66 réponses à ce sujet

[azerSheppard]

I´m going to use movies. That´s appropriate. Look at original Star Wars Trilogy and new. If you don´t see it then it´s not my problem.

All horribly written scifi (if you can call it that), more befitting into  Tolkiens world than the supposed scifi that star wars is suposed to represent. I find recent pixar movies to contain more scifi than star wars movies.

Not dissing some of the books tho, they certainly went where George Lucas could never hope to go.

The only reason it got any attention was because in the 70's, aside from weed, there was nothing interesting to do.



Who considers the Star Wars movies as cult movies? Meaning non-mainstream? It was always mainstream, I never understood the rage about the new movies, they where exactly the same as the original 3, same exact formula:
0. Trope away
1. Create cookie cutter story-line
2. Cutting-edge special effects

SciFi, as it's name suggests is attempting to immerse the public into a fictif story created by means of scientific exploration. Read some Asimov if my explenation.
If the only thing you add is special effects, you can only be as much SciFi, as Saw is horror.

inb4 george lucas:ph34r:

[Bourne Endeavor]

Mesina2 wrote...

How did you come out of 30+ hours game with completely different engine to be expansion to 15+ hours game?

You may wish to rewrite this because the sentence it difficult to interpret. In any case, I claimed it was an expansion as an offset shot because I did not find the game a strong sequel or a sequel at all. It was a different adventure almost entirely and so standalone we may well have forgotten Mass Effect. That is similar to Dragon Age: Awakening, which is an expansion game to Dragon Age. Therefore, I called ME2 a fantastic "expansion" and weak sequel.

Story wise, kinda.
Gameplay wise, definitely not.

OK you just killed "Weak sequel" statement.

You have only played shooters or Final Fantasy-esque 'sequels' haven't you? A sequel is a game or story that continues where the first left off and branches forward the story. By your own admittance the story for the main plot was "kinda weak." Improved gameplay does not "kill" claiming something is a weak sequel. This is not Final Fantasy or Call of Duty, where each installment into the series has no reference to its predecessor.

Don't wear helmet then?

That would be fantastic, if it were possible on certain armor. I cannot remove the helmet on the Cerberus or Collector gear for example. So the alternative is to ignore them entirely, which is why it baffles me Bioware thought this would be a worthwhile concept. The art design is beautiful and yet many will never see it for more than a few minutes because people fancy seeing Shepard's face.

Phaedon wrote...

You do know that these count multiple
Sheps, right? So yes, I did skip Jacob/TIM/etc's dialogue as well. And I
still don't see your point, are 'shooter fans' not worthy of making a
consensus? The general consensus is that people liked ME2, I don't see
what's your problem with it.

Can I get a quote from Bioware about that? I have heard precisely the opposite. The fact Soldier is four times more popular than every other class combined leads me to believe those statistically are either widely inaccurate or only based upon the first Shepard registered. In the case of the latter, I would be considered to have played a Soldier as when I was playing around with the create options, I picked Soldier. Despite this, I have never bothered to finish a Soldier run. Soldier leading over the other classes is completely plausible but not being four times superior. You know how many Halo and CoD fans adore the sniper and shotgun?

Modifié par Bourne Endeavor, 27 décembre 2010 - 07:55 .

[Phaedon]

Can I get a quote from Bioware about that? I have heard precisely the opposite. The fact Soldier is four times more popular than every other class combined leads me to believe those statistically are either widely inaccurate or only based upon the first Shepard registered. In the case of the latter, I would be considered to have played a Soldier as when I was playing around with the create options, I picked Soldier. Despite this, I have never bothered to finish a Soldier run. Soldier leading over the other classes is completely plausible but not being four times superior. You know how many Halo and CoD fans adore the sniper and shotgun?

Why would they base these stats only on the first Shepard? Why limit the information that they collect. Data collection doesn't work that way. They say 'a player' not 'a Shepard'. And by player they mean all of their Shepards. Because, honestly, I don't think that only half of the people that played it managed to finish it.
I am not sure if I understand what you mean with the last sentence.

Modifié par Phaedon, 27 décembre 2010 - 09:31 .

[carlosjuero]

There is no "general consensus" on Mass Effect 2 - some people love it, some people hate it, some people are "meh" on it.



People who have any issues with it tend to be shouted down as "haters" and thus, I am thinking, are less likely to post their views when they see it happening to others.



I don't much care for ME 2 compared to ME 1 - there, I said it. Now I am labeled by some people automatically as a "hater", even though there are things I like about the game I just prefer the first one more - doesn't make me a "hater" just a different demographic than the game was aiming to grab by the short hairs.

