129 réponses à ce sujet

[DRSH]

I enjoyed ME2 as much as I did ME1. Both games rock hard. Both games kick ass. Both games leave you wanting more... & this is what the OP wants... MORE! We all want MORE! ... so I guess I wrapped it up... if u either luv or hate ME2... u still want MOAR! ).

[alickar]

in ways i thinks this argument is usless 1st part all the game companies g4tv IGN etc said that they story was perfect and also mass effects stry is spread into 3 parts ME1 ME2 n ME3

[Gibb_Shepard]

Skilled Seeker wrote...

No the characters cannot be introduced in ME3 with the same level of depth and quantity as ME2. ME2 has a character driven story opposed to the narrative driven story of ME1. ME2's importance to the overarching plot will therefore depend on the treatment and impact of the ME2 characters in ME3.

Every single on can die. How significant so you think these disposable crew buddies will be?

[Skilled Seeker]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Skilled Seeker wrote...

No the characters cannot be introduced in ME3 with the same level of depth and quantity as ME2. ME2 has a character driven story opposed to the narrative driven story of ME1. ME2's importance to the overarching plot will therefore depend on the treatment and impact of the ME2 characters in ME3.

Every single on can die. How significant so you think these disposable crew buddies will be?

I don't know. I don't like jumping to conclusions. And I wasn't talking about just the squadmates either.

[AdmiralCheez]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Every single on can die. How significant so you think these disposable crew buddies will be?

Imagine if who lived had a massive effect (geddit?) on ME3.  CONSEQUENCES IN A BIOWARE GAME WHAT.

Seriously, just because they can die doesn't mean that their effect will be minimal.  I'm allowed to be optomistic if I want.

[kmcd5722]

The main story (even as stated by BW) is all about the characters. This is why it does not feel like a real sequel. It would have been a great side story, or it could have developed the situation with the Reapers/Collectors much deeper than it was. Oh well, hopefully ME3 will contain a richer story with plenty to do on the side.

[Pacifien]

If I wanted to spend the time to find it, I'd post a link to one of the preview interviews where the developers discuss their intentions with Mass Effect 2 and it being a game focused on the characters. A developer actually says in the interview that games are not built in such a manner, that team building is typically just a portion of the greater story, and they knew they were trying something that might not work in the end. And for some people on these forums, it obviously didn't work.

However, I appreciate them not shying away from creating something they knew beforehand might not work. Had I not enjoyed the game anyway, that appreciation would be a bitter pill to swallow. I've had to learn to accept or let go various other bitter disappointments from other series before, it's never a pleasant experience. My having to play this routine before makes me unsympathetic to those who are going through it now, I know.

I don't begrudge people disliking the game, just as I wish they would not begrudge me for liking the game. There's not a lot of middle ground to be found in such discussions. If they didn't like it and I did, to change it would mean taking away from one to please the other. And if the developers were intent on changing anything, I'd rather they simply take what they've done before at its most basic form as a mere stepping stone to developing something entirely new.

If you viewed the game simply on it being a portion of a larger story, it might age better. Maybe not. If gathering the team had been just 1/5th of the story as such things often are, perhaps it would not be so bad. Maybe not. I've seen people describe so many reasons for their dislike of the second game, it's really difficult to even tell where to start. And it wouldn't get us anywhere, the second game is over, it's out, it's done. Focusing on what should have been isn't going to change what was.

I bought Mass Effect 1 based on my playing previous BioWare games. I found it to be similar enough to KOTOR to feel it was a BioWare game, but different enough to realize it was skirting a different genre altogether. I mean, I had to have friends tell me how assault rifles and shotguns were supposed to work, that's how poorly I understood it. And yet I liked Mass Effect 2. I still don't own any other shooter game, and haven't enjoyed playing them when I try. So I never understood the complaint that Mass Effect 2 was squarely in the shooter genre. If it is, it's the only one that appeals to me.

