92 réponses à ce sujet

[SmokePants]

I would be upset if we had any inkling as to how the Reapers will be nullified. That would be hack storytelling. The upcoming invasion is SUPPOSED to feel hopeless.

A narrative is not a tree to be climbed, it is a rollercoaster to be ridden.

Modifié par SmokePants, 01 janvier 2011 - 02:10 .

[Zulu_DFA]

Pro_Consul wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Pro_Consul wrote...

Based on what reasoning do you conclude that this IS a red herring from the writers who have completely eschewed them up to this point? (That was a rhetorical question, I am not actually inviting you to highjack this thread by giving a detailed answer.)

So I'll give you a quick answer:

It's either a red herring or a plot hole.

That, by you, is "reasoning". I guess that sorta does answer my question, although not at all in the way I was expecting.

I though you weren't inviting me to give a long answer.

Pro_Consul wrote...

Hmm... One or more Reapers is said to have attempted to indoctrinate the Rachni by trying to highjack their telepathic means of communication, with the affect that it drove them to extremes of uncontrolled aggression.

It is said by who exactly? The queen wasn't able to make sense out of it all when it was sitting in the tank, even though it could provide the exact location of the Mu relay. So anything that it could tell you later would be just a made-up story, period.

The plot hole here would be that why would the Reapers need to indoctrinate the Rachni 2K years prior to the next 50K milestone when the spacefaring life had only just sprung up again, even though they've got the Collectors at their disposal (that were lurking at their base beyond the Omega-4 relay but weren't active until ~500 years back)?

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 01 janvier 2011 - 02:21 .

[glacier1701]

Zulu_DFA wrote...
...snip...
It is said by who exactly? The queen wasn't able to make sense out of it all when it was sitting in the tank, even though it could provide the exact location of the Mu relay. So anything that it could tell you later would be just a made-up story, period.

The plot hole here would be that why would the Reapers need to indoctrinate the Rachni 2K years prior to the next 50K milestone when the spacefaring life had only just sprung up again, even though they've got the Collectors at their disposal (that were lurking at their base beyond the Omega-4 relay but weren't active until ~500 years back)?

 You are making a lot of mistakes and bad assumptions with this statement.

(1) 50k years for each cycle is NOT an exact timetable. We have estimates and estimates only. Even the dating of the Prothean extinction is rough. So whats to say that the time of the Rachni Wars was not 50k years after the the Prothean Extinction? 50k years is a nice round figure - its why its used. There is always some sort of margin of error when dating and from what we have been told the figure was used 2000 years ago when The Rachni Wars started and even before then when just the Asari and Salarians were at The Citadel. A margin of error of 5% (which is what 2000 years boils down to) is not that big when we consider the level of destruction inflicted by the Reapers last time around.
(2) The Rachni Queen has NOTHING to gain by lying or making up stories. If she and her race are to survive she needs an ally. By saying that the Reapers indoctrinated the Rachni BEFORE Shepard releases her is giving your enemy (Shepard at this point) a potential reason FOR not letting you go. There is already reason enough to destroy the Queen but adding in that really means treading a dangerous path especially if its a lie. If she were to lie she would not admit to a weakness.
 (3) Making up stories later on (if you did release the Queen) gains nothing. The Council knows about the Rachni thus the Reapers will know about the Reapers. Rachni ships are being spotted and thus information is on the Extranet and thus again the Reapers know about the Rachni. Thus there is NO point in making up stories since the Reapers know the Rachni are a space faring race, are dangerous and thus need to be exterminated. Lying to the person who seems to be the one person who can help and has helped you in the past leads to the fact that when push comes to shove they may abandon you because you lied. Thus telling the truth is best as it means that no false hope is generated when the Reapers do arrive. False hope could mean that the Reapers are NOT stopped and thus the end of the Rachni.


 Nope the plot hole is the fact that when the ME1 story was being developed the story for ME2 was something completely different. For whatever reasons the original story for ME2 was thrown out and a new one put that ignored much of what was done and said in ME1 because that way the combat side of things could be played up. The bad job done with the story shows clearly the fact that BW would really have liked to have restarted the whole series and ignore ME1 but they could not. Indeed you can make the statement that had ME2 been the story of ME1 and the ME1 story that in ME2 (with appropriate alterations to minor points) the whole series would make a lot more sense and be of greater grandeur.

