672 réponses à ce sujet

[Babli]

iakus wrote...

Lots of stuff here.  But just a few points to make

The funny thing is that people will say 'other than gathering your crew and building your team and getting ready for this mission, there's not much story there.' But that is the story."

1)Gathering a crew we do.  Though   as other posters state, we bring people aboard, then stuff them in closets, cellars, workrooms, or whatever until they're needed for their personal mission. 

2) At what point do we "build a team" exactly?  They do not interact with each other.  At all.  Part of building a team is getting people to work together, to trust that they'll have each other's backs.  To get to know each other to a degree that they can anticipate each other's reactions, and know what they can and cannot handle.  That may have been the intent of the personal missions, but if so, it failed hard.  Shepard is the entirety of the characters' universe.  The third squadmate may as well have not been there at all.  Most of the characters don't even acknowledge that you have other squad members on board the Normandy.  What we get are 12 bad****es that are personally loyal to Shepard.  Shep simply pulls them out of his utility belt, Batman-style, as they are needed.

Take Samara on Zaeed's personal mission.  See what she has to say about setting fire to the refinery and endangering the innocent workers.  Take Thane on Garrus's mission.  See what he has to say about killing in anger.  Maybe he'll mention his wife's death and his reaction to it. Or not.  How about taking Miranda on Jack's mission.  Maybe we'll get a Cerberus point of view on the Teltin facility.  Nah.  Take Garrus on Tali's recruitment of loyalty mission.  Do they say one word to each other?

"Part of what's great about a roleplaying game is that you have the choice of going off and doing other side stories, but that can be a problem, and that was one of the pieces of feedback we had about Mass Effect 1, that because the core story had so much intensity and pressure around it, when you would go off and do a side mission, it didn't have that kind of intensity and it wasn't directly linked as part of the story. That's where that Dirty Dozen team building structure addressed a lot of that on a fundamental level."

Again, where's the teambuilding?  Have the writers actually seen The Dirty Dozen?  Or any other story with an ensemble cast?  Most of the fun comes from people with differnt personalities play off each other.  The characters are good.  A little over the top.  But good.  And given nothing to do.  I feel like Bioware set out all these ingredients:  dough, tomatoes, cheese, assorted meat and veggies.  But instead of baking it into a pizza, declared the job done while they all still in their seperate containers.  They declared it a team before they actually come together as a single unit.

This is why one of my current favorite threads on this board is the banter thread.  It's nice to see and post some of the dialogue that could have gone into the game and add flavor and personality into the characters, but for whatever reason did not.

This post is everything what was needed to be said. 2 years are just not enough time of development for RPG.

[Nightwriter]

I like to think of LotSB as game two as well, Fiery.

Jzadek72 wrote...

I think the Collectors were tacked on to give some story content to prevent complete uproar. As it was, Mass Effect 2 seems designed to introduce key characters.

Which raises the point: it was a lousy way to introduce characters.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Regarding the development time being too short argument, it's Electronic Farts. It's how they roll.

Modifié par FieryPhoenix7, 09 janvier 2011 - 08:05 .

[Destroy Raiden_]

The over all arching story is stopping the reapers 2’s plot didn’t do this it was about stopping it's next in line the collectors. To BW it may’ve been a character driven story but none of the characters missions physically pushed the plot along. Mordin’s save the genophage cure will show up in 3 it didn’t propel the story in anyway for 2 so if the characters were the story for 2 like Cassey claims then the story failed. And if the characters were the story why bother to have us hunt down the collectors and do those 4 missions on them? The interaction with the collectors was what really pushed the story forward and it was done in a very spread out fashion. I was expecting a great story like I got in 1 so much so I bought the game full price which I rarely ever do because I was like oh it’s ME2 it’s got to be good turns out it was OK.

[In Exile]

I do want to point out one thing about ME1, though: it's just as bad with the irrelevant side-plot as main plot as ME2.

After Eden Prime, you've got some of what you need on Saren: he is working with the geth and attacked a human colony. After the citadel investigation, you have 80% of the meaningful plot: Saren wants the conduit, he is searching for it, he is working with the geth to bring back the reapers.

Feros, Noveria and Therum are largley irrelevant re: the plot. If you have the second beacon on Virmire give you the full location of Ilium, you can effectively collapse the plot of the game. Eden Prime, Citadel, Council tells you about Virmire, Virmire, Ilos, Endgame.

For all the talk about the location of the Mu relay, or making sense of the vision - these aren't real plot points in the sense that they are only problems because Bioware elaborated them as problems. These aren't logical consequences of the beacon or chasing after Saren.