I prefer to view the Mass Effect series as the hybrid I think it truly is, one that is not going to appeal to someone looking squarely for a traditional RPG experience and one that is not going to appeal to someone who only enjoys shooters. And what do you get when you can't claim to definitively be one or the other? Displeasure from both looking for a game designed to be only one thing. As I like games that defy genre labels, I don't have much sympathy for this either. I'm just an unsympathetic bastard all around, I suppose.

Anyway, ME2 wasn't a complete game because the developers never designed it to be so. They took advantage of it being the middle segment of a trilogy. I don't have a problem with this obviously.

Modifié par Pacifien, 19 décembre 2010 - 04:45 .

[AlanC9]

kmcd5722 wrote...

This is why it does not feel like a real sequel.

What does a "real sequel" feel like?

[kmcd5722]

AlanC9 wrote...

kmcd5722 wrote...

This is why it does not feel like a real sequel.

What does a "real sequel" feel like?

Continuing the fight against the reapers by not being distracted by spending 4/5 of the game recruiting/loyaling team members.  Maybe 1/5, as pacifien stated, would suffice, not 4/5.

[SSV Enterprise]

More infuriating posters...

ReveurIngenu wrote...

Let's look at it from this point of view then: Just because YOU see it as being a story doesn't mean it is.

What happened at the end of ME1?  Without really going into spoilers, at the end of ME1, you expected to continue Shepard's mission to save the galaxy from the Reapers.  In ME2, what was the bulk of the game?  Recruiting members.  For what? For a trivial little mission that really doesn't mean crap when you look at the threat that the Reapers represent.

The whole little "Human colonies are disappearing" crap.  Who the hell cares about some human colonies when the entire galaxy is being threatened by the Reapers?  It's like worring about your couch burning when your entire house is on fire.  It's like, what the heck is that?  That's not what's important!  How the hell does that advance the story that you have to inform the galaxy of the Reaper threat, and then rally them up to fight off the Reapers?

ME2's story is so trivial and pointless to the big story (if looking at my example, the big story is that your whole house is burning, not just your unimportant little couch that can be so easily replaced, so why are you only worring about your damn couch?).  The big story in ME being the fight against the reapers.

ME2 fills perfectly its title of being a "side mission" in the big picture that is the fight against the reapers. You ask what is to be thought of irrelevant subjects such as Wrex unifying his people, etc.  In that case, why not have made ME2 be about Shepard having to go buy milk because he had run out.  It would be interesting (not really, but you get my point) but it's completely irrelevent to the story.  That's all backstory, that's all side story, that's all side missions, that's all bonus.  In no way does it constitute the continuation of the story that is the fight for the Galaxy against the Reapers.

ME2 is just one-big side mission made to put humans in the spotlight for the upcoming human-centered conclusion.  :pinched: The more I reflect on it, the more I feel like Bioware and EA really take us for brainless morons and the more I dislike ME2 and feel I will be heavily disappointed in ME3 (that is, if I even buy it).

Has it even occured to you that the Collectors were part of the Reaper threat?

Heck, the Collectors seemed to be fulfilling, on their own, why the Reapers swing around the galaxy every 50,000 years!  The Collectors seemed to be the Reaper's "plan B" -- if their vanguard failed at bringing the Reapers back to the galaxy, then the Collectors would subtly do the job for them.  Thanks to the Illusive Man's intuition, he connected the dots between the Collectors and the Reapers.  Shepard then shot their plan B to hell.  After that, the Reapers basically said "Screw it, we'll go to the galaxy purely on engine power and make Shepard and his whole race pay for being a big pain in the ass!"

Let me put it another way:  The Collectors were eventually planning on hitting Earth.  That's pretty damn important, don't you agree?

Let's use my example one last time to demonstate how ridiculous the ME trilogy seems to be after ME1: 
ME1 -> Shepard notices the house is on fire, but no one else in the family notices.  ME1 is Shepard trying to inform the household of the threat that is the fire. 
ME2 -> Shepard, for an unknown reason, decides that only the couch is important.  While the whole house is starting to burn, his only concern is for the couch, which has begun taking flames.
ME3 (My guess) -> Shepard tells the other members of the househould that the couch is burning, and that if they don't all help put out the fire on the couch, it will spread to the rest of the house.  Except, the fire has no reason to start and to stop at the couch and the house could and should burn down because it is burning elsewhere, somewhere unrelated to the couch.  So why are they only concentrating their efforts on the couch?  Or rather, why is the fire only concentrating its efforts on the couch?  Why are we talking about the couch so much when the whole freakin' house is at stake???!!!

No, it's more like:

ME1:  Shepard sees a small fire in the house.  He puts it out, but sees a larger fire coming towards the house.
ME2:  The large fire has not arrived yet.  Another small fire appears specifically on his family, and he puts it out.
ME3:  The larger fire finally arrives, and seems to somehow go for his family.  He puts it out.

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

I
think we can all safely assume that Shepard isn't working for CErberus
in ME3. I mean in the description of the game it even says "Shepard, an
Alliance Marine".

Paragon Shepard probably won't be, but I'm pretty sure that Renegade
Shep will be.  And technically, Shepard will always be an Alliance
marine in the sense that he was trained as one.

Can easily be introduced in ME3, Complete non issue.

Introduced as thoroughly?  Did you miss the part where it took most of the game to develop these characters?  If ME2 didn't exist, then we'd have a lot of people crying foul that these characters are totally undeveloped, piling up too many for no gain.  Myself included.

[/b]The man is not a mute, he can tell you what happenned.

The only problem being Shepard was there, so why the hell should Garrus have to tell you?

He has done no such thing. Most clans hate the way Wrex want the Korgan species to be.

Some clans do, like Gatatog.  But the very fact that Urdnot has survived while taking this stance reveals that more clans are willing to go along with this than are unwilling.  Under Urdnot Wreav's leadership, Gatatog and Urdnot were close rivals, with Uvenk just waiting for the first oppurtunity to overturn Wreav.  WIth Wrex, Uvenk had litte power to stop what was happening.  Wrex himself says that things are going "Better than he'd feared, worse than he'd hoped."  There's also the fact that Weyrloc, a powerful rival clan, is absorbed into Urdnot upon completing Mordin's loyalty mission.

Obviously the krogan are not united as of ME2, but Wrex has them on their way.  They'll be ready by ME3.  Or at least, have a couple final things to wrap up.

Pretty insignificant buddy, the Krogan cure will take a very long time to finalize.

Oh, what makes you so sure?  Do you have a major in alien genetics, now?  And how do you even know how long the time between ME2 and ME3 is?  There were 2 years between ME1 and ME2.  Such a span should be enough for a salarian scientist like Mordin.

[b]They're dead.

Not necessarily.  There base is destroyed, yes, but it's implied that the Collectors have more than one ship.  The Reapers may also have some with them.  It would be odd to have these minions of the Reapers appear in ME3 with no introduction.

In
the end, their are little significant parts to ME2's story, and these
could easily be incorporated into ME3. There wasn't much significance in
the plot of ME2.

WROOOOOOOONG!

Modifié par SSV Enterprise, 19 décembre 2010 - 11:15 .

[Destroy Raiden_]

For OP, yes it was basically find all these people, do all their loyalty missions, then go to fight the final stage where you have multiple rooms and 15,000 weak subbosses before the major weak boss. That was 2 lets hope 3 is far far better. Don’t get me wrong Samara, Tali, Jack, Legion, Kasumi, and Jacobs missions where unique and creative but of those Tali and Legions should’ve been part of the main story plot rather then loyalty missions. All other missions while creative where really creative fillers with no way to add to the over all main story arch other then being what they where which was fun, creative, glorified sidequest.

[Iakus]

kmcd5722 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

kmcd5722 wrote...

This is why it does not feel like a real sequel.

What does a "real sequel" feel like?

Continuing the fight against the reapers by not being distracted by spending 4/5 of the game recruiting/loyaling team members.  Maybe 1/5, as pacifien stated, would suffice, not 4/5.

I don't think I would have minded too much focus on the team members if I thought the game actually focused on the team members.

I mean, the whole point of the game was "prepare your team for the suicide mission.  I expected taht to mean stuff like upgrading the Normandy (thankfully there really was a little of that), learning more about our enemy, gathering equipment we'll need, hearing opinions about what we should do and how to prepare, solving intraparty conflicts and convince these individuals from a variety of walks of life to work together.  Show them that you're a leader worth following and that you're ready for anything.  Essentially, I took it literally when it was referred to as a "Dirty Dozen in Space"

Turns out you do one favor for them and they're magically loyal, focused and ready for anything.  Personality clashes are minimal.  Heck personality is minimal when the spotlight isn't on them.

That's what it means to me, at least, when someone says the game feels incomplete.  It's like there's only a skeleton of a story attatched to all the shooting.  There's good elements in there, dont get me wrong.  I like learning backstories.  But the present was sacrificed for the past, like the game's plot was an afterthought.  With so many different people on board with different outlooks on life, loyalties, agendas, I expected more out of that.  It seemed like there was so much of a rush to tell these individual stories, that it was forgotton why they're all on this ship in the first place.

[AlanC9]

kmcd5722 wrote...


Continuing the fight against the reapers by not being distracted by spending 4/5 of the game recruiting/loyaling team members.  Maybe 1/5, as pacifien stated, would suffice, not 4/5.

How does recruiting the people you need to accomplish the mission count as a distraction from accomplishing that mission?

As opposed to what iakus is saying, where the problem is the execution, not the concept.

Modifié par AlanC9, 20 décembre 2010 - 07:50 .

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...
 I expected taht to mean stuff like upgrading the Normandy (thankfully there really was a little of that), learning more about our enemy, gathering equipment we'll need, hearing opinions about what we should do and how to prepare, solving intraparty conflicts and convince these individuals from a variety of walks of life to work together.

Well, all of those are in there to some extent, aren't they? Except for solving intraparty conflicts, I guess, since I don't think a P/R check is satisfactory there any more than you do. But I don't have a good way to handle that in gameplay.

[Chaos Gate]

AlanC9 wrote...

How does recruiting the people you need to accomplish the mission count as a distraction from accomplishing that mission?

As opposed to what iakus is saying, where the problem is the execution, not the concept.

Because it's a very cheap form of storytelling.

Collecting a gang of hardened fighters to complete a certain mission might well fit into a B-grade Stallone or Van Damme flick, but it won't convincingly work in any story worth its salt anywhere else. It's a hackneyed plot used to cover the absence of a real plot.

Furthermore, it detracts from the game by making Shepard look kinda silly and misguided. "The entire universe is about to go up in flames, and we are all in mortal danger...but hang on Tali, I'll secure your loyalty by helping you out with your Daddy issues first!" That sure makes sense, doesn't it?

Face it - the loyalty missions were poor. For the most part they felt like useless digressions that contributed very little to the core game. It is for this reason that I felt that they should have been downloadable content for when you completed the main campaign, rather than forming the central scaffolding for ME2's flimsy narrative. They were meaningless missions, just there as decorative filler rather than anything else - sure sounds like DLC to me.

Saying that Mass Effect 2 had no story is a bold claim, and yet it is a claim that I continue to make. The campaign felt fractured and pointless, and climaxed into a conclusion that lacked any satisfaction whatsoever. A far cry from the storylines we have become accustomed to from past Bioware productions.

[Pyrate_d]

SV Enterprise is entirely wrong (imo--this is all about opinion as to what constitutes "filler"), and rude besides.

I'm not going to knock introducing new characters and their conflicts (it's fun!), but as far as the REAPER STORYLINE is concerned, nothing happened in ME2. We're in the same positions we were in at the starting of the game. Using reaper technology seems like a minor point to me. It's certainly a very small thing when compared to the long journey that you took to get there.

ME2 is a great game, but I definitely think it could be classified as filler. As far as I'm concerned, bioware made the first game as an introduction to the main characters and the main story. The second game is simply a setup for the third game. We can all hope that ME3 will be a suitable climax.

After reading some of SSV Enterprise's other posts, I agree on some points. ME2 has vastly, vastly superior gameplay. It's on a whole different level. I couldn't play ME1 more than once, because combat just isn't fun to me. I'm still playing ME2 occasionally.

Modifié par Pyrate_d, 20 décembre 2010 - 09:04 .

[Pyrate_d]

double post!

Modifié par Pyrate_d, 20 décembre 2010 - 08:56 .

[SSV Enterprise]

Pyrate_d wrote...

SV Enterprise is entirely wrong (imo--this is all about opinion as to what constitutes "filler"), and rude besides.

I'm not going to knock introducing new characters and their conflicts (it's fun!), but as far as the REAPER STORYLINE is concerned, nothing happened in ME2. We're in the same positions we were in at the starting of the game. Using reaper technology seems like a minor point to me. It's certainly a very small thing when compared to the long journey that you took to get there.

ME2 is a great game, but I definitely think it could be classified as filler. As far as I'm concerned, bioware made the first game as an introduction to the main characters and the main story. The second game is simply a setup for the third game. We can all hope that ME3 will be a suitable climax.

After reading some of SSV Enterprise's other posts, I agree on some points. ME2 has vastly, vastly superior gameplay. It's on a whole different level. I couldn't play ME1 more than once, because combat just isn't fun to me. I'm still playing ME2 occasionally.

Nothing happened?  Good grief, how thick is your skull?  Did you miss the part where the Collectors were making a *censored spoiler* and Shepard stopped them?

And yes, I'm being rude.  As I said, people who think ME2's story is inferior to ME1's or just plain bad are fine thinking that; it's a matter of opinion.  People who say ME2's story was inconsequential are being plain stupid, and that's not a matter of opinion.  We haven't seen the potential consequences yet, and there are a lot of things set up in ME2 that could have great consequences.  Are we so distrustful of BioWare that we think they would let a whole game go to waste rather than using that setup to tie it all together for an explosive conclusion?

PS Setup isn't the same thing as filler.  Setup is important to what comes next.  Filler isn't.

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

iakus wrote...
 I expected taht to mean stuff like upgrading the Normandy (thankfully there really was a little of that), learning more about our enemy, gathering equipment we'll need, hearing opinions about what we should do and how to prepare, solving intraparty conflicts and convince these individuals from a variety of walks of life to work together.

Well, all of those are in there to some extent, aren't they? Except for solving intraparty conflicts, I guess, since I don't think a P/R check is satisfactory there any more than you do. But I don't have a good way to handle that in gameplay.

Not really, no. No attempt is made to verify anything TIM tells you about the Collector/Reaper connection.  In fact, that' connection is pretty much ignored for abut 2/3 of the game (in fact, Shep does suprisingly little fact-checking about anything this leader of a quasi-terrorist organization tells him). 

Sure you gather weapons and upgrades.  But you literally trip over most of them while doing other missions.  Plus squad mates just happen to have just the upgrades the Normandy needs, with no exotic components or materials needed.   Just mine a few planets! 

And gettng these people to all work together?  They barely acknowledge that there are other people on board!

[SSV Enterprise]

No one knows much about the Collectors, so how is Shepard supposed to do his own checking? He goes to Freedom's Progress, and indeed, finds an empty colony and the evidence of the Collectors. On Horizon the link to the Reapers is confirmed by the presence of the Husks. The Collector ship revealed more about the Collectors.

[Raniall]

The millions of people who bought this game, and all of the GOTY awards would disagree with the OP, and so do I.

[Maestro975]

I liked the way ME2's story was set up for the most part. It showed us the seedier underbelly of the universe and introduced individuals who will cause problems for you in the third installment, which are two things that the second chapter of a trilogy needs to do.

There are some cohesion issues that I wished they had fixed:


Dr. Wilson and the Shadow Broker. In the vanilla game, you never know why Wilson sells you out. In LOTSB, you just get a fleeting reference about Wilson being a mole in SB's files on Legion. Shep should've found out who Wilson was working for prior to the LOTSB mission, giving it a better setup than an email or hacking a few terminals.

Since the Collectors are said to work primarily through intermediaries (Golo'Mekk in Ascension, SB in Redemption, the vorcha in Mordin's recruitment mission), and you fight the Blue Suns while recruiting Garrus, Jack, and Grunt, they could've drawn a connection there. Harbinger or SB contact Vido, offering a substantial reward for Shepard's head. Vido in turn tells his men to keep an eye out. The Suns figure into a total of 8 missions/assignments, it wouldn't have been that hard to have a villain connected to the Collectors in some way show up in, say, two of them. In ME1, you were hunting Saren and Benezia, and when you strayed from that path, part of you wondered if you were giving them a head start. If you were the fugitive, that would give you the freedom to explore and build your team, yet also provide urgency/suspense as to when your pursuers are going to catch up to you again.

In ME1, e-mails always led to something. It was kindof annoying when I got that e-mail from Billy the escaped convict, saying more or less "thank's for blowing up Purgatory and letting me escape. I'll dedicate my next victim to you. Then I'll come after you because I'm that kindof guy" and no sidequest came of it.

The Derelict Reaper could've and should've been more than just a "haunted house shoot'em up." Setting foot on that ship should've been the ME equivelant of when Indiana Jones discovered the well of souls. Instead, it feels like it was added into the Collector thread at the last minute.

[Razyx]

Agree with the OP. I think we need ME3 to call ME2 "a sh**" or a good thing. E.G if we start ME3 having to choose (join) between the Alliance or Cerberus... ME2 would have more "weight", etc. If not, and talking about the main plot, ME2 is really weak.

[clennon8]

Any good story is about the characters and the setting, and ME2 delivered those things in spades. As for the plot, I think it was pretty typical for the middle part of a trilogy. I also think the detractors don't realize how much was actually accomplished, and how many story lines were advanced.

The bottom line, though, is that there is nothing new under the sun when it comes to plots; Shakespeare used them all up. What keeps me coming back to the Mass Effect universe is the people we get to meet and the depth of setting. Learning about ardat-yakshi, the Pact between the Hanar and Drell, the division of the geth, the quarian culture, the motivations of Cerberus - these details make the universe live and breathe, make it a place I want to spend time in. The reason I care about the Mass Effect universe - perhaps a tad too much - is that I care about Garrus, Liara, Tali, Wrex, Ashley, Dr. Chakwas, Miranda, Kasumi, Captain Anderson, Joker, EDI, and so on. Not because I want to see exactly how it all turns out with the Reapers.

That's not to say ME2 is an absolutely perfect game. There were a few misfires. That final boss did look an awful lot like a giant Terminator. And Jacob is kind of a bore. But I'm not going to dwell on the imperfections. BioWare has created something special, and I'm going to savor the experience.

Modifié par clennon8, 20 décembre 2010 - 07:04 .

[Wrathra]

Raniall wrote...

The millions of people who bought this game, and all of the GOTY awards would disagree with the OP, and so do I.

Millions of people bought books and watched movies about sparkly vampires too - so numbers don't necessarily mean quality. Just saying...