[Zulu_DFA]

glacier1701 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...
...snip...
It is said by who exactly? The queen wasn't able to make sense out of it all when it was sitting in the tank, even though it could provide the exact location of the Mu relay. So anything that it could tell you later would be just a made-up story, period.

The plot hole here would be that why would the Reapers need to indoctrinate the Rachni 2K years prior to the next 50K milestone when the spacefaring life had only just sprung up again, even though they've got the Collectors at their disposal (that were lurking at their base beyond the Omega-4 relay but weren't active until ~500 years back)?

 You are making a lot of mistakes and bad assumptions with this statement.

(1) 50k years for each cycle is NOT an exact timetable. We have estimates and estimates only. Even the dating of the Prothean extinction is rough. So whats to say that the time of the Rachni Wars was not 50k years after the the Prothean Extinction? 50k years is a nice round figure - its why its used. There is always some sort of margin of error when dating and from what we have been told the figure was used 2000 years ago when The Rachni Wars started and even before then when just the Asari and Salarians were at The Citadel. A margin of error of 5% (which is what 2000 years boils down to) is not that big when we consider the level of destruction inflicted by the Reapers last time around.

(2) The Rachni Queen has NOTHING to gain by lying or making up stories. If she and her race are to survive she needs an ally. By saying that the Reapers indoctrinated the Rachni BEFORE Shepard releases her is giving your enemy (Shepard at this point) a potential reason FOR not letting you go. There is already reason enough to destroy the Queen but adding in that really means treading a dangerous path especially if its a lie. If she were to lie she would not admit to a weakness.
 (3) Making up stories later on (if you did release the Queen) gains nothing. The Council knows about the Rachni thus the Reapers will know about the Reapers. Rachni ships are being spotted and thus information is on the Extranet and thus again the Reapers know about the Rachni. Thus there is NO point in making up stories since the Reapers know the Rachni are a space faring race, are dangerous and thus need to be exterminated. Lying to the person who seems to be the one person who can help and has helped you in the past leads to the fact that when push comes to shove they may abandon you because you lied. Thus telling the truth is best as it means that no false hope is generated when the Reapers do arrive. False hope could mean that the Reapers are NOT stopped and thus the end of the Rachni.


 Nope the plot hole is the fact that when the ME1 story was being developed the story for ME2 was something completely different. For whatever reasons the original story for ME2 was thrown out and a new one put that ignored much of what was done and said in ME1 because that way the combat side of things could be played up. The bad job done with the story shows clearly the fact that BW would really have liked to have restarted the whole series and ignore ME1 but they could not. Indeed you can make the statement that had ME2 been the story of ME1 and the ME1 story that in ME2 (with appropriate alterations to minor points) the whole series would make a lot more sense and be of greater grandeur.

(1) All right, I can give you the "rough estimate", but the Galactic civilization was still too young at that time to be suitable for reaping.

(2) Life maybe? And I am of the opinion that the queen wasn't saying in ME1 that the Rachni had been indoctrinated. But it was lying when it promised to behave.

(3) Time to build up and become independent of your naive mercy? So that if some Council agent stumbled upon the breeding Rachni, they would have at least you as an ally to vouch for them and stall the containment effort somewhat, while they were spreading over the Galaxy like locust?

As for the story in general, I agree it suffered due to the crappy shift towards the 3D-arcade gameplay style and shameless fan service, but only in presentation (aka plot). The pivotal points of the script of the trilogy were never thrown out and substituted with something else.

Shepard was always destined to work for Ceberus. Only it was poorly explained for the paragons.
The Reapers were always targetting Humanity, but not until ME2 they went to open action.

[JamieCOTC]

FOZ289 wrote...

The whole story?  Can someone explain why Mass Effect 2 mattered at all in the big picture? 
They introduced a new enemy, and you spend the whole game fighting them and them only.  By the end you're no better off against the Reapers.  If any mention of Reapers were removed, Mass Effect 2 would stand entirely alone.  But the thing is, this is the 2nd game and they only have 3 games (well, and a bunch of novels and comics) to tell the story, and you'd figure something would be added, and so this kind of stands out as a huge oversight.

