with the finale.  Typically in a dark fashion where the villains appear to be winning.  What Mass Effect 2 was turned out to be a holding pattern.  Shepard ended ME 2 in almost exactly the same way as ME 1.  The Reaper plot hardly advanced at all.  Heck, the Collector plot barely moved untli the very end. 

Almost all connections to ME 1 were pretty well severed.  Me 1 and ME 2 had about as much to do with each other as Die Hard 1 and Die Hard 2. Certainly not The Fellowship of the RIng and The Two Towers.

All in the name of making the games "accessible" and "standalone"

My faith (or optimism if you prefer) in Bioware is that they will not be that moronic.  Seriously, do you expect Bioware to not tie up all loose ends in the finale?  They have done nothing to suggest that they would be that stupid.  Cue cheesy Darth Vader line "I find your lack of faith disturbing."

I had absolute faith in Bioware before ME 2 came out.  Now it's pretty badly shaken.  Honestly, I don't know what to expect.  Weak story, continuity problems, cinematics over storyline.  When I finished I had to check the box to make sure it was a Bioware game.  I ended ME 1 going "What happens next?"  I ended ME 2 going "That's it? What just happened?"

Modifié par iakus, 06 octobre 2010 - 05:12 .

[wizardryforever]

Xeranx wrote...
"Roughly 50% of the people who started Mass Effect 2 finished the game"

What's that quaint phrase?  Oh yes, "there's lies, damned lies, and statistics."  There is no context for this stat (which you reworded to make it fit your argument).  It could mean that tons of people started a game, then realized they didn't like the class they played, or the way their Shepard's nose looked, and restarted.  Voila, lots of unfinished games.

[Onyx Jaguar]

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



Most people do not finish games.

[Xeranx]

wizardryforever wrote...

That's the mystery.  Something I hope we find out more about in ME3.  Just because it ends with a mystery doesn't mean that it's a plothole, just that it's something that will be explained later.  It is meant to be something we wonder about until the next installment, not whine about how it wasn't explained.

Are we supposed to "hope" we find out why they were making a human reaper over hoping that our new found tech, allies, knowledge, etc  -- you know, the stuff we were supposed to be searching for to actually support the last statement Shepard made in ME: "The reapers are still out there and I'm going to find some way to stop them" -- will actually do the job we want it to do?

ME2 is supposed to be the bridge between ME and ME3.  There's a part in Dragon Age that does the same thing ME2 did in regards to what we intended to do.  I have to say that the surprise after that sequence is similar to mine after ME2.

[Iakus]

wizardryforever wrote...


Yeah, basically.  I'm astonished that some of these people still hang around these boards if the game is really that bad.  I mean seriously, if you hate the game as much as you say you do, then why stick around for months to complain to people who don't care?  This kind of activity seems to scream troll, or at the very least someone who likes to have their ego stroked, even by themselves.

Two reasons:

1) I enjoyed Mass Effect 1 and every other Bioware game I've ever played, going back to the original Baldur's Gate.

2) There is going to be a Mass Effect 3.  I want to be able to enjoy that game as much as these other games.
 
Given that Bioware has no customer satisfaction survey, or anything resembling that.  I have to make my voice heard in other ways.  In the hopes that someone will take note of what's said and take it into consideration in making ME 3.  A vain hope, perhaps, but it's all I have.

But don't worry, I'm polite while addressing my grievances.  I don't insult people, I'm reasonably respectful, even when accused of being a troll, an elitist, a hater, or what have you.  I'm just interested in a spirited debate. 

[Onyx Jaguar]

Making a Reaper within the Milky Way, that wouldn't have to jump out from dark space almost speaks for itself.

[Xeranx]

wizardryforever wrote...

Xeranx wrote...
"Roughly 50% of the people who started Mass Effect 2 finished the game"

What's that quaint phrase?  Oh yes, "there's lies, damned lies, and statistics."  There is no context for this stat (which you reworded to make it fit your argument).  It could mean that tons of people started a game, then realized they didn't like the class they played, or the way their Shepard's nose looked, and restarted.  Voila, lots of unfinished games.

