672 réponses à ce sujet

[Nightwriter]

But don’t you see, I need to feel like what’s happening to the characters is connected to what’s happening to me.

And what’s happening to me is this Collector mission.

Your character motivations there are okay I guess, but I'd classify them as "meh". Well, they're not really yours, they're BioWare's, you're not to be blamed for them of course.

[xlavaina]

jeweledleah wrote...
snip

That was an incredibly concise explanation you gave there. I think it accurately depicts the main examples of why all the squad will stay. This is my personal belief as well, so I sure hope you're right. But from a plot (and financial perspective) it would make no sense for BW to cut the squad loose. 

[jeweledleah]

Nightwriter wrote...

But don’t you see, I need to feel like what’s happening to the characters is connected to what’s happening to me.

And what’s happening to me is this Collector mission.

Your character motivations there are okay I guess, but I'd classify them as "meh". Well, they're not really yours, they're BioWare's, you're not to be blamed for them of course.

I see it differently though.  each character is connected to me, individualy.  A few of them might be connected to each other through prior history (Miranda and Jacob, Garrus and Tali, Dr. Chakwas and Joker), but those bonds are not as strong as those that connect them to Shepard.  its why Shep is the leader, the one that gathers the team.  Its not team's mission, its Shepard's mission, it only becomes teams mision by extention.

I keep on thinking about seven samurai, the original gather the team and protect the innocents with it story.  In it, only one character is in it for the actual saving of innocents - who happens to be the team's leader and connecting point.  Everyone else is connected to each other and the mission through him.  his friends, his comrands, his student, his fan.  some go becasue hey, might as well, some go to prove themselves, some go because they can relate to the plight of the villagers, but the mission is that of a leader.  And in the end, their win is bittersweet (conversation with Liara in  shadow broker DLC anyone?)  the true winners are the people they have protected.

yes, character development could possibly have been done better.    it WAS however an improvement from ME1 and honestly, that's all I can ask for. yes the story could have been more fleshed out, even as a transition.  it was still a good transition, and while I had doubts about the games originaly and didn't buy them untill they were on a ridiculously good sale (after playing a bit of ME2 demo), I have no doubts now and will be buying ME3 as soon as its released.  that alone, to me at least is a sign of a good game and a good story.

Modifié par jeweledleah, 18 janvier 2011 - 02:56 .

[Slayer299]

@jeweledleah - I'd like to ask you to explain something you said a few posts back if you would. You mentioned that ME2 was a bridge

this IS the bridge story, so we 're probably not seeing a lot just yet.
granted, there could have been some more character development, but to
me that seems like nitpicking in hindsight.

was what you said specifically. So I ask you, if the characters were the story, why didn't they help drive the story forward, wouldn't that have made more sense? That you were building you team (ala the Dirty Dozen or T7S) and along the way you're learning about them, but that also you'd still learn something more about the main plot of the Reapers themselves? I don't mean to say anything would be earth-shattering, but to know more than what we did at the end of ME2 would make a great deal more sense to me.

Along the way we learn 2 things that are not character driven (since they didn't lead you to that information in any way); that the Collectors are Protheans and that Reaper-Termi might be how they reproduce. Personallyh I"m still scratching my head on that last one still.... But wouldn't it have made more sense to not to have that just dropped in our lap?

Also, I do agree with your assessment on the ME2 squad.

[SithLordExarKun]

bjdbwea wrote...


No. If anything, ME 2 wasn't criticized enough. Many so-called professional reviewers chose to simply ignore all the flaws in this game, as far as the story as well as many other things are concerned.

Seriously? I bet that if ME1 along  with its laughable combat system and ****fest inventory were given the same reviews that were given to ME2, you would use it as an argument as to why its better than ME2.

No offence but you're a fanatical ME1 fanboy that has huge holes in your logic.

[xlavaina]

SithLordExarKun wrote...

bjdbwea wrote...


No. If anything, ME 2 wasn't criticized enough. Many so-called professional reviewers chose to simply ignore all the flaws in this game, as far as the story as well as many other things are concerned.

Seriously? I bet that if ME1 along  with its laughable combat system and ****fest inventory were given the same reviews that were given to ME2, you would use it as an argument as to why its better than ME2.

No offence but you're a fanatical ME1 fanboy that has huge holes in your logic.

Agreed. What exactly are the major "flaws" in the game besides the slightly cliche plot, bjd? Because honestly I don't see how it could have been executed any better. 