I know people will try to defend it as saying it's developing characters, but how does that justify making a 20 hour long sidestory as the 2nd part of a trilogy?  Even if Mass Effect 3 somehow finds a way to give an actual point to everything in the 2nd game, it doesn't stop the plot from being fairly unsatisfying.

That's why ME2 = great game, bad sequel. 

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

SmokePants wrote...

I would be upset if we had any inkling as to how the Reapers will be nullified. That would be hack storytelling. The upcoming invasion is SUPPOSED to feel hopeless.

A narrative is not a tree to be climbed, it is a rollercoaster to be ridden.

QFT and I love that last sentence.

Darth Caine wrote...
Yes and if you take out any reference to lightsabers, The Force, Sith or Jedi, you'd have no idea Empire Strikes Back is related to Star Wars.While you're at it take out any mention of Terminators or Skynet in Terminator 2 and it'll have no relation to The Terminator.And then remove all pirates, guns, swords and ships from Dead Man's Chest and it'll have no relation to Pirates of the Carribean

Not to mention any of the sequels following the exploits of the main characters from the first one. You know, just like what ME2 does. But I suppose that level of thinking is above some peoples heads.

The Big Nothing wrote...
What was the point of The Empire Strikes Back, besides being the awesome cream in the "Star Wars" cookie?

Didymos1120 wrote...
Seriously.  The Rebellion accomplished precisely jack in that movie and barely made an appearance  Getting curb-stomped in the beginning was their whole contribution to the plot: it provided Luke with the perfect excuse to go train, since everyone had to scatter anyway.  And the "I am your father" and "Han On Ice" parts contributed nothing to the "Destroy the Empire" goal.  Still the best SW film by a mile.

Indeed. Let's just hope ME3 doesn't have some annoyingly cute little furballs being the saviours of the galaxy though and ending with some really bad tribal or 'new world' music.

[JamieCOTC]

MajorStranger wrote...


If you have read Casey Hudson's interview about Mass Effect 3 (which i did) He clearly stated that Mass Effect 3 will have two completely different ending (and many in between) either we win or we all die. Consider that: If in mass effect  you have save the council and the rachni, and then in Mass Effect 2 you have gain the loyalty the Urdnot Clan (by not killing Wrex), The Quarian (by the trial) and the Geth (by the "side-quest" as you say, your chances of wining the war are better than if you just had the Alliance help. .

Cool.  btw, where is this interview.  I'd love to read it.  Thanks. 

[Mister Mida]

Can't say that right now I don't agree with OP. ME2 did feel like a bit of a reboot IMO.

[FOZ289]

MajorStranger wrote...

FOZ289 wrote...

SSV Enterprise wrote...

In the big picture (spoilers ahoy):

--We know the Reapers are particularly interested in humanity.
--We know at least part of why the Reapers wipe out the galaxy every 50,000 years.
--We know that the Protheans weren't truly wiped out, but were adapted.
--We know that Sovereign was responsible for the rachni's madness, and that the new rachni are currently preparing to fight the Reapers (if you spared the queen, that is)
--If Wrex is alive, he is uniting the krogan.
--Mordin may come up with a genophage cure.
--We know that only a small fraction of the geth actually supported Sovereign.  The geth "Heretics" have been defeated, and an alliance with the geth may be possible.
--...on the other hand, a quarian invasion of geth space may happen soon.  The quarians may even re-subjugate the geth.
--You possibly have the support of Cerberus
--You possibly do not have the support of the Council and the Alliance.
--You may be able to use the Reapers' own technology against them.

That was off the top of my head.  I think that's a pretty sizeable addition to the big picture.

-Huh?  We know Harbinger has a grudge against Shepard, and we know they used the Collectors to try to make a new Reaper out of humans.  That's about it.
-Part of why?  All I remember on the subject is an utterly nonsensical monologue about how Shepard has "failed" and that Reapers are "salvation through destruction" which makes not even the slightest bit of sense, since Reapers can pretty much bs their way out of anything by saying "It's beyond your comprehension."
-Vigil already said that the Reapers enslaved tons of Protheans, now we just now that the enslaved Protheans aren't dead, but they've been so modified it doesn't even matter anymore.  They might as well be mutated gorillas.

