672 réponses à ce sujet

[Fiery Phoenix]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

Frankly, I perceive that as an excuse to avoid conceding the main plot was lackluster and riddled with plot-holes and inconsistencies. The stories are entirely divorced from the Collector plot, some having absolutely nothing even remotely relative to the overall development. This is all the more prominent when the main plot resurfaces, the characters that are supposedly the story, are entirely nonexistent. In actuality, they remain nonexistent in virtually every aspect of the game that is not their individual bubble arc.

The Suicide Mission is arguably the only portion of the game when the characters display momentary individualization. When Shepard or EDI mention a plausible means to break through the doors. Jacob is quick to voice his opinion and likewise, Miranda with hers. When Miranda voices her opinion of her being the ideal choice for a leader, Jack and Garrus are vocal in their disagreement; well not Garrus, who only nods along unless Jack is dead.

Unfortunately that is the extent of the exchanges. You have partial dialogue whilst you traverse the Collector Base in regards to the dangers the squad is facing but little else. Due to the nature of this mission, one could theoretically conclude ample discussion is unnecessary but that is frankly the most vocal the squad is with one another devoid of the brief conflict scenes.

In a Mass Effect synopsis I watched, using Ash in the proceeding example. Should you have been involved with her. Shepard is provided the option of saying he could never leave her, to which she responds, "I know, and I'm grateful but... Kaidan died because of me. Because of us." Shepard can than chastise her for being a martyr or comfort her, citing she has nothing to prove.

This is a fantastic demonstration of attaching a separate story arc to the main plot and both characters grow because of it. Once again on the SM. If you chose Tali as a squad leader Miranda mentions how she got her entire team killed on Haestrom and thus brought Tali's recruitment mission arc into the main plot. Why this was such a rarity is absolutely baffling. It is the definition of plot development and not only acknowledges each character is aware of one another but offers their opinion of that character.

(...)

Smudboy agrees with you.

[Nightwriter]

glacier1701 wrote...

 The main problem here is that while trying to make ME2 a character driven story they forgot about the importance of the MAIN character. After all the one mantra that BioWare (including Casey) has thrown at us time and time again is that the whole trilogy is SHEPARD's story - the story of the first Human Specter. Yet in ME2 we get nothing that explores or expands on any of Shepard's character. By now we've said all we have to on how its possible to have had the background of losing a unit on Akuze due to Cerberus but not being able to say anything about it, how you've been dead for 2 years and so that means you couldnt contact people yet cant tell the VS on Horizon that or even discuss the whole concept of being dead and now alive. ME2 basically threw out Shepard and tried to substitute all these other characters. That is where the critism about no story comes from in that the MOST IMPORTANT CHARACTER in ME2 was ignored. And since this is the PLAYER you've immediately relegated the player to someone along for the ride and not the primary instigator for the story and thus alienated them from the game. Is it any wonder that there is that critisism about there being no story? 

 We know that Casey is really the master of doubletalk and we've had many examples of this from his interviews. The one trait that any good game developer should have is to be able to see things from the PLAYER POINT OF VIEW. Casey seems incapable of doing that and thus has tried to turn critisism of ME2 by the players as being the players fault and not that of those working on the game. Mistakes can be made and admitting to them would not make us unhappy. In other words he seems incapable of admitting to problems. Personally I would almost say that for anyone who was thinking about getting into the game developing business Casey could be the example of the person you would NOT want as your boss. NOTE: I am saying ALMOST - lets see what comes up in the next few months from Casey before making any final determination on that side.

 In summary while using a character driven story is not a bad idea it was flawed as it was shown in ME2 as the most important character, Shepard, was completely left out. Casey seems not to recognise that and how players feel about how that leads to them being pushed off to the side. He compounds that by blaming players for a mistake made by BioWare whereas admitting to a mistake would have given us all much greater hope of seeing an absolutely fantastic game in ME3.

... I don't know, glacier.

While the lack of focus on Shepard is a problem, I don't think it's ME2's main problem. Its main problem seemed, to me, that its character-focused story didn't focus on characters. It did not tie them together, work their identities and backgrounds into the plot, make them interact, or make them come together as a team.