In the same way, after Horizon, really, ME2 spins its wheels.

[Ahriman]

In Exile wrote...

That makes sense to me. It's just like your conversation with Vigil in ME1, when you ask why the reapers are doing the whole harvesting thing, and the reply is ''your job is to stop them, not understand them.''

Quite simply, it doesn't matter. That's horrible re: their fate, but it's done, we can't save them, and we need to stop the repears to prevent that from happening to us. I actually thought ME2 handled this particular revelation well.

We also had less insane screaming from Shepard, which was nice.

Vigil is VI and such answer fits good for it. But Shepard is not VI, that's why he/she is interested in Reapers reasons. Sentient creatures ask questions and have emotions. I don't want to play as VI.

[Iakus]

Jzadek72 wrote...
My comparison for Mass Effect 2 and 3 is that it's like the Hyperion Cantos, only with a prequel.
Those books are extremely good and well-praised Sci-fi that has affected the way the genre is written greatly. It also predicted the internet about ten years in advance. The first book, however, had even less story content than ME2, and focussed entirely on the induvidual stories of the people in them, leading them up to the moment when the story kicked in for book 2.

If they do the same in Mass Effect 3, and have these people as key to the plot, or at least your squadmates again, then Mass Effect 2 will have served its purpose in leading onto the third game.

That would be terrible, imo

I wanted ME 1 to be ME 1, ME 2 to be ME2, and ME 3 to be ME3.  Making ME 1 a prequel effectively shuts it out of the trilogy and reduces it to one long skippable side story.  Or maybe an interactive comic book.

Also, Hyperion established how each of the pilgrims was connected to Hyperion, and in some cases, the Shrike.as well.  Without that information, nothing that followed in The Fall of Hyperion would have made any sense at all.  This goes very much against the flow of ME2, where all these characters were totally unconnected to each other, the Collectors, or the Reapers (barring Garrus and Tali) 

The comparison would have been more accurate if ME 2 established that each of the squadmates did in fact have a strong connection to them, and this reason is why they joined with Shepard.  Such a topic has popped up from time to time.  Many find such an idea anathema.

I think the Collectors were tacked on to give some story content to
prevent complete uproar. As it was, Mass Effect 2 seems designed to
introduce key characters. If, however, they decide to make you recruit a
mostly new team in the third game, then Mass Effect 2 will have a much
weaker standing than it would otherwise.

Concerning Collectors:  I hope you're wrong.  ME 2 already felt too much like "Mass Effect 2:  Killing TIme Until Mass Effect 3"

COncerning reccruits:  There will be new recruits.  Of that I have no doubt.  The only question will be how many.  I can definitely see many ME 2 squaddies going off to do the "Wrex Effect" and gether armies on Shepard's behalf.  This could in fact be the saving grace of ME 2.  At least then, the characters will have something to do in ME 3.

[Flamewielder]

Indeed. ME2 plays like a (good) collection of short stories set in the ME universe.



Problem 1 - You lose the sense of "threat" you get from the main story converging towards a confrontation against the Reapers. Instead, you get the Collectors... they make fine mooks, kinda like the Geth in ME1, but not as threatening as Sovereign or Saren felt.



Problem 2 - More party interaction is needed to make you feel like you've assembled a team rather than a toolkit. Get more party member interaction comments like "We're allowed to say no to suicide missions? Why wasn't I told?"

[RiouHotaru]

 ...I think people are making some rather huge leaps here between the "story" of ME1, and the "story" of ME2.  How this continues to happen, I will not ever fully understand.  You can't honestly make these comparisons, as, while the two games are part of the same trilogy, they both look and feel like two completely separate games, in terms of how the plot and story work.

In ME1:
Crew "recruitment" is practically non-existant.  You get everyone BUT Liara before even leaving the Citadel, and two of those six while on Eden Prime.  It's possible to "skip" Garrus or Wrex, but why would you?  Once on the Normandy, they take up their own self-enclosed spaces and...that's it.  Tali is an exposition machine on the Quarian Race, and Ash/Kaidan/Liara give some background on themselves while ninja-ing you into a romance with them that you have to go specifically out of your way to avoid, lest you be forced into it by the end-game.  Squad interactions are also non-existant.  Ash and Kaidan get a few, which is to say I could count them all on ONE HAND, unique conversations, most everyone else gets pre-scripted elevator convos which are almost identical between characters.  Once you've heard a few of them, you've heard them all.