Why does any of this matter?  It took the whole Citadel fleet and a bunch of Alliance ships to kill ONE Reaper, and that's also because Sovereign was focusing some power on controlling Saren's body.  What does it matter if Wrex is uniting the Krogan?  After 2 years he just has a couple clans that just beat the hell out of any other clan that talks **** about Urdnot.  And the rachni.  So what if they're progressing fast, what the hell are they and the Krogan going to do against hundreds/ thousands of Reapers? 

Geth/ Quarian:  The Quarians don't care, and uniting the Geth is a loyalty quest that some people didn't even do.  I don't see how an optional quest can make or break the entire plot of the third game.

Cerberus?  What have they even done?  They're just a radical group, a splinter cell of one BRANCH of the Alliance. 
Council/ Alliance:  We already knew the Council isn't helping, they had all of one scene in ME2.  That's not new information.

What Reaper technology?  All you got out of the derelict Reaper was the IFF, and Sovereign was too damaged for anyone to find anything useful.  And both of those are now gone, plus I blew up the Collector base.

Seriously, HOW is anyone any closer at all to stopping the Reapers?  Yeah, I'm sure a couple dozen Krogan ships are going to make a big difference fighting hundreds of mothership-sized sentient death machines.

If you have read Casey Hudson's interview about Mass Effect 3 (which i did) He clearly stated that Mass Effect 3 will have two completely different ending (and many in between) either we win or we all die. Consider that: If in mass effect  you have save the council and the rachni, and then in Mass Effect 2 you have gain the loyalty the Urdnot Clan (by not killing Wrex), The Quarian (by the trial) and the Geth (by the "side-quest" as you say, your chances of wining the war are better than if you just had the Alliance help.

Try not to see the Mass Effect Trilogy like three video game but more like a big giant game in which every choice you have matters.

You are just a troll who need an audience. You don't like it? Don't play it and don't complain about it.

Why should I need to read an interview about Mass Effect 3?  This is Mass Effect 2.  The trailer for ME3 did not release immediately after ME2 came out, if I had posted this months earlier your defense wouldn't exist.  No information regarding Mass Effect 3 should be required for the plot.  That makes no sense.  Mass Effect 2 doesn't have any loose ends of its own, instead it introduced entirely new threads, resolved those, and ignored the loose ends from the first game entirely.

I cannot stand people who think I'm trolling and dislike a game because I complain about it.  I could write 4 paragraphs about where Valve has gone wrong with Team Fortress 2, but that doesn't mean I dislike the game.  You don't NEED to hate a game to criticize it.  So don't even start that ****.  The solution to a problem is not ignoring it.

Modifié par FOZ289, 01 janvier 2011 - 07:28 .

[Lord Nicholai]

StowyMcStowstow wrote...
If you take out any reference to Cerberus, the Reapers or the Protheans, then you would have no idea the game was related to Mass Effect.

True, Mass Effect only has three things that make it recognisable.

Nightwriter wrote...

But what if combining the resources of both plan A and plan B would result in mission success?

This means, what if Sovereign had thrown both the geth and the Collectors at the problem?

The Collectors would have been wiped out...

Modifié par Lord Nicholai, 01 janvier 2011 - 07:48 .

[azerSheppard]

Mister Mida wrote...

Can't say that right now I don't agree with OP. ME2 did feel like a bit of a reboot IMO.

Infact it was, Bioware wanted the PS3 gamers to have a fair shot at it, so they kinda made a reboot esque sequel.

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

FOZ289 wrote...
Mass Effect 2 doesn't have any loose ends of its own, instead it introduced entirely new threads, resolved those, and ignored the loose ends from the first game entirely.

Despite your claims in the other paragraph below the one I've quoted. I think this post sentence proves even more so what a silly troll you are to come out with such a statement especially with the fact I've noticed you haven't bothered responding to the most obvious flaw in your OP that people have picked up on.