I also think you're being unfair toward Casey. He's just doing his job, and he's not criticizing fans in any way here. It is his responsibility to say "we made a good game", and I'd love him as my boss - he's always keeping up on fan feedback and he makes reasonable arguments in this article.

[Crimmsonwind]

ME1's story was plot-driven. ME2's story was character driven. Both stories were good in different ways. If those can be combined in ME3, you would have the best story ever. I think people complained about ME2's story because it was different from what they had previously experienced, and weren't expecting it. I was a little thrown off, but over time I've gotten used to it and I've actually quite enjoyed it in a way that I couldn't quite get from ME1.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Nightwriter wrote...

While the lack of focus on Shepard is a problem, I don't think it's ME2's main problem. Its main problem seemed, to me, that its character-focused story didn't focus on characters. It did not tie them together, work their identities and backgrounds into the plot, make them interact, or make them come together as a team.

ME2 DID focus on the characters (i.e. squadmates); it just failed to make them relevant to the main plot, for which reason they seemed to be either pure fanservice or filler figures who are in fact in the wrong story.

Modifié par FieryPhoenix7, 09 janvier 2011 - 03:59 .

[Pwner1323]

Crimmsonwind wrote...

ME1's story was plot-driven. ME2's story was character driven. Both stories were good in different ways. If those can be combined in ME3, you would have the best story ever. I think people complained about ME2's story because it was different from what they had previously experienced, and weren't expecting it. I was a little thrown off, but over time I've gotten used to it and I've actually quite enjoyed it in a way that I couldn't quite get from ME1.

I think ME3's story should only revolve around the war. If it strays off on characters and more plot it will just complicate things and at the end you will be seeing a great party of the reaper's destruction scratching your head on how exactly the war was won when all you did was run around the galaxy mining planets, recruiting people and romncing aliens.

[glacier1701]

Wizz wrote...

glacier1701 wrote...

  In summary while using a character driven story is not a bad idea it was flawed as it was shown in ME2 as the most important character, Shepard, was completely left out. Casey seems not to recognise that and how players feel about how that leads to them being pushed off to the side. He compounds that by blaming players for a mistake made by BioWare whereas admitting to a mistake would have given us all much greater hope of seeing an absolutely fantastic game in ME3.

Unfortunately we cannot know Bioware admitted those problems or not, because admitting mistakes is not Casey's work. That's why I don't like to read his interviews, they are just advertisment and cannot be taken serious.  "Squadmates look disconnected from the plot? No, characters are plot." "Planet scanning is boring? No, it's new age of exploration" etc.

 Casey is in charge of the ME development team. He supposedly has the final say on what gets put in or taken out of the development process. He is definetly quick to accept any praise or awards but that also means that he should take the blame for any problems. As the public face for the game and its head he should be the one to admit to mistakes. However I do agree that his interviews do seem to be advertisments and it is perhaps that tone and his dismissal of players that turn me off his style of game development as compared to other developers.

[Nightwriter]

Pwner1323 wrote...

Badpie wrote...

I agree 100%.  I felt like Shepard was a hollow shell of nothingness in ME2.  There was no character development.  He was a robot, and like you said I felt "along for the ride" instead of actively driving the story.  

Maybe YOUR Shepard was a robot with no development because mine was aweasome. Shepard came out in ME2 way better then in ME1. It goes deeper into his personal thoughts on the galaxy and the decision to join Cerberus or go solo was one that is placed throught the entire game on his dialog and not as a one time decision wich I enjoyed very much. Im sorry, but I bonded with my Shepard/Creation much more then in ME1.

Shepard never gets any decision to join Cerberus or go solo. You are limited to vain dramatic whining that means exactly nothing, all of which is invalidated by the fact that Shepard joins Cerberus before he's even ascertained that it is the only option.

[Phaedon]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

Frankly, I perceive that as an excuse to avoid conceding the main plot was lackluster and riddled with plot-holes and inconsistencies. The stories are entirely divorced from the Collector plot, some having absolutely nothing even remotely relative to the overall development. This is all the more prominent when the main plot resurfaces, the characters that are supposedly the story, are entirely nonexistent. In actuality, they remain nonexistent in virtually every aspect of the game that is not their individual bubble arc.

How so? You are recruiting a team in order to take down the Collectors. As for the characters being non-existant, how so? This seems like a strange thing to say in comparison to ME1's 'characters'. They each have 2 missions dedicated to them.

The Suicide Mission is arguably the only portion of the game when the characters display momentary individualization.

Hardly, dialogue, recruitment and loyalty missions

When Shepard or EDI mention a plausible means to break through the doors. Jacob is quick to voice his opinion and likewise, Miranda with hers. When Miranda voices her opinion of her being the ideal choice for a leader, Jack and Garrus are vocal in their disagreement; well not Garrus, who only nods along unless Jack is dead.

What does interaction has to do with individualization?

Unfortunately that is the extent of the exchanges. You have partial dialogue whilst you traverse the Collector Base in regards to the dangers the squad is facing but little else. Due to the nature of this mission, one could theoretically conclude ample discussion is unnecessary but that is frankly the most vocal the squad is with one another devoid of the brief conflict scenes.

Same as above.

In a Mass Effect synopsis I watched, using Ash in the proceeding example. Should you have been involved with her. Shepard is provided the option of saying he could never leave her, to which she responds, "I know, and I'm grateful but... Kaidan died because of me. Because of us." Shepard can than chastise her for being a martyr or comfort her, citing she has nothing to prove.

This happens literally in 60% of the dialogue with the squaddies.

This is a fantastic demonstration of attaching a separate story arc to the main plot and both characters grow because of it. Once again on the SM. If you chose Tali as a squad leader Miranda mentions how she got her entire team killed on Haestrom and thus brought Tali's recruitment mission arc into the main plot. Why this was such a rarity is absolutely baffling. It is the definition of plot development and not only acknowledges each character is aware of one another but offers their opinion of that character.

Again, you are using interaction as an example.

As it is Mass Effect 2 is a collection of individualized stories that exist in their own little bubble with the minimalist of exceptions. Garrus' qualms with Sidonis has about as much to do with the Collectors or the Reapers as Final Fantasy VII does with Final Fantasy VIII. (Read: Absolutely nothing)

And again, you make sure that your squaddies are focused for the suicide mission.

A character driven story would acknowledge the characters, would attach their plights and blunders to the overarching plot. In spite of Tali's failure as a leader. She is no less able than Miranda according to the game. The death of your Tech Expect is due to a stray rocket, which has no bearing whatsoever on her leader capabilities.There was once again no individualism, no separation.

Again, how does interaction equal individualism. This is wrong,
 

While I cannot be certain since you admittedly paraphrased, TC. If Casey insinuated we simply did not understand the story. That is partially insulting. I understood everything and thoroughly enjoyed most of the recruitment and loyalty missions. It does not change that in my understanding. I found your main story weak.

Well, to your understanding interaction is necessary for individualism. You also compare ME1's characters to ME2's saying that they were better 'individualised'

[GodWood]

Crimmsonwind wrote...
ME1's story was plot-driven. ME2's story was character driven. Both stories were good in different ways. If those can be combined in ME3, you would have the best story ever. I think people complained about ME2's story because it was different from what they had previously experienced, and weren't expecting it. I was a little thrown off, but over time I've gotten used to it and I've actually quite enjoyed it in a way that I couldn't quite get from ME1

I can assure you, that's not why people complain about ME2's plot.

[Crimmsonwind]

GodWood wrote...

Crimmsonwind wrote...
ME1's story was plot-driven. ME2's story was character driven. Both stories were good in different ways. If those can be combined in ME3, you would have the best story ever. I think people complained about ME2's story because it was different from what they had previously experienced, and weren't expecting it. I was a little thrown off, but over time I've gotten used to it and I've actually quite enjoyed it in a way that I couldn't quite get from ME1

I can assure you, that's not why people complain about ME2's plot.

That's why I complained at first, and some other people as well. I know there are other reasons, but we can't turn this into "let's make a bullet list of everything wrong in ME2." I still have my fair share of nitpicks about ME2.

[Pwner1323]

Something I've learned in these Forums: ME fans are a bacstabbing bunch. They complain about everything and always are quick to discredit others instead of simply disagreeing with them.