[Phaedon]

carlosjuero wrote...
People who have any issues with it tend to be shouted down as "haters" and thus, I am thinking, are less likely to post their views when they see it happening to others.

No, they don't. You know that nobody even calls the true hardcore elitists, 'haters', right? Otherwise, a 1-day ban/warning makes sure that they won't do so again. As for less likely to post their views, well, please check the Disappointment thread

[expanding panic]

Burdokva wrote...

DarthCaine wrote...

Here some of the most voted polls on this site:

Disappointed with Mass Effect 2?
http://social.biowar...093/polls/1659/
Disappointed - 20%, Not Disappointed - 80%

Mass Effect 1 vs Mass Effect 2
http://social.biowar...596/polls/1670/
Mass Effect 1 - 37%, Mass Effect 2 - 63%

http://social.biowar...596/polls/4081/

GameSpot User Scores:
ME1: 9.1 360, 8.9 PC
ME2: 9.4 360, 9.3 PC

And yet the polls are from February, when Mass Effect 2 was brand new and we were still "lol"-ed by it. I prefer to look at things in perspective. 

Yes, it is a great game. As a sequel, it's decent. But it's not better than the original, to the contrary (except on a technical level). I'd say make the polls again a couple of months before Mass Effect 3 comes so that the forums will once again be buzzing with activity and enough time will have passed since ME2's release, and you may get different results. 

Mass effect 2 is far superior then the original. I was hooked on ME2 the whole time while in ME in stated out hooked fell out until Virmire. I think everything About ME2 is better then the original. I really hated the mako just drop me off where I have to be and let me do some shooting. I dont want to have to drive miles at a time risk my life before I can even get to where i have to be.

[CroGamer002]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

You may wish to rewrite this because the sentence it difficult to interpret. In any case, I claimed it was an expansion as an offset shot because I did not find the game a strong sequel or a sequel at all. It was a different adventure almost entirely and so standalone we may well have forgotten Mass Effect. That is similar to Dragon Age: Awakening, which is an expansion game to Dragon Age. Therefore, I called ME2 a fantastic "expansion" and weak sequel.

Then Star Wars Empire Strikes Back is expansion to New Hope by your logic.

You have only played shooters or Final Fantasy-esque 'sequels' haven't you? A sequel is a game or story that continues where the first left off and branches forward the story. By your own admittance the story for the main plot was "kinda weak." Improved gameplay does not "kill" claiming something is a weak sequel. This is not Final Fantasy or Call of Duty, where each installment into the series has no reference to its predecessor.

Actually I never heard of Final Fantasy until discovering AVGN and Spoony. Also I wasn't compering FF and CoD to Mass Effect. I don't want ME to look like anything like that overrated franchise of FF neither a CoD as much as I love that franchise.
Yes I admit ME2 main plot is inferior to ME1 but then again it's same thing with every trilogy ever made.
Terminator doesn't count.

That would be fantastic, if it were possible on certain armor. I cannot remove the helmet on the Cerberus or Collector gear for example. So the alternative is to ignore them entirely, which is why it baffles me Bioware thought this would be a worthwhile concept. The art design is beautiful and yet many will never see it for more than a few minutes because people fancy seeing Shepard's face.

Oh you're talking about DLC armors.
I have few of those, nothing special.
N7 custom armor is way better since you can customize it.

[Xeranx]

Phaedon wrote...

Can I get a quote from Bioware about that? I have heard precisely the opposite. The fact Soldier is four times more popular than every other class combined leads me to believe those statistically are either widely inaccurate or only based upon the first Shepard registered. In the case of the latter, I would be considered to have played a Soldier as when I was playing around with the create options, I picked Soldier. Despite this, I have never bothered to finish a Soldier run. Soldier leading over the other classes is completely plausible but not being four times superior. You know how many Halo and CoD fans adore the sniper and shotgun?

Why would they base these stats only on the first Shepard? Why limit the information that they collect. Data collection doesn't work that way. They say 'a player' not 'a Shepard'. And by player they mean all of their Shepards. Because, honestly, I don't think that only half of the people that played it managed to finish it.
I am not sure if I understand what you mean with the last sentence.

I'd like to know how that makes any sense considering the fact that on any account registered to the Cerberus Network no one can use the same account to play ME2 at the same time you're playing ME2 with that account.  In other words, I can't use Xeranx and have someone else play ME2 and be logged in with Xeranx at the same time.  