All ME2 issues resolved? Really? Sorry but no, they aren't. If you think that then you really are an idiot.
Loose ends from ME ignored? You mean like the Rachni? Oh no wait, they weren't ignored. Keeping Wrex alive? Oh no wait, that wasn't ignored. Keeping the council alive? Ahh yes... Airquotes The Council *close airquotes* we saw them in ME2. I could go through a whole slew of ME loose ends that were either resolved or we got more info about in ME. But I'd probably fill out the whole page with it and I think I've already made one part of my point. The other part being... this is the 2nd part of a trilogy, they could easily have ignored some stuff until ME3 or at least left things open because, they might, you know, have no importance as far as the plot goes in ME2 and be of more relevance to what happens in ME3.

[88mphSlayer]

well they wrote the first game, then realized if they wanted the trilogy to end with the reapers invading the milky way, they'd need to somehow cover several years of waiting with something interesting



so they took the Aliens approach having Shepard revived with a new form of enemy, new characters and a different universe in general, gave them the perfect setup to revamp the Mass Effect series in general



i think the only problem was just that the big deal are the reapers invading the galaxy, not some backup plan... so i can sorta forgive Bioware for not being able to really push the collectors, after all after ME1 players loved some form of finality in a story, so the collectors were never going to be able to be as big or interesting threat as the reapers



although i think they took that and maybe didn't work enough on the collectors, i mean sure you might not find them useful for the 3rd game as the Reapers would overshadow the collectors in the minds of gamers, but that doesn't mean you use them as a convenient plot device just to push character arcs for the 3rd game

[tdb023]

In the grand scheme of things, ME2's main purpose is to bridge the gap between ME1 and ME3. It also throws us into some major conflicts throughout the galaxy, like the Quarian-Geth almost war. It also gives us a very powerful ally, or acquaintance, depending on how you look at him, with the Illusive man. Plus, it gives us a bigger ship, a new crew, outside of Garrus and Tali, and a weapon, perhaps, that can take down a reaper in the Thanix Canon,

[FOZ289]

Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien wrote...

FOZ289 wrote...
Mass Effect 2 doesn't have any loose ends of its own, instead it introduced entirely new threads, resolved those, and ignored the loose ends from the first game entirely.

Despite your claims in the other paragraph below the one I've quoted. I think this post sentence proves even more so what a silly troll you are to come out with such a statement especially with the fact I've noticed you haven't bothered responding to the most obvious flaw in your OP that people have picked up on.

All ME2 issues resolved? Really? Sorry but no, they aren't. If you think that then you really are an idiot.
Loose ends from ME ignored? You mean like the Rachni? Oh no wait, they weren't ignored. Keeping Wrex alive? Oh no wait, that wasn't ignored. Keeping the council alive? Ahh yes... Airquotes The Council *close airquotes* we saw them in ME2. I could go through a whole slew of ME loose ends that were either resolved or we got more info about in ME. But I'd probably fill out the whole page with it and I think I've already made one part of my point. The other part being... this is the 2nd part of a trilogy, they could easily have ignored some stuff until ME3 or at least left things open because, they might, you know, have no importance as far as the plot goes in ME2 and be of more relevance to what happens in ME3.

What loose ends are you talking about?
Collectors:  Introduced, gone.  New Reaper:  Introduced, destroyed.  Harbinger, okay, but he's basically just the voice of the Reapers and so they still have a presence in the game now that Sovereign is gone.  He didn't exist in the first game, so he's a new issue that I didn't expect to be resolved by the end of ME2 anyway.

Wrex and the rachni weren't loose ends.  Just because Wrex shows up in ME2 is not a "loose end," it's simple continuity.  If Wrex had stolen an escape pod and abandoned the crew at the end of the first game, for example, THAT would be a loose end.  Wrex's simple appearance and minor role in ME2 is not a resolution of a loose end, unless your loose end was "Is Wrex going to do anything after ME1?"

The Council was a loose end because they don't believe Shepard.  In ME2, they appear for one scene, ignore you yet again, and that's it.  They're still a loose end, not resolved in the slightest.