Seems like you're trying to bend the statement to fit the context of what you're trying to get across.  It said people who started ME2.  It did not say say people who started such and such class didn't finish with the class they started with.  Try again.  Also another point: How do you think Bioware got the stats they have?  My guess is Cerberus Network.  Considering that it was either stated or implied that CN would be required for DLC I imagine it's safe to assume that a large enough number registered their games so that they could collect the data they did.

I highlighted what I was responding to in that post.  To speak of a majority when that stat exists is beyond silly.  Until you have actual proof that there is a majority it's shaky ground at best.  Also, 7550 XBOX votes and 6332 PC votes on gamespot out of 1.7 (give or take) million sales is a majority?  13882 divided by 1728790 is less than 1%.  That's a majority?

Finally:  
http://www.gamasutra...havior_Cues.php
Tell me again I reworded that stat.  I dare you.

Modifié par Xeranx, 06 octobre 2010 - 05:37 .

[Onyx Jaguar]

But that is like saying the majority of whoever plays any video game does not like that video game



Most people do not complete any given game

[Onyx Jaguar]

Also polls do have an effect on marketing, these segments represent the "core" market of people who are considered "mainstays" and solid in regards to sales

[Xeranx]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

But that is like saying the majority of whoever plays any video game does not like that video game

Most people do not complete any given game

My argument is not saying that a majority doesn't like the game.  The comptetitive individual in me would love it if it were so just to shut people up about using some imaginary silent majority to make a statement and act as though it were irrefutable.  My argument is against making any claim that there is a majority/minority who like the game.  

The use of roughly implies close.  To me it says it's "less than" because I think that if it were "more than" you'd actually state such, but in any case (before people decide to jump on me saying "a-ha!") you cannot make a case for there being a majority especially with the given numbers we have.

Modifié par Xeranx, 06 octobre 2010 - 05:48 .

[Slayer299]

scotchtape622 wrote...

Slayer299 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.

 What was Plan B exactly? Kidnapping Humans to make a Human Reaper was their Plan B? Because that made zero sense whatsover, how was that going to get the rest of the Reapers out of Dark Space?

Actually that was Plan C, and ME1 was Plan B.

Hehehe, well then, they need to get someone to really come up with a great Plan C then!

[ScooterPie88]

smudboy wrote...

Mongerty wrote...

smudboy wrote...

But instead, at the end of ME2, we're in exactly the same position we were in at the end of ME1, the Reapers are coming.  Although now, the Council has gone stupid, our pistols run out of "ammo", and we can sell a live Geth and blow up a base that makes the enemy we're trying to stop.  Woo.  Nice development.

Well, you don't really know how the allies and choices you made in Mass Effect 2 will affect Mass Effect 3.
Including, but not limited to:
Fate of Collector Base
Geth and Quarian conflict
Shadow Broker  (Liara)
Cerberus Support/ Opposition
Sheperd cybernetic implants
Geth in General (Legion's mission)


Going by your standards, the Rebellion wasn't any closer to defeating the Empire at the end of Empire Strikes back, so it was a terrible movie according to how the trilogy works.

Please do not compare ME2 to TESB. It's been done to death, and it has very, very little in common.

The only thing that matters, which is what I already listed, was the Collector Base: but that can be blown up.  Ditto with Legion: but Legion can be sold.  These are the two, unavoidable choices.

So whoopedy-freaking-do.

Let's face it, the story is shattered.  They'll be making another ME2, cause that's what ME3's going to be.

Why is it every post of yours I see you say something negative and generally provocative?

Modifié par ScooterPie88, 07 octobre 2010 - 04:02 .

[Slayer299]

wizardryforever wrote...
Covered this, didn't we?  ME2 is not the finale, I would be disappointed if everything we did had an immediate impact on the galaxy.  That smacks of lazy writing with no long-term story arc and discontinuity issues across the board.  What do you expect from the middle game in a trilogy?  Since when is the middle part of a trilogy ever the best part in terms of story?  Try never (maybe almost never).