The ONLY other interactions are the debriefings between story missions, and even then, you only hear input from a few.  Ash and Kaidan once again get the most dialog here, with Liara in a close second.  Garrus, Tali and even Wrex get about...oh, ONE dialog line each, but for the most part keep their mouths shut any other time.  There's very little sense of connection of the squadmates to each other outside of the elevators, which barely counts for the above reasons.  There was some unique dialog on missions...like Liara vs. Benezia, but otherwise it doesn't exist.  The story missions don't offer any more interaction until you get to Virmire, whose only noteworthy moments are Wrex and the Sacrifice Decision.

ME1's problem is that it was simply too BIG.  Too many things to do in the galaxy, probably almost twice if not three times the number of sidequests, only a few of which ever had anything to do with Shepard personally (the background-related missions), and the few squaddie-related quests as well, which was everyone BUT Ash/Kaidan.


In ME2:

Story opens with Shepard's death, which IMO is a fantastic way to get things going.  I disregard the "but the resurrection makes no sense!" arguments because it doesn't break my personal suspension of disbelief.  Just because it breaks yours doesn't make it a plothole.  Now, sure, Miranda and Jacob fill the slots of Ashley and Kaidan, and aside from Mordin, the other squaddies are just there...which is just like ME1...only in ME2 they have a lot more to say than simply exposition about their species.  Sure, just like ME1, they take up spaces in different parts of the ship, but this time they have more to say.  More about themselves (except in the case of Garrus and Tali, who give minimal background because there's some assumption people have played ME1 already), and their issues, personal beliefs, etc etc.  Basically, the dialog you got from Ash and Kaidan, only this time you get it from everyone.

Now, while there are pre-scripted unique interactions between characters (the burning bodies in Mordin's recruitment, talking about the situation in Jacob's loyalty, etc etc, it at least feels like each character has something different to say.  As for characters playing "third wheel" during loyalties, this makes perfect sense.  Not every squaddie has anything to say about the situation the other is in.  And most of them probably know well enough to NOT say anything.  After all, thematically the loyalty missions are about the squadmate themselves, so Samara wouldn't make any comment on Garrus' quest for revenge, she follows Shepard's orders.  Plus I'm sure she knows better than to comment in the first place.

Honestly, ME2 develops the squadmates much, MUCH more than ME1 did, at least as individual characters with regards to Shepard.  You're right, they don't interact with each other much...but then they didn't in ME1 much either.  I'd much prefer NO interaction, than identical scripted interaction (Looking at you elevators!).  As for their "integration" into the Collector Plot, you're right, it does feel more like an episode of a TV series than a movie (which is what ME1 felt like).  But I liked that.

I guess, when it comes down to it, your like/dislike of the plot is a case of YMMV (Your Mileage May Vary), but I wish people would stop saying "The story/plot of ME2 is weak" as though it were a statement of fact.

Because it's not.  That's your opinion.

[Jzadek72]

iakus wrote...

Jzadek72 wrote...
My comparison for Mass Effect 2 and 3 is that it's like the Hyperion Cantos, only with a prequel.
Those books are extremely good and well-praised Sci-fi that has affected the way the genre is written greatly. It also predicted the internet about ten years in advance. The first book, however, had even less story content than ME2, and focussed entirely on the induvidual stories of the people in them, leading them up to the moment when the story kicked in for book 2.

If they do the same in Mass Effect 3, and have these people as key to the plot, or at least your squadmates again, then Mass Effect 2 will have served its purpose in leading onto the third game.

That would be terrible, imo

I wanted ME 1 to be ME 1, ME 2 to be ME2, and ME 3 to be ME3.  Making ME 1 a prequel effectively shuts it out of the trilogy and reduces it to one long skippable side story.  Or maybe an interactive comic book.

Also, Hyperion established how each of the pilgrims was connected to Hyperion, and in some cases, the Shrike.as well.  Without that information, nothing that followed in The Fall of Hyperion would have made any sense at all.  This goes very much against the flow of ME2, where all these characters were totally unconnected to each other, the Collectors, or the Reapers (barring Garrus and Tali) 

The comparison would have been more accurate if ME 2 established that each of the squadmates did in fact have a strong connection to them, and this reason is why they joined with Shepard.  Such a topic has popped up from time to time.  Many find such an idea anathema.

I think the Collectors were tacked on to give some story content to
prevent complete uproar. As it was, Mass Effect 2 seems designed to
introduce key characters. If, however, they decide to make you recruit a
mostly new team in the third game, then Mass Effect 2 will have a much
weaker standing than it would otherwise.