I loved ME1 and 2 to the point of them being my 2 favorite games ever (until ME3 comes ot of course).

[JustValiant]

One of the things I hope we will see in ME3 is this :innocent:.

[Nightwriter]

Phaedon, ME2's story is the suicide mission. That's really the whole thing. The main event. Therefore characters only start becoming involved in the story during the suicide mission. Everything else is preparatory, and we'll never feel like events that happen in preparation of the story are part of the story, especially when those events feel so disconnected from it.

[Crimmsonwind]

Pwner1323 wrote...

Something I've learned in these Forums: ME fans are a bacstabbing bunch. They complain about everything and always are quick to discredit others instead of simply disagreeing with them.

I loved ME1 and 2 to the point of them being my 2 favorite games ever (until ME3 comes ot of course).

They're some of my favorite, most beloved games as well. That doesn't mean they're perfect.

[Pwner1323]

Crimmsonwind wrote...

Pwner1323 wrote...

Something I've learned in these Forums: ME fans are a bacstabbing bunch. They complain about everything and always are quick to discredit others instead of simply disagreeing with them.

I loved ME1 and 2 to the point of them being my 2 favorite games ever (until ME3 comes ot of course).

They're some of my favorite, most beloved games as well. That doesn't mean they're perfect.

But not to the point of making them look like utter **** storytelling like this thread does (with all due respect of course).

[Gibb_Shepard]

Phaedon wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...
This is really simplifying things, Phaedon. A story's quality is not determined by so bare a skeleton or so simple a checklist. Concerning your points:

I agree there's no comparison, because ME1 wasn't a recruitment game. I liked it better for this.

I also prefer ME1's plot missions, and was not aware ME2 had more story-based missions than ME1. However, if it did, it would appear these story focused missions did little work in drawing focus to the story.

I respect that you found the suicide mission enjoyable. I personally liked ME1's because I felt like I had gone on more of a journey to get there.

I can't really argue anything, because this is your opinion, but saying that I am oversimplifying things while calling ME2 a recruitment game is wrong. 

Dude..... ME2 is a recruitment game, and you have drastically oversimplified things. The style of ME1's plot is greatly different to ME2's. If we got every movie and simplified them to the absolute molecule like you just did, then yes, every movie on the planet would have the same plot style. 

I know you like to defend every inch of ME2's manhood, but come on, you're starting to sound like an over protective mother.

Modifié par Gibb_Shepard, 09 janvier 2011 - 04:12 .

[marshalleck]

Pwner1323 wrote...

Crimmsonwind wrote...

Pwner1323 wrote...

Something I've learned in these Forums: ME fans are a bacstabbing bunch. They complain about everything and always are quick to discredit others instead of simply disagreeing with them.

I loved ME1 and 2 to the point of them being my 2 favorite games ever (until ME3 comes ot of course).

They're some of my favorite, most beloved games as well. That doesn't mean they're perfect.

But not to the point of making them look like utter **** storytelling like this thread does (with all due respect of course).

This thread didn't do anything that Bioware didn't already do themselves. 

[Pwner1323]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...
This is really simplifying things, Phaedon. A story's quality is not determined by so bare a skeleton or so simple a checklist. Concerning your points:

I agree there's no comparison, because ME1 wasn't a recruitment game. I liked it better for this.

I also prefer ME1's plot missions, and was not aware ME2 had more story-based missions than ME1. However, if it did, it would appear these story focused missions did little work in drawing focus to the story.

I respect that you found the suicide mission enjoyable. I personally liked ME1's because I felt like I had gone on more of a journey to get there.

I can't really argue anything, because this is your opinion, but saying that I am oversimplifying things while calling ME2 a recruitment game is wrong. 

Dude..... ME2 is a recruitment game, and you have drastically oversimplified things. The style of ME1's plot a greatly different to ME2's. If we got every movie and simplified them to the absolute molecule like you just did, then yes, every movie on the planet would have the same plot style. 

I know you like to defend every inch of ME2's manhood, but come on, you're starting to sound like an over protective mother.

ME2 IS a recruitment game. What else is it? A third person shooter/SIM? Don't be ridiculous!