BUt it isn't expected that Bioware would wrap everything up in nice pink bow in the middle. The middle of a trilogy is to set things up for the finale. To use LotR (Two Towers) it did resolve some issues and setup/foreshadow what was to come in the last chapter. By the end of the TT things were looking very bleak even with their respective victories. I really didn't see that in ME2, we blew up the baby-Reaper and did/did not destroy the CB, but we didn't discover anything major about the Reapers or how to stop them. 

If you can show me exactly what was setup for 3 and what we really learned (Not including the Prothean/Collector 'reveal') I'd like to hear it and on that note I gotta grab some zzzz's. I'll look for your reply in the morning.

edit - removed a line not needed.

Modifié par Slayer299, 06 octobre 2010 - 06:07 .

[Weiser_Cain]

Being an adept was much better in part one.

The story was better.

The Reapers were better, though I did like the derelict Reaper.

I didn't like the softening of the Krogan in 2.

I liked the stronger RPG feel of the first. In ME2 once you choose your class you're pretty much set in the way it plays, not so in the first one.

[Gibb_Shepard]

DarthCaine wrote...

The haters are just a vocal minority, the majority prefers ME2 over ME1

http://social.biowar...596/polls/1670/
http://social.biowar...596/polls/4081/
http://social.biowar...093/polls/1659/

GameSpot User Scores:
ME1: 9.1 360, 8.9 PC
ME2: 9.4 360, 9.3 PC
(you can check other sites if you want, in every last one ME2 has a higher user score)

Sales

My mini review

Disliked:
-No armor for squad mates
-Effects of ME1 choices (though every realist saw this coming, it's the same in every BioWare game)
-Too many squad mates (by the time I recruited them all, I forgot about the ones I already have)
-Scanning (still, I'd rather scan a planet than go up 90 degrees hills just to get to an even more annoying minigame)
-Glitches
-No helmet toggle
-No skipping opening scene (still, it's better than ME1 where NO scenes were skippable)
-Box-art (worst ever)
-Very little armor parts
-A few unexplained plot holes
-Arnold Schwarzenegger (though not much worse than Zombie Cyborg Jumping Frog)

Liked:
-No mako
-Easier to manage equipment
-More cinematic
-More emotional
-Better written new interesting characters (ME1's squad mates were the most boring characters BioWare has ever made)
-Shepard speaks more often thus giving him more personality
-More Humor (than in ME1)
-Profanity (the more, the merrier I say)
-Better environments
-More atmospheric (Afterlife, Omega, Illium)
-Much better music (than  ME1's)
-Every weapon is different
-Biotics are awesome (unlike ME1)
-Better Powers
-Awesome combat
-New xp system
-Much better side quests
-Ammo
-Tougher decisions (thought still not tough enough, BioWare should take cues from The Witcher)
-Better easter eggs

LOL, they are hardly a minority man. In the main poll the two games are not far off eachother, it's a 60/40 split. Unlike the femsheppers, they are a vocal minority.

Modifié par Gibb_Shepard, 06 octobre 2010 - 06:37 .

[PD ORTA]

Xeranx wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

But that is like saying the majority of whoever plays any video game does not like that video game

Most people do not complete any given game

My argument is not saying that a majority doesn't like the game.  The comptetitive individual in me would love it if it were so just to shut people up about using some imaginary silent majority to make a statement and act as though it were irrefutable.  My argument is against making any claim that there is a majority/minority who like the game.  

The use of roughly implies close.  To me it says it's "less than" because I think that if it were "more than" you'd actually state such, but in any case (before people decide to jump on me saying "a-ha!") you cannot make a case for there being a majority especially with the given numbers we have.

This stat means nothing. I have games that I've enjoyed in the past that I didn't complete for various reasons, as well as games I didn't particularly like, that I did.
I'm sure you and all the other complainers are part of the 50% who completed the game.

As far as the silent majority/vocal minority, of the hundreds of people who regularly visit this site, it's the same 20/30 posters who appear in every ME2 bashing thread. While a few of us who enjoyed ME2 come in to these threads to support the game... the rest can be found in character support and general threads discussing how much they enjoy the ME series and are looking forward to ME3.