292 réponses à ce sujet

[Zurcior]

 Like many on these forums, I didn't feel as invested in Mass Effect 2's story as I did Mass Effect 1's.  And sure enough, I began to wonder why this was. And then I remembered something. Something many of us fell victim to: A massive troll unleashed spoilers about major plot points in the game before it was releashed! I began to wonder whether or not that already knowing the story ruined my experience of the story.

 If I didn't already know that the Collectors were Protheans, would I have (right then and there) felt the same shock I felt in ME1 when it was revealed that it was actually the Reapers who built the Citadel and mass relays? If I didn't already know about the human-reaper, would it have blown my mind as I was experiencing it? Was my perception and judgement of the story clouded because of what I already knew?
 
 What do you think? Do you feel the same way?

[yummysoap]

Because it is. For all the improvements I love Mass Effect 2 for, I can't deny that it's story is absolutely pathetic when compared to its predecessor.

[Collider]

Mass Effect 1's story is better, but wasn't actually good. It's like comparing poor (ME1) to poorer (ME2). In that respect I can forgive ME2 somewhat because I enjoyed the characters and combat more, and ME2 was overall more polished.

[Zulu_DFA]

The story of ME2 is inferior because the arcade shooter has no reason to have a story at all.

Therefore, the story, the plot and the lore were neglected/disregared during development.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 01 décembre 2010 - 03:47 .

[Undertone]

What surprises me is that some people want even more simple simplicity then what already is. And while ME2 certainly has some improvements, some of the stuff was just plainly taken out instead of fixed.



When it comes to story, ME1 hands down beats ME2 in every department.

[AntiChri5]

You feel it is inferior because it is inferior.

I understand the temptation to blame someone else, some random troll spoiling things, but......there are so many problems with ME 2 plot....

ME 1 wasn't perfect but......



~sigh~

[Bourne Endeavor]

Undertone wrote...

What surprises me is that some people want even more simple simplicity then what already is. And while ME2 certainly has some improvements, some of the stuff was just plainly taken out instead of fixed.

When it comes to story, ME1 hands down beats ME2 in every department.

That is what frightens me with the shooter crowd. Those who have been intrigued enough to come over either complain about too much dialogue or too many cut-scenes and should Bioware continue to cater to them... the end result will be anything except pleasant. The way Christiana Norman is has me nervous at times. She seems far too keen on implementing more shooter elements however I digress.

The story in Mass Effect is widely superior primarily because it exists. Mass Effect 2's story has immense potential yet was plagued with an overly dramatic opening, frequent departures to tackle side missions and virtually no development of any kind to the antagonists. Why it receives any praise as a whole is because the recruitment and loyalty missions were definitely worthwhile. In the end ME2 is a collection of adamantly rendered side quests and a fantastic expansion game to ME. I have difficulty citing it a sequel. Of course, that does not mean I do not love it.

Edit: Hey, new analogy I rather fancy. Mass Effect 2 is to Mass Effect what Awakening should have been to Dragon Age.

Modifié par Bourne Endeavor, 01 décembre 2010 - 04:08 .

[Undertone]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

Undertone wrote...

What surprises me is that some people want even more simple simplicity then what already is. And while ME2 certainly has some improvements, some of the stuff was just plainly taken out instead of fixed.

When it comes to story, ME1 hands down beats ME2 in every department.

That is what frightens me with the shooter crowd. Those who have been intrigued enough to come over either complain about too much dialogue or too many cut-scenes and should Bioware continue to cater to them... the end result will be anything except pleasant. The way Christiana Norman is has me nervous at times. She seems far too keen on implementing more shooter elements however I digress.

The story in Mass Effect is widely superior primarily because it exists. Mass Effect 2's story has immense potential yet was plagued with an overly dramatic opening, frequent departures to tackle side missions and virtually no development of any kind to the antagonists. Why it receives any praise as a whole is because the recruitment and loyalty missions were definitely worthwhile. In the end ME2 is a collection of adamantly rendered side quests and a fantastic expansion game to ME. I have difficulty citing it a sequel. Of course, that does not mean I do not love it.

Edit: Hey, new analogy I rather fancy. Mass Effect 2 is to Mass Effect what Awakening should have been to Dragon Age.

I cannot help but agree 100%. While ME was never a hardcore RPG and trust me I never wanted it as one - ME2 had complete lack of any inventory. If you disregard all the DLC (some of which should have been in the game anyway), the game has more or less 2 weapons for each type and 1 armor with with more or less three customizable parts. While ME1 inventory surely needed some work (freeing space was annoying), ME2 simply lacked inventory whatsoever as well as variety. Only with all the DLC today did the game started to feel like it actually had a bit of variety in equipment. Hell, when you think about it nowadays actual shooters have more weapon and variety in appereance and customization.

Story-wise it would have helped if all that recruiting (I mean it's 11 or 12 companions for god sake if not mistaken) had their purpose in the Suicide Mission. But all that recruiting and getting their loyalty for the 30 min (at most) suicide mission in which some didn't even had anything to do seemed like a giant waste of time. Not only that but you had to pretty much be retarded or do it on purpose in order to mess it up and lose somebody.

Modifié par Undertone, 01 décembre 2010 - 04:26 .

[Sajuro]

I liked the plot, I mean I missed the squad meeting but I thought it was a coherent plot that told a rather fun story. You are just looking at ME1 with rose colored glasses.

[AdmiralCheez]

Well, OP, I must admit, spoilers do kind of take the surprise out of everything. However, a weak plot is immediately apparent whether you know it ahead of time or not. For example, I avoided any and all spoilers for StarCraft 2, but there were still parts of the story that made me facepalm. Not saying it wasn't good, but there were parts where I was just like, "Okay, Blizzard, THAT's the best you can come up with?"



Mass Effect 2 had a lot of great stories and subplots in it, but the writers kind of forgot to weave them together into a coherent whole. Therefore, we basically got a collection of super-epic sidequests sloppily glued onto a rather weak core plot. Really, all Bioware had to do was to make all those loyalty/recruitment missions relate to the Collector/Reaper thing somehow--you know, contribute more to the story than just "Character X is now loyal"--and we'd all be bowing down and worshipping the gods of epic writing right now.



Hopefully, they'll fix that in ME3.

[Undertone]

Sajuro wrote...

I liked the plot, I mean I missed the squad meeting but I thought it was a coherent plot that told a rather fun story. You are just looking at ME1 with rose colored glasses.

Don't get me wrong, the game was by all means enjoyable, fun etc. But there's always room for improvement.

[Fiery Phoenix]

I keep telling myself it's because ME2 is the middle part of a pre-planned trilogy, which is why I have extremely high hopes for ME3. Mind you, I never really had high hopes for ME2 storywise -- for this exact reason.

[AdmiralCheez]

Oh, and also...

You are just looking at ME1 with rose colored glasses.

This.  Seriously, ME1's plot really wasn't that great, either.  I just played the damn thing, so I know.

[Sajuro]

Undertone wrote...

Sajuro wrote...

I liked the plot, I mean I missed the squad meeting but I thought it was a coherent plot that told a rather fun story. You are just looking at ME1 with rose colored glasses.

Don't get me wrong, the game was by all means enjoyable, fun etc. But there's always room for improvement.

Not saying there isn't, but I just found that ME2's combat flows much better, and of course that is a grave sin for an RPG, and ME1's story wasn't exactly the Illiad or Odyssey, hell it's quality was par with Zelda.

[MassEffect762]

Story was too thin and rudimentary, it never really took off for me.

The few surprises it had were poorly executed imo.(i.e. human Reaper, Protheans=Collectors, Harbinger chatterbox, VS/LI on horizon)

ME2 felt disjointed, unintelligent, arcadey and lacked the "darker" theme Bioware said it'd be.

Pretty good "stand-alone" game but a pretty lame sequel for me.

Modifié par MassEffect762, 01 décembre 2010 - 05:13 .

[stryder25]

I recently played through both games for the first time, and I would agree that the first game has the superior overall story, as well as better antagonists. I do think ME2 has better ally characters (of course, recruiting your team is the focus of the game) and dialogue in general, at least.

Modifié par stryder25, 01 décembre 2010 - 04:45 .

[Bourne Endeavor]

Sajuro wrote...

Undertone wrote...

Sajuro wrote...

I liked the plot, I mean I missed the squad meeting but I thought it was a coherent plot that told a rather fun story. You are just looking at ME1 with rose colored glasses.

Don't get me wrong, the game was by all means enjoyable, fun etc. But there's always room for improvement.

Not saying there isn't, but I just found that ME2's combat flows much better, and of course that is a grave sin for an RPG, and ME1's story wasn't exactly the Illiad or Odyssey, hell it's quality was par with Zelda.

It may not hold a candle to games like Xenogears or other titles in the genre (arguments could be made fo Suikoden, FFX, Chrono Trigger/Cross) however let us not be cruel here. Zelda is essentially a boy saving a princess for the umpteenth time with the only degree of originality seen is Link being afraid of the dark and going wolfy. Zelda has not had a storyline since the SNES days, at least not a good one. Mass Effect is better than that even if it is not "epic."

Personally, I liked the story myself. My only qualm was it felt like it dragged on slightly until you reached Virmire. As for the sin to RPGs. That is not necessarily true. I am a dedicated and borderline obsessed RPG fan, yet love FPS games all the same. I thoroughly enjoyed the combat in ME2 and agree it is superior in this regard. Hell  even the lack of an inventory does not bother me. I would be perfectly content if those aspects were left out had the story flowed better. I do concede to having all sorts of qualms about the lack of customization though... okay and I have been vocal about hating ammo and a few other things. In the end, I simply believe ME2 was an overreaction to complaints of ME. Such is why we must be certain so say "FIX BIOWARE FIX!" so they do not misinterpret us again and remove stuff.

Modifié par Bourne Endeavor, 01 décembre 2010 - 04:57 .

[ODST 3]

I liked the sequel much better.

[Niddy']

Mass Effect 2 destroyed immersion with those retarded mission completed screens which to me ruined the whole point of a flowing story and chopped it up into pieces like a Call of Duty game; which is meh at best.



I've played me1 like 20 times and me2 3, that may not be a main reason but f*&# that kills the mood.

[wulf3n]

ME1 - Clear Enemy

- Clear Objectives

- Main character essential to the plot (as well as some support characters)

- Cliched story yes, but executed to such a degree that i couldn't care less.



ME2 - Unclear "main" enemy

- Confusing objective

- Interchangeable characters, non of which necessary to the plot.(except mordin...once)

- 7 short stories.

[RiouHotaru]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Oh, and also...

You are just looking at ME1 with rose colored glasses.

This.  Seriously, ME1's plot really wasn't that great, either.  I just played the damn thing, so I know.

Yeah, ME's story wasn't terribly much better.  It dragged on for ages and ages without any idea that you making clear progress UNTIL Virmire.  Not to mention your squaddies didn't DO anything, they were walking exposition machines who droned on for hours about their backstories, or in Tali's case, droned on to fill up the Codex.  You had all but ONE member of your team recruited before you even left the Citadel.

The problem with the original is that the story wasn't made to flow consistently  It was rapid-fire in the beginning, then slowed to the pace of cool molasses in the middle and then jerked forward again into high speed right into the conclusion.  Also the agonizingly high quantity of tedious side-quests made that middle portion too much meat to chew on.

ME2's story is, IMO, much more consistent.  Plus each mission to fill out the team feels consistent to me.  I didn't feel like I was mindlessly slogging through any part of the game.  Streamlined does not = dumbed down, folks.

[wulf3n]

RiouHotaru wrote...
Yeah, ME's story wasn't terribly much better.  It dragged on for ages and ages without any idea that you making clear progress UNTIL Virmire.

How is that any better in ME2. You spend 90% of the game recruiting squad mates you don't even need.

RiouHotaru wrote...
Not to mention your squaddies didn't DO anything, they were walking exposition machines who droned on for hours about their backstories, 

Yep, thats ME2 for you, all about the characters, not the plot

RiouHotaru wrote...
The problem with the original is that the story wasn't made to flow consistently  It was rapid-fire in the beginning, then slowed to the pace of cool molasses in the middle and then jerked forward again into high speed right into the conclusion.  Also the agonizingly high quantity of tedious side-quests made that middle portion too much meat to chew on.

The story only slows if you do the NON-COMPULSORY side missions. the same thing happens in ME2.

RiouHotaru wrote...
ME2's story is, IMO, much more consistent.  Plus each mission to fill out the team feels consistent to me.

consistent here sounds more like repetitive. What precisely made ME2 "consistent"...also what do you mean by consistent?

RiouHotaru wrote...
 I didn't feel like I was mindlessly slogging through any part of the game.  Streamlined does not = dumbed down, folks.

That sounds more like a gameplay issue than a story one.

[AdmiralCheez]

@wulf: I think the streamlined =/= dumbed down is referring more to the pacing, here. I agree with Riou on most of his points.  Keep in mind that I loved both ME1 and ME2 and am not hating on either one.

Also, allow me to point out another false dichotomy the fans seem to have cooked up: having strong character development does not have to come at the expense of the central plot.  Hopefully, ME3 will prove that.

Modifié par AdmiralCheez, 01 décembre 2010 - 06:51 .

[Iakus]

Take it fromsomeone who was not spoiled on any of ME2's plot:



ME2, while better from a technical standpoint, was an abysmal story, and a terrible sequel.



ME 1 was kind of light on story elements too, but is an epic space opera in comparison. ME 2 is a dozen little snippets of stories mixed together without any kind of central focus to give it meaning. Nothing in one story impacts any other part, short of the "don't kill me" flag at the end.