That stat has nothing to do with however many Shepards a player uses.  It's states plainly that "roughly 50% of players who started Mass Effect 2 finished the game".  It does not say roughly 50% of Shepards per a percentage of players were used to completion of the game.  

[Phaedon]

You are suggesting, then, that only half of the players who played ME2 managed to beat it?



What happened to them, explosive diarrhea?

[InvaderErl]

carlosjuero wrote...

There is no "general consensus" on Mass Effect 2 - some people love it, some people hate it, some people are "meh" on it.

General consensus means the majority consensus.

The fact that ME2 keeps pushing ahead in reader's choice polls, which involve thousands of voters, to either #1 or #2 indicates the majority hence GENERAL consensus of the game is positive.

Your point would only work if someone were to ask what is EVERYONE's opinion of ME2 which is not what the topic asked.

Modifié par InvaderErl, 28 décembre 2010 - 12:03 .

[Bourne Endeavor]

Why would they base these stats only on the first Shepard? Why limit the information that they collect. Data collection doesn't work that way. They say 'a player' not 'a Shepard'. And by player they mean all of their Shepards. Because, honestly, I don't think that only half of the people that played it managed to finish it.
I am not sure if I understand what you mean with the last sentence.

It could be based on limitations or the presumption collecting data for multiple play throughs is unnecessary. There are numerous reasons it could be restricted. Saying "a player" could reference to one Shepard. There is no definition answer to suggest they meant all Shepards. In fact, it is more plausible than not that data analysis was collected from a single play through because subsequent files would not widely differ beyond morality choices. It could therefore be perceived as waste.

What I meant by my last sentence was with the general preference of those weapons in FPS games. It seems remarkably unlikely Vanguard and Infiltrator would be so widely underplayed in comparison to Soldier. If data was solitary in its collection, this would make more sense.

In any event, this is mere speculation on my part. I had merely heard it was only the initial file that was compiled and have not heard anything to suggest otherwise. As I stated above, the results suggest that is the case.

Mesina2 wrote...

[Then Star Wars Empire Strikes Back is expansion to New Hope by your logic.

Ever watched Star Wars. If it were similar to Mass Effect 2 storywise, then yes. I would claim it was a weak sequel or mocking jest it was an expansion. Ironically, the general opinion I have heard is Empire Strikes Back is only adequate or even bad in comparison to its predecessor and subsequent sequel.

Modifié par Bourne Endeavor, 28 décembre 2010 - 12:05 .

[InvaderErl]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...
 Ironically, the general opinion I have heard is Empire Strikes Back is only adequate or even bad in comparison to its predecessor and subsequent sequel.

What maniac told you this?

[cachx]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...
 Ironically, the general opinion I have heard is Empire Strikes Back is only adequate or even bad in comparison to its predecessor and subsequent sequel.

MY expression at this sentence.

As for the OP. WEll, look around. ME2 is in pretty much everybody's 'best of' lists this year (this forum maybe being the exception).

Modifié par cachx, 28 décembre 2010 - 12:17 .

[Pwner1323]

InvaderErl wrote...

Bourne Endeavor wrote...
 Ironically, the general opinion I have heard is Empire Strikes Back is only adequate or even bad in comparison to its predecessor and subsequent sequel.

What maniac told you this?

Im glad I don't undestand this sentence. It means I don't play WoW and have a life. Phew......

[Sandbox47]

General consensus? I don't know for sure but... where I live, ME2 is favoured over ME by everyone I know. The best thing about it would be the fact that you can choose whether you are in cover or not. I'm a bit pissed off that Liara isn't a team member but on the other hand Aria is introduced and I'm counting on them to give her a bigger part in the future.

There is also more story in ME2 and the codex has expanded (though they've removed the personal stuff).

[InvaderErl]

Pwner1323 wrote...

InvaderErl wrote...

Bourne Endeavor wrote...
 Ironically, the general opinion I have heard is Empire Strikes Back is only adequate or even bad in comparison to its predecessor and subsequent sequel.

What maniac told you this?

Im glad I don't undestand this sentence. It means I don't play WoW and have a life. Phew......

Silence you.

I'll have none of your nerd bashing, especially whilst posting on a video game forum.

Also where'd the heck WoW enter into this?

Modifié par InvaderErl, 28 décembre 2010 - 01:16 .

[Pacifien]

This topic is far too broad as it encompasses the entire purpose of these forums: to give your opinion on the game. Simply reading other people's posts will give someone a general idea of what they think about Mass Effect 2. Having someone try to derive some sort of consensus opinion about it all is going to be biased according to the person collating the data, I imagine.



Also, no insults on these forums. Ever.