Concerning Collectors:  I hope you're wrong.  ME 2 already felt too much like "Mass Effect 2:  Killing TIme Until Mass Effect 3"

COncerning reccruits:  There will be new recruits.  Of that I have no doubt.  The only question will be how many.  I can definitely see many ME 2 squaddies going off to do the "Wrex Effect" and gether armies on Shepard's behalf.  This could in fact be the saving grace of ME 2.  At least then, the characters will have something to do in ME 3.

I agree completely - that's why I was saying it was a weaker way of doing it. Except I think that Mass Effect 1 was still important, just a different part of the narrative somewhat.

Modifié par Jzadek72, 09 janvier 2011 - 08:24 .

[Nightwriter]

Riou, you've got really flimsy and convenient reasons for why characters don't speak up in ME2. Er, in my opinion, that is. I should point out that Tali gets involved in the entire Citadel quest, Garrus gets involved in the Citadel quest, Liara is involved in the Benezia plotline and Noveria, Wrex is involved in the Saren genophage cure debacle, and Kaidan/Ashley are involved in the Virmire decision. Everyone participates in the story events, personally, at one point or another. ME2? Not so much.

[Silentmode]

Order of importance for me in a Bioware game:

1. Companions

2. Story

3. Gameplay

In regards to companions ME2 passed with flying colors, it introduced one of the deepest, most diverse, cast of characters they've ever made and the loyalty missions were a great step forward in their evolution. People are too critical of ME2's story imo, it was meant to do 2 things: introduce players to key characters that will most likely have roles to play later and most important of all to bridge the story to ME3. In this aspect ME2 did its job admirably, I really think some people are too anal about this stuff I don't ever remember stopping in the middle of the Suicide Mission to say "You know, these collectors are a really poor plot device."



P.S.: With all that said if the characters from ME2 don't amount to anything more than cameos, namely a majority of the companions not returnings AS companions in ME3 then I will admit Bioware really did screw up ME2.

[masterp1975]

I enjoy reading all the amature writing critics on these social forums.



"Everything sucks and is mediocre at best, but it's good enough for me to keep criticizing it and buying related products to criticize some more."



You're posting on a forum. Get over yourself.

[FeelTheMighty]

Honestly, ME2 develops the squadmates much, MUCH more than ME1 did, at least as individual characters with regards to Shepard.  You're right, they don't interact with each other much...but then they didn't in ME1 much either.  I'd much prefer NO interaction, than identical scripted interaction (Looking at you elevators!).  As for their "integration" into the Collector Plot, you're right, it does feel more like an episode of a TV series than a movie (which is what ME1 felt like).  But I liked that.

I guess, when it comes down to it, your like/dislike of the plot is a case of YMMV (Your Mileage May Vary), but I wish people would stop saying "The story/plot of ME2 is weak" as though it were a statement of fact.

Because it's not.  That's your opinion.

Agreed. Definitely agreed. I remember the ME1 cast interacting even less than the ones in ME2. The funny thing is that a lot of these criticisms against ME2 can be applied to ME1 as well.

Modifié par FeelTheMighty, 09 janvier 2011 - 08:40 .

[Aeowyn]

masterp1975 wrote...

I enjoy reading all the amature writing critics on these social forums.

"Everything sucks and is mediocre at best, but it's good enough for me to keep criticizing it and buying related products to criticize some more."

You're posting on a forum. Get over yourself.

We're having a discussion. This is what forums are for. If you don't want to read stuff where people discuss the plot, the squad, the gameplay then why the hell are you hanging around on a forum?

[Moiaussi]

ISpeakTheTruth wrote...

Here's another pretty obvious hole in that logic.... He could have looked for all that information covertly as a Spectre and avoid the attack on Eden Prime that allerted everyone in the galaxy! Or better yet he could have spent his time looking for al of that information after the Reapers were released and the galaxy was being defeated again. Then he could go to Eden Prime when there's no one left and then go on his scavenger hunt because after the galaxy's be purged guess what Saren and the Reapers would have all the time in the world to look for what the Protheans did.

As for any possible traps on the Citadel again Saren is the most famous decorated Spectre ever he could have gone searching/scanning the Citadel fo anything else. Instead of going around blowing up bases and having Geth fly around the galaxy making everyone in the galaxy aware that something bad is going down.

@ Vaenier Seeing that the Reaers made every inch of the Citadel I think they'd be able to manually operate it will little to no problem. 

ME1's amazing story that everyone seems to loves at the end of the day makