47 réponses à ce sujet

[AdmiralCheez]

Face it, Pallin went down for the story reasons. It's not a stupid retcon, it's plot progression.

ME2: Pallin died in geth attack and Chellick is executor.  This is mentioned once in-game by Emily Wong's newscast, and would have been mentioned twice had a short conversation with Garrus on the Citadel not been cut.

Retribution, which takes place post-ME2: Pallin is magically alive again and still executor.

Inquisition, which has an unclear timeframe: Bailey kills Pallin.

Analysis: RETCON.  If Emily Wong had not referred to Chellick as executor (since Garrus's line had been cut), it would not be an issue, but sloppy editing has led to a massive continuity fail.  Bioware goofed.

Also, funny how you complain about the SC2 story, when it's primarily a game about little tanks blowing up little soldiers, while the ME2 story, which is supposed to be about, well, the story of Commander Shepard, sucks at times harder than any part of SC2 story...

All right, I said I wasn't going to say anything, but here we go.

1. Magical Tassadar Jesus. (I love good ol' Tassy, but that part almost ruined the game for me.)
2. Xel'Naga Artifact + Kerrigan = WTF ending.
3. Anything and everything that had to do with Ariel. (I fully admit personal bias on this one.)
4. LOL prophecy time! *facepalm*
5. The Overmind was actually overminded by a bigger, badder, more evil overmind.  An interesting twist, but it gets old.

I could probably come up with more, but I haven't played it in a while because Bnet and I are currently not speaking to each other, plus I'd rather not further ruin a fun game for myself by picking out all the bits that don't make sense.  And yes, while you may argue that it's about little tanks blowing up little zerglings, the story is way more character-centered this time around.  Or did you miss all the parts with Jimmy getting drunk and brooding?

Fact is, SC2 falls apart under scrutiny just as fast as ME2.  Keep in mind that I love both games to death, but they suffer from equal suckage, albeit for different reasons.  Regardless, I only explained myself because you specifically challenged me on the subject, but this thread is supposed to have nothing to do with StarCraft and I don't want to get someone else's thread locked.  So please, drop the subject or PM me.

Modifié par AdmiralCheez, 04 décembre 2010 - 10:19 .

[dgcatanisiri]

I liked Pallin, but I like Bailey. Granted, at least part of that is because I like Michael Hogan, but still. But the death of Pallin is story progression, much like the resignation of Captain Anderson. These are background events that are happening in the overall narrative. They're showing that life is going on while Shepard is working elsewhere. There's time passing in between the games, and things do happen in the process. It's realistic for things to have happened in the time between games, rather than everything remaining static, waiting for the next chapter of Shepard's story to be told before things happen. So it doesn't bother me that Pallin has been killed.

[AdmiralCheez]

@dgcatanisiri: It wouldn't have bothered me, either, had they not killed him twice in two separate ways. See the first part of my above post. Really, I'm all for things going on in the background when Shepard's not present, but I'd really like all the stories to at least agree with each other when it comes to simple facts.

[LPPrince]

Hop off the SC2 train before it gets into an argument. Seriously.

Now then-

I understand the point about story progression outside the games, but the thing is, ME2 didn't have enough throwbacks to ME1, at least in my opinion.

Emails replaced what should've been ENCOUNTERS.

With the loss of Pallin, we lost another encounter with an ME1 character.

I want to meet up with some, not have something happen to them.

I'm still waiting on Samesh, Dr. Michel, Barla Von, Chorban, Jahleed, Emily Wong, Jeong, Lizbeth, possibly the Hanar Preacher(although that one's totally unnecessary for me, it'd be funny), Din Korlack, Calyn, The Consort, etc etc

Modifié par LPPrince, 04 décembre 2010 - 10:37 .

[AdmiralCheez]

Oh yeah, cameos trump emails, certainly. No one disagrees with you there, LPP. ;-)

[LPPrince]

I just felt that the emails were cop outs. I hate saying that, because I love Bioware, but I HATE that the emails replaced the encounters.

[In Exile]

It comes down to a choice between making content exclusive that only someone who played ME1 will see, or not. And Bioware chose to approach ME2 as a standalone, which was very confusing given the idea of the series.