[Nightwriter]

Pwner1323 wrote...

Something I've learned in these Forums: ME fans are a bacstabbing bunch. They complain about everything and always are quick to discredit others instead of simply disagreeing with them.

I loved ME1 and 2 to the point of them being my 2 favorite games ever (until ME3 comes ot of course).

Well... no. I'm just honest about what I like and don't like. ME2 delivered great combat, immersive acting and conversation choreography, much more fascinating side missions. I'd just like the characters to be more involved in the plot. Why does saying so make me a backstabber?

[Phaedon]

Nightwriter wrote...

Phaedon, ME2's story is the suicide mission. That's really the whole thing. The main event. Therefore characters only start becoming involved in the story during the suicide mission. Everything else is preparatory, and we'll never feel like events that happen in preparation of the story are part of the story, especially when those events feel so disconnected from it.

The SM? No. Saying that the story of the game starts in the final 45 minutes is wrong. Now, if you say that ME2's story was 'Stopping the Collectors', then that's correct, and I don't see what's wrong with it. Both games have, what, around 5 story based missions? If you consider them the main event in both games, then I don't see how you were disappointed by ME2's plot.

[Crimmsonwind]

Pwner1323 wrote...

Crimmsonwind wrote...

Pwner1323 wrote...

Something I've learned in these Forums: ME fans are a bacstabbing bunch. They complain about everything and always are quick to discredit others instead of simply disagreeing with them.

I loved ME1 and 2 to the point of them being my 2 favorite games ever (until ME3 comes ot of course).

They're some of my favorite, most beloved games as well. That doesn't mean they're perfect.

But not to the point of making them look like utter **** storytelling like this thread does (with all due respect of course).

You haven't been around here long, have you? XD

People complain. That's what they do. You're complaining about our complaining. It's an endless cycle. Might as well get used to it. The storytelling wasn't totally awful. I really enjoyed the story (up until the end... AhnoldReaper -.-), I liked this focus on developing character of our squadmates, and I liked interacting with them. Personally, I don't see much of a problem  at all with the way the plot played out in regards to the characters. I DID have a problem with a lot of other little things, mostly involving Shepard and some game mechanics, but those are off-topic.

[GodWood]

Pwner1323 wrote...

Crimmsonwind wrote...

Pwner1323 wrote...
Something I've learned in these Forums: ME fans are a bacstabbing bunch. They complain about everything and always are quick to discredit others instead of simply disagreeing with them.

I loved ME1 and 2 to the point of them being my 2 favorite games ever (until ME3 comes ot of course).

They're some of my favorite, most beloved games as well. That doesn't mean they're perfect.

But not to the point of making them look like utter **** storytelling like this thread does (with all due respect of course).

ME2 has a lot of plot issues and flaws.
How does pointing them out make one a backstabber?

[Pwner1323]

Crimsonwind, you obviously did not read one of my earlier posts. I've been here longer then you in fact and ME fans complain about EVERYTHING. Even why the Normandy has cerberus logos on it. Really, just some real dumb stuff.

[Nightwriter]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

I know you like to defend every inch of ME2's manhood, but come on, you're starting to sound like an over protective mother.

Come on, Gibb. I wanted civil discussion, not the resurrection of old flame wars. He's as protective of ME2 as I am of my right to find fault with ME2 without being called a hater.

[Phaedon]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...
Dude..... ME2 is a recruitment game, and you have drastically oversimplified things. The style of ME1's plot is greatly different to ME2's. If we got every movie and simplified them to the absolute molecule like you just did, then yes, every movie on the planet would have the same plot style. 

I know you like to defend every inch of ME2's manhood, but come on, you're starting to sound like an over protective mother.

A recruitment game, huh? Well then, why does it have the same number of plot-based missions? 

I don't see where you see me defending ME2. I loved ME1, but saying that it's story was as deep as people around here say, is simply wrong, imho. 

The story of both games is cut into parts, how am I oversimplifying that? It is what it is. Please tell me how ME1 was so much different. Putting that aside, deciding which game you prefered relies on how you prefered the execution of these parts. I still preferred ME1's story till yesterday, but now I am starting to question that.