[slimgrin]

Well, I have to get my negative comment quota in for the night: Hudson claiming that 'the characters were the story' is simply a cop-out. ME2 is a video game, not a modern novel. But this is the same guy who steadfastly stands by the whole planet scanning bit...

Modifié par slimgrin, 18 janvier 2011 - 03:30 .

[Moiaussi]

SithLordExarKun wrote...

bjdbwea wrote...


No. If anything, ME 2 wasn't criticized enough. Many so-called professional reviewers chose to simply ignore all the flaws in this game, as far as the story as well as many other things are concerned.

Seriously? I bet that if ME1 along  with its laughable combat system and ****fest inventory were given the same reviews that were given to ME2, you would use it as an argument as to why its better than ME2.

No offence but you're a fanatical ME1 fanboy that has huge holes in your logic.

Lol, seriously? There is plenty of praise in the ME2 reviews for the mechanics, but as for the plot they say things like praising a lack of continuity, claiming there is strong continuity and that decisions from ME1 really matter in ME2, or just glossing over the plot to concentrate on the improved gameplay.

Have you actually read the reviews rather than simply the scores?

[jeweledleah]

Slayer299 wrote...

Along the way we learn 2 things that are not character driven (since they didn't lead you to that information in any way); that the Collectors are Protheans and that Reaper-Termi might be how they reproduce. Personallyh I"m still scratching my head on that last one still.... But wouldn't it have made more sense to not to have that just dropped in our lap?

yes, it would have.  I think it was the matter of bioware chosing a point at witch they stopped fiddling with the story and went for te rest of the development of the game to have it released on time.

was it the best solution?  probably not.  can I still accept it?  concidering how the game made me feel when I was playing it through?  yes.

Modifié par jeweledleah, 18 janvier 2011 - 03:42 .

[bjdbwea]

xlavaina wrote...

What exactly are the major "flaws" in the game besides the slightly cliche plot, bjd? Because honestly I don't see how it could have been executed any better.

I could tell you that, but it would be off-topic, and it has been outlined many times in many other threads already. You can easily find them if you are really interested in why some people think that ME 2 is far from being perfect. This thread is about the story, and that has enough flaws already to fill a book.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 18 janvier 2011 - 03:48 .

[jeweledleah]

slimgrin wrote...

Well, I have to get my negative comment quota in for the night: Hudson claiming that 'the characters were the story' is simply a cop-out. ME2 is a video game, not a modern novel. But this is the same guy who steadfastly stands by the whole planet scanning bit...

I personaly prefer panet scanning to driving Mako.  I find the mechanic to be more enjoyable to me. 

part of it is probably due to me being horrible driver and Mako being clunky, but even if mako handled bette,r I would still enjoy planet scanning.  Just thought I'd put it out there.

not everyone disliked it.

[Nightwriter]

Slayer299 wrote...

@jeweledleah - I'd like to ask you to explain something you said a few posts back if you would. You mentioned that ME2 was a bridge

this IS the bridge story, so we 're probably not seeing a lot just yet.
granted, there could have been some more character development, but to
me that seems like nitpicking in hindsight.

was what you said specifically. So I ask you, if the characters were the story, why didn't they help drive the story forward, wouldn't that have made more sense? That you were building you team (ala the Dirty Dozen or T7S) and along the way you're learning about them, but that also you'd still learn something more about the main plot of the Reapers themselves? I don't mean to say anything would be earth-shattering, but to know more than what we did at the end of ME2 would make a great deal more sense to me.

Along the way we learn 2 things that are not character driven (since they didn't lead you to that information in any way); that the Collectors are Protheans and that Reaper-Termi might be how they reproduce. Personallyh I"m still scratching my head on that last one still.... But wouldn't it have made more sense to not to have that just dropped in our lap?

Also, I do agree with your assessment on the ME2 squad.

It's not a character driven story. It's a character focused story. An example of a character driven story would be the Loghain plot, where his actions force you into counteraction and shape the story of the game.

This is not a character driven story. The characters do not drive the plot, else their actions would affect the story of the game. Rather, ME2 is a character focused story.

[Nozybidaj]

The "the characters are the story" is really just a bit of a cop out.



We've been told repeatedly that ME is "Shepard's story" anytime someone wants to bag on BW for anything from customization to same sex romances, but now people want to bag on the story and now the story is "the characters (not Shepard) are the story". Just a bit of PR fluff and self serving rhetoric.