The loose ends:  Council doesn't believe you:  Not resolved at all.  Council doesn't give half a damn.
A way to defeat the Reapers:  Not resolved at all (if you destroyed Collector ship)  We know it's going to take more than brute force to stop the Reapers.  If you chose to destroy the Collector ship, then you have nothing.  You would expect there to be a bit of a hint, some development towards a stratagem, but the game is just a bridge.  No closer to ultimately stopping the Reapers (that means the Krogan and rachni aren't going to be enough to stop all of the Reapers.  Like I said, it's clear they're going to need a stratagem, not just tons of ships).

Also, the problem with the Collector ship is that BioWare is going to need a way to work around people starting with the 3rd game.  So we can't assume the Collector ship will be the key to stopping the Reapers because a choice in the 2nd game wouldn't work so well as a major catalyst in the 3rd game, until BioWare gives more information.

Or you just have a different idea of what a loose end is.

Modifié par FOZ289, 01 janvier 2011 - 09:24 .

[SSV Enterprise]

FOZ289 wrote...

What loose ends are you talking about?
Collectors:  Introduced, gone.  New Reaper:  Introduced, destroyed.  Harbinger, okay, but he's basically just the voice of the Reapers and so they still have a presence in the game now that Sovereign is gone.  He didn't exist in the first game, so he's a new issue that I didn't expect to be resolved by the end of ME2 anyway.

Reaper interest in humanity:  Introduced, still there.  Possibility for a alliance with the geth: introduced, still there.  The krogan being united: introduced, still in progress.  Mordin's possible genophage cure: introduced, still in progress.  The quarian's future actions: introduced, still there.  Cerberus possibly having Reaper tech: introduced still there.

The Council was a loose end because they don't believe Shepard.  In ME2, they appear for one scene, ignore you yet again, and that's it.  They're still a loose end, not resolved in the slightest.

It'll probably be wrapped up in ME3.  The difference between getting your spectre status back and losing it is progression with this "loose end".

The loose ends:  Council doesn't believe you:  Not resolved at all.  Council doesn't give half a damn.
A way to defeat the Reapers:  Not resolved at all (if you destroyed Collector ship)  We know it's going to take more than brute force to stop the Reapers.  If you chose to destroy the Collector ship, then you have nothing.  You would expect there to be a bit of a hint, some development towards a stratagem, but the game is just a bridge.  No closer to ultimately stopping the Reapers (that means the Krogan and rachni aren't going to be enough to stop all of the Reapers.  Like I said, it's clear they're going to need a stratagem, not just tons of ships).

Also, the problem with the Collector ship is that BioWare is going to need a way to work around people starting with the 3rd game.  So we can't assume the Collector ship will be the key to stopping the Reapers because a choice in the 2nd game wouldn't work so well as a major catalyst in the 3rd game, until BioWare gives more information.

Wrong.  Having a united army of krogan, rachni, geth, quarians, and Council races on call as opposed to not having an army at all is in fact a step towards fighting the Reapers.  And the Collector base will have consequences in ME3, both in fighting the Reapers and in how powerful Cerberus becomes.  BioWare could make it so that if you start at the third game you can still make some major decisions from the past games.

[didymos1120]

SSV Enterprise wrote...
 Cerberus possibly having Reaper tech: introduced still there.

They had some, no matter what: the stuff used on Grayson in Retribution.  What's still uncertain, since the book doesn't come down on either side of the base decision, is whether they've got more and how much more they have if they do.

[FOZ289]

SSV Enterprise wrote...

Reaper interest in humanity:  Introduced, still there.  Possibility for a alliance with the geth: introduced, still there.  The krogan being united: introduced, still in progress.  Mordin's possible genophage cure: introduced, still in progress.  The quarian's future actions: introduced, still there.  Cerberus possibly having Reaper tech: introduced still there.

Wrong.  Having a united army of krogan, rachni, geth, quarians, and Council races on call as opposed to not having an army at all is in fact a step towards fighting the Reapers.  And the Collector base will have consequences in ME3, both in fighting the Reapers and in how powerful Cerberus becomes.  BioWare could make it so that if you start at the third game you can still make some major decisions from the past games.