[LPPrince]

Well, it does need to be standalone, but I don't see why that should've stopped these people from returning. A good refresher would be nice.

[this isnt my name]

In Exile wrote...

It comes down to a choice between making content exclusive that only someone who played ME1 will see, or not. And Bioware chose to approach ME2 as a standalone, which was very confusing given the idea of the series.

Dont they want the same for ME3 ?
Its annoying, why should my experience be ruined just because someone didnt play ME1, they didnt play it, ignore them and move on, I played it, I supported BW, I should be the pne they cater too not a guy who hasnt played the first game. So choices are removed due to greed about wanting more fans, and making the game "accessible" (SP ?) im noticing a pattern between seeing games made accessible and seeing them go downhill...
Thank god this will all be over with ME3 and I wont have to worry about this **** ever again, then I just have fable to worry about.

[LPPrince]

this isnt my name wrote...

Dont they want the same for ME3 ?
Its annoying, why should my experience be ruined just because someone didnt play ME1, they didnt play it, ignore them and move on, I played it, I supported BW, I should be the pne they cater too not a guy who hasnt played the first game. So choices are removed due to greed about wanting more fans, and making the game "accessible" (SP ?) im noticing a pattern between seeing games made accessible and seeing them go downhill...
Thank god this will all be over with ME3 and I wont have to worry about this **** ever again, then I just have fable to worry about.

O______O

There will ALWAYS be people who come into a series half way, or even at the end of it.

Bioware casts a safety net by making it accessible to new players. It wouldn't be smart to effectively force a new player to get an older game just to understand a new one.

I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't of bought Black Ops if they found out they had to buy World At War first.

Or God of War for God of War 3.

Or Fable for Fable III. The examples keep going.

[Mister Mida]

They should do the same thing like Ubisoft does with Assassin's Creed; at the start of the game (AC2/AC: you get an introduction vid telling you how the story has progressed up to that moment. New players may not understand the entire story then, but it's a cheap way of making the game idiot proof without necessarily rebooting a story and by doing so ****** off the existing fanbase.

But if ME (1) characters like Anderson and Ashley/Kaidan get the same shallow treatment in ME3 as in ME2 I'll be pissed off. And that is an understatement.

Modifié par Mister Mida, 05 décembre 2010 - 10:15 .

[this isnt my name]

LPPrince wrote...

this isnt my name wrote...

Dont they want the same for ME3 ?
Its annoying, why should my experience be ruined just because someone didnt play ME1, they didnt play it, ignore them and move on, I played it, I supported BW, I should be the pne they cater too not a guy who hasnt played the first game. So choices are removed due to greed about wanting more fans, and making the game "accessible" (SP ?) im noticing a pattern between seeing games made accessible and seeing them go downhill...
Thank god this will all be over with ME3 and I wont have to worry about this **** ever again, then I just have fable to worry about.

O______O

There will ALWAYS be people who come into a series half way, or even at the end of it.

Bioware casts a safety net by making it accessible to new players. It wouldn't be smart to effectively force a new player to get an older game just to understand a new one.

I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't of bought Black Ops if they found out they had to buy World At War first.

Or God of War for God of War 3.

Or Fable for Fable III. The examples keep going.

Then if they dont understand, or are at a disadvantage thier fault, the game shouldnt be effected by it.

Yes im sure they were all eager to find out how thier choices effected the world, and how they had an impact... Oh right you dont have an impact, ME is shepards story, he makes big choices that have huge impact (or should anyway) its stupid to have a big choice gutted because someone didnt get ME1 like the rest of us. We bought the games, we should get the most benefit, why should we have less because someone cant be bothered to play the first chapter ? Making each game stand alone makes it impossile for the choices to have depth and consequences, so what due to ME3 being standalone I will just get hatemail and spam from TIM, you saw how much depth ME1 choices had in 2, if 2 is the same then what is the point of choices ? Oh look a different email...
We cant have choices with depth and make it so anyone can pickit up, if I have supported ME from 1-3 then I should be the one to get the benefit, I shouldnt have my choices made irrlivent because some guy only decides to play 3.
Also this is shepards story, and has lots of choices, and importing them is  big talked about feature, unlike those other games, choices matter, they should have impact on a huge scale, it would be weird to choose the renegade option in ME2 at the end and just have an email or something pointless, and it would be basically the same as the paragons world... The other gamesare different stories, just because they are sequals dosent mean you can compare them to ME1/2/3.

Modifié par this isnt my name, 05 décembre 2010 - 11:06 .

[Phaedon]

Bailey was promoted to Commander, not Executor.

[Jzadek72]

LPPrince wrote...

 Anyone hoping this doesn't happen?

What I mean is simple- The Inquisition situation.

*SPOILERS AHEAD FOR INQUISITION AND RETRIBUTION*

Executor Pallin gets killed by Bailey, and then Bailey gets a promotion.

You know, when I heard Pallin was killed off and the Executor was Chellick, I was already miffed. I liked Pallin, and wanted to see him in ME3.

Then I found out that the promotion for Chellick was non-canon and Pallin was alive, thanks to Retribution.

Then Inquisition comes around and Pallin is killed. This time, its canon. Grrrrrrrreat.

And so it seems Bailey is going to be the one to "take his place", if you know what I mean.

*END SPOILERS*

Anyone share my opinion of not wanting a bunch of ME1 characters to die?

I don't even care if they were minor or major, I want as many ME1 characters back as possible.

I agree to a certain extent, but I prefer Bailley to Pallin (It's Saul Tigh) so I'm happy hes getting a larger part. Anyway, you don't hire someone like Micheal Hogan to do a part and not make the most of it.

[LPPrince]

Phaedon wrote...

Bailey was promoted to Commander, not Executor.

I don't literally mean he took his place. I mean that in ME3, instead of seeing Pallin again, we'll see Bailey kind of assume his role in the narrative. Not actually become Executor. Just be that senior officer we run in to.

Modifié par LPPrince, 05 décembre 2010 - 09:02 .

[LPPrince]

this isnt my name wrote...

Then if they dont understand, or are at a disadvantage thier fault, the game shouldnt be effected by it.

Yes im sure they were all eager to find out how thier choices effected the world, and how they had an impact... Oh right you dont have an impact, ME is shepards story, he makes big choices that have huge impact (or should anyway) its stupid to have a big choice gutted because someone didnt get ME1 like the rest of us. We bought the games, we should get the most benefit, why should we have less because someone cant be bothered to play the first chapter ? Making each game stand alone makes it impossile for the choices to have depth and consequences, so what due to ME3 being standalone I will just get hatemail and spam from TIM, you saw how much depth ME1 choices had in 2, if 2 is the same then what is the point of choices ? Oh look a different email...
We cant have choices with depth and make it so anyone can pickit up, if I have supported ME from 1-3 then I should be the one to get the benefit, I shouldnt have my choices made irrlivent because some guy only decides to play 3.
Also this is shepards story, and has lots of choices, and importing them is  big talked about feature, unlike those other games, choices matter, they should have impact on a huge scale, it would be weird to choose the renegade option in ME2 at the end and just have an email or something pointless, and it would be basically the same as the paragons world... The other gamesare different stories, just because they are sequals dosent mean you can compare them to ME1/2/3.

Simple. When you pay for a game, you are entitled to JUST that game. Its the same reason why achievements or trophies can't depend on you playing another game.

Its the difference between, "Beat ME2 with an ME1 character once" and "Beat ME2 with ME1 character once OR beat ME2 with a new character twice". The former you'll never see. The latter we have.

People who come in to a series later than others should not be inconvenienced. A refresher course is better than just throwing everything at them and expecting them to know what is going on.

I feel Bioware should've thrown more ME1 references into ME2, and hopefully throw a TON into ME3, but for the sake of the new players, they need to explain the story behind these characters.

For example-

When you see Shiala on Nos Astra, she mentions who she is and when you met her in ME1.

This needs to happen for most of the ME1 returns. This way, new players can say, "Oh, okay. I understand." rather than, "HUH!?"

[ReluctantMind]

Maybe Bioware should just slap together a brief character introduction sheet that can give the backstory on characters and include it in the game as a reference for new players. That would take next to zero resources. Sort of like the glossaries included in some big novels such as Dune.

[this isnt my name]

LPPrince wrote...

this isnt my name wrote...

Then if they dont understand, or are at a disadvantage thier fault, the game shouldnt be effected by it.

Yes im sure they were all eager to find out how thier choices effected the world, and how they had an impact... Oh right you dont have an impact, ME is shepards story, he makes big choices that have huge impact (or should anyway) its stupid to have a big choice gutted because someone didnt get ME1 like the rest of us. We bought the games, we should get the most benefit, why should we have less because someone cant be bothered to play the first chapter ? Making each game stand alone makes it impossile for the choices to have depth and consequences, so what due to ME3 being standalone I will just get hatemail and spam from TIM, you saw how much depth ME1 choices had in 2, if 2 is the same then what is the point of choices ? Oh look a different email...
We cant have choices with depth and make it so anyone can pickit up, if I have supported ME from 1-3 then I should be the one to get the benefit, I shouldnt have my choices made irrlivent because some guy only decides to play 3.
Also this is shepards story, and has lots of choices, and importing them is  big talked about feature, unlike those other games, choices matter, they should have impact on a huge scale, it would be weird to choose the renegade option in ME2 at the end and just have an email or something pointless, and it would be basically the same as the paragons world... The other gamesare different stories, just because they are sequals dosent mean you can compare them to ME1/2/3.

Simple. When you pay for a game, you are entitled to JUST that game. Its the same reason why achievements or trophies can't depend on you playing another game.

Its the difference between, "Beat ME2 with an ME1 character once" and "Beat ME2 with ME1 character once OR beat ME2 with a new character twice". The former you'll never see. The latter we have.

People who come in to a series later than others should not be inconvenienced. A refresher course is better than just throwing everything at them and expecting them to know what is going on.

I feel Bioware should've thrown more ME1 references into ME2, and hopefully throw a TON into ME3, but for the sake of the new players, they need to explain the story behind these characters.

For example-

When you see Shiala on Nos Astra, she mentions who she is and when you met her in ME1.

This needs to happen for most of the ME1 returns. This way, new players can say, "Oh, okay. I understand." rather than, "HUH!?"

Again thier fault, you dont buy a book and only read the last chapter, if your confused its your fault. People who supported the series from the start should not be inconveniced because of someone who didnt get part 1+2, if they want toknow they can play 1+2, we shouldnt have our experiences lessened just so its more accessible to someone who totally ignored the first two. Especially in a game like ME.

[LPPrince]

Its a game, not a book or movie. You can't use the same ideology.



In the end, Bioware makes the most money(which is what they want) if they make each game a successor to the last while still making it a standalone game.



It is their job to correctly balance that out.

[Sparda Stonerule]

I don't care what happens in the book as long as the story in the games comes through intact. Granted you get a more powerful effect from reading some books, like in Lair of the Shadow Broker. However, they aren't really needed for us to get a strong effect. Besides the only good Mass Effect book was the one with Anderson and Saren.

[LPPrince]

Hey, whether a book is good or not is an opinion, not outright fact. At least say that.



But then as far as the games go, Pallin's life would still TECHNICALLY be ambiguous. We don't know whether he's alive or not, since the "Executor Chellick" thing we heard in ME2 was retconned.

[Yakko77]

Cerberus Operative Ashley Williams wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Pallin was a typical Turian аsshole. Got what was coming to him. Bailey is a crook, but he is our crook.

I actually really liked Pallin even though he hated me. He was straight up with me. I respect that.

I'm not sure he hated Shepard or even humanity for that matter.  He was just wary and being cautious of a newcomer (humanity) and it quick rise to power and he was very clear about his distrust of Spectre's and their freedom to play by their own rules and abuse the powers granted to them.

[LPPrince]

Yakko77 wrote...

Cerberus Operative Ashley Williams wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Pallin was a typical Turian аsshole. Got what was coming to him. Bailey is a crook, but he is our crook.

I actually really liked Pallin even though he hated me. He was straight up with me. I respect that.

I'm not sure he hated Shepard or even humanity for that matter.  He was just wary and being cautious of a newcomer (humanity) and it quick rise to power and he was very clear about his distrust of Spectre's and their freedom to play by their own rules and abuse the powers granted to them.

Exactly. If anything, I'd say he respected Shepard, and really had to after ME1, even more so if you saved The Council as I did.