I think ME2 would have worked fine as a spin-off story where the creators wanted to explore some other ideas and concepts, but trying to plop it down in the middle of the trilogy while putting the real story (Shepard and the Reapers) on hold was pretty lackluster.



No way to fix it now at this point, BW never admits when they are wrong (even the link in your OP has Casey stating "they wouldn't change anything"). Its not like they are going to push the series out to 4 games now, forget the 2nd ever happened, and finish the trilogy the way it should have been, but whatever.



"The characters" may have been the story of ME2, that's fine. That fact doesn't excuse why or where it was placed in the series.

[WarBeagle01]

I didn't have time to read all previous posts. Basically I'm ok with the "characters are the story" line, except the characters are quite sterile in their interaction with each other. Not that they were uber deep in ME1, but when you are walking around, there is very little to no contact between anyone - you and the squad mates or between squad mates. Sure there are those "click here to listen to xxxx talk" icons, but it's lame if that's it.



So I disagree with Casey in that regards. If the characters are the story, you have to have more depth or else it is nothing more than "fetch x amount of team members and do a side mission with them".

[Ioini]

Sorry to necro this topic but my personal opinion: Whoever wrote ME2 did a bang up job. I'd say whoever wrote LOTSB should write the storyline of the next bridging DLC and ME3.

[Zan Mura]

Ioini wrote...

Sorry to necro this topic but my personal opinion: Whoever wrote ME2 did a bang up job. I'd say whoever wrote LOTSB should write the storyline of the next bridging DLC and ME3.

With regards to LoTSB, only a crazy person would disagree with that.

[tonnactus]

jeweledleah wrote...


except you could say the same about characters in ME1..only with some of them you could forget they were on a ship at all, with unless you dutifuly walked around for some post mission conversations.

At least,they were all around in the debriefing after every main mission...
Now it seems that only 3 persons matter at all.

[Nightwriter]

I totally understood why that happened, tonn. They could never be sure of your recruiting order, so they never knew who was there and who wasn't: how could they write nice interactive scripts for every character without knowing which hands were on deck?

Which only makes me sort of dislike the whole recruitment-being-the-plot thing even more...

[Iakus]

Nightwriter wrote...

I totally understood why that happened, tonn. They could never be sure of your recruiting order, so they never knew who was there and who wasn't: how could they write nice interactive scripts for every character without knowing which hands were on deck?

Which only makes me sort of dislike the whole recruitment-being-the-plot thing even more...

Indeed.  It's why I think Bioware really bit off more than they could chew going this route.  The resources to make a truly character-centered story with so many characters would have to be huge.

No, they don't get points for trying.

[Nightwriter]

See, me, I prefer to have the whole squad formed as early on as possible. That way I know myself and all the characters will experience the story with a unified, complete experience. I get the most character content that way, I have the best story experience that way, the writers include the most characters in the story that way.

There's a reason you normally get your most plot-involved characters earlier on.

[Lewie]

iakus wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I totally understood why that happened, tonn. They could never be sure of your recruiting order, so they never knew who was there and who wasn't: how could they write nice interactive scripts for every character without knowing which hands were on deck?

Which only makes me sort of dislike the whole recruitment-being-the-plot thing even more...

Indeed.  It's why I think Bioware really bit off more than they could chew going this route.  The resources to make a truly character-centered story with so many characters would have to be huge.

No, they don't get points for trying.

Well its do or die. Lets play 3 with no past crew to stop the whining. 

[Lewie]

I would guess if in 3 you were stuck in an a bad situation and one of the old crew turned up, you would be damn glad to see them. I really hope all the crew is there.

[tonnactus]

Nightwriter wrote...

I totally understood why that happened, tonn. They could never be sure of your recruiting order, so they never knew who was there and who wasn't: how could they write nice interactive scripts for every character without knowing which hands were on deck?

It works in the first game.If kaidan was dead and liara recruitment was the last mission(or after virmire and kaidan was dead),wrex made a point that asari are not as tough as krogan(regarding that she didnt eat and slept for days).
I dont even want everyone to say something everytime(not realistic),but they all have to be there to get the facts.
That at least.

And regarding the recruiting order,the game was segemented.You could get tali only after horizon for example.
So this is not an excuse at all.

Modifié par tonnactus, 20 janvier 2011 - 10:58 .