I guess.  But I was expecting something different.  I wasn't expecting Shepard to cruise around the galaxy talking to people, who decide "Sure, maybe we'll show up when you need help.  Until then we'll just go back to the background."  And I think it's going to be absolutely absurd if the Reapers are stopped by brute force, so while getting more forces is part of a big picture, the BIGGER picture is that it's going to take more than that to stop the Reapers. 
And I was hoping SOMETHING would happen, but frankly the whole game was just a small and large scale recruitment mission.  The problem is, Shepard spends the whole game expecting to stop the COLLECTORS because they are the immediate threat, and the Reapers have taken a backseat.  The first game had the flexibility to create a villain (Saren) and have him being controlled by the Reapers.  But now that we know about the Reapers, you'd think that they would spend the game trying to stop the Reapers.  Instead, an entirely new enemy is introduced, and rather than the Collectors serving the role of Saren and the Geth, as an anthropomorphic representation of the Reapers (since fighting giant spaceships wouldn't be much fun), they're a stand-alone enemy that is controlled by the Reapers.  Almost like a filler enemy with an obligatory and perhaps arbitrary connection to the main enemy (Reapers).  And ultimately instead of "The Reapers must be stopped," it's presented as "The Collectors must be stopped, then we can focus on the Reapers."  It's not until the end that the Collectors are shown to be anything more than very, very annoying and were actually directly helping the Reapers rather than just stealing humans and making the Reapers' job easier. 

And so it all comes back to needing more than a lot of ships to stop the Reapers.  At this point this post is just going to get more confusing, so:

I was expecting a CLUE.  Not a "I KNOW HIS WEAKNESS NOW" moment, but some kind of helpful revelation that can be utilized in ME3.  You beat the game, and just realize, "but where does that put Shepard?"  The only allies that have serious potential are the Geth, and that's only as the result of an optional quest, not something the entire plot of ME3 can hinge on.

Modifié par FOZ289, 01 janvier 2011 - 10:07 .

[hitorihanzo]

SSV Enterprise wrote...

In the big picture (spoilers ahoy):

--We know the Reapers are particularly interested in humanity.
--We know at least part of why the Reapers wipe out the galaxy every 50,000 years.
--We know that the Protheans weren't truly wiped out, but were adapted.
--We know that Sovereign was responsible for the rachni's madness, and that the new rachni are currently preparing to fight the Reapers (if you spared the queen, that is)
--If Wrex is alive, he is uniting the krogan.
--Mordin may come up with a genophage cure.
--We know that only a small fraction of the geth actually supported Sovereign.  The geth "Heretics" have been defeated, and an alliance with the geth may be possible.
--...on the other hand, a quarian invasion of geth space may happen soon.  The quarians may even re-subjugate the geth.
--You possibly have the support of Cerberus
--You possibly do not have the support of the Council and the Alliance.
--You may be able to use the Reapers' own technology against them.

That was off the top of my head.  I think that's a pretty sizeable addition to the big picture.

I was about to type some of these same things.  Not as succinctly, organized lol. 

But I digress.  I thought that Mass Effect 2 built up well the third game.  The writers based it on The Empire Strikes Back.  In Empire, the story isn't moved along that much either.  It's a chase movie for the most part- there is a big plot twist near the end, but overall, did anything happen that wasn't designed to move the movie towards the third act?

[SSV Enterprise]

FOZ289 wrote...

SSV Enterprise wrote...

Reaper interest in humanity:  Introduced, still there.  Possibility for a alliance with the geth: introduced, still there.  The krogan being united: introduced, still in progress.  Mordin's possible genophage cure: introduced, still in progress.  The quarian's future actions: introduced, still there.  Cerberus possibly having Reaper tech: introduced still there.

Wrong.  Having a united army of krogan, rachni, geth, quarians, and Council races on call as opposed to not having an army at all is in fact a step towards fighting the Reapers.  And the Collector base will have consequences in ME3, both in fighting the Reapers and in how powerful Cerberus becomes.  BioWare could make it so that if you start at the third game you can still make some major decisions from the past games.

I guess.  But I was expecting something different.  I wasn't expecting Shepard to cruise around the galaxy talking to people, who decide "Sure, maybe we'll show up when you need help.  Until then we'll just go back to the background."  And I think it's going to be absolutely absurd if the Reapers are stopped by brute force, so while getting more forces is part of a big picture, the BIGGER picture is that it's going to take more than that to stop the Reapers. 
And I was hoping SOMETHING would happen, but frankly the whole game was just a small and large scale recruitment mission.  The problem is, Shepard spends the whole game expecting to stop the COLLECTORS because they are the immediate threat, and the Reapers have taken a backseat.  The first game had the flexibility to create a villain (Saren) and have him being controlled by the Reapers.  But now that we know about the Reapers, you'd think that they would spend the game trying to stop the Reapers.  Instead, an entirely new enemy is introduced, and rather than the Collectors serving the role of Saren and the Geth, as an anthropomorphic representation of the Reapers (since fighting giant spaceships wouldn't be much fun), they're a stand-alone enemy that is controlled by the Reapers.  Almost like a filler enemy with an obligatory and perhaps arbitrary connection to the main enemy (Reapers).  And ultimately instead of "The Reapers must be stopped," it's presented as "The Collectors must be stopped, then we can focus on the Reapers."  It's not until the end that the Collectors are shown to be anything more than very, very annoying and were actually directly helping the Reapers rather than just stealing humans and making the Reapers' job easier. 

And so it all comes back to needing more than a lot of ships to stop the Reapers.  At this point this post is just going to get more confusing, so:

I was expecting a CLUE.  Not a "I KNOW HIS WEAKNESS NOW" moment, but some kind of helpful revelation that can be utilized in ME3.  You beat the game, and just realize, "but where does that put Shepard?"  The only allies that have serious potential are the Geth, and that's only as the result of an optional quest, not something the entire plot of ME3 can hinge on.

Why are you expecting the whole fight against the Reapers to hinge on a single factor?  Mass Effect isn't that extremely linear.  Take Dragon Age, for example.  Throughout the game you gather allies and consolidate your power.  Does the fight against the Blight hinge on any one of your allies?  Not at all.  It's the combination of all your that gives you the ability to fight back against the Blight.  The same situation is likely for Mass Effect 3.

[Pro_Consul]

FOZ289 wrote...

Mass Effect 2 doesn't have any loose ends of its own, instead it introduced entirely new threads, resolved those, and ignored the loose ends from the first game entirely.

Really. Like the loose end of the Reapers still being out there plotting to destroy all civilisation as we know it? True. But of course if they had resolved that one then this would not only be the second ME game; it would be the LAST. Basically it is sounding more and more like you are just upset that the climax didn't arrive in part 2 of 3. Your criticism seems to be nothing more than unhappiness that this story has more than two parts.

[DPR Raptor]

Not a lot was important about the story of ME2, and it was still one of the best games we've all ever played.  That being said, it reminded me of an episode of Sailor Moon; a new enemy was introduced at the beginning so that the viewer experiences a measure of satisfaction at that enemy's defeat at the end of the show. 
ME3, however, should not suffer from this flaw because it is the end of the trilogy.  The middle one is always the hardest, and BioWare is in the unenviable position of making the greatest console RPG of all time while at the same time the most epic story ever told in a video game (feel free to disagree).  
I strongly dislike threads like this because we should all LET BIOWARE DO WHAT THEY DO:  MAKE GREAT GAMES!
Wait for ME3...and be happy:lol:

[88mphSlayer]

tdb023 wrote...

In the grand scheme of things, ME2's main purpose is to bridge the gap between ME1 and ME3. It also throws us into some major conflicts throughout the galaxy, like the Quarian-Geth almost war. It also gives us a very powerful ally, or acquaintance, depending on how you look at him, with the Illusive man. Plus, it gives us a bigger ship, a new crew, outside of Garrus and Tali, and a weapon, perhaps, that can take down a reaper in the Thanix Canon,

ME2 was a game changer, simply put

if Shepard had been kicking around for 2 years i think the setup for Mass Effect 3 would've been highly predictable, whereas now it's anyone's guess as to how the events of ME3 will go down, not to mention the collectors building a human reaper has forever changed the way we see Reapers - whereas our impressions from ME1 was that they were just big monsters that wanted to kill us all

[Count Viceroy]

I don't think we can judge Me2 properly until 3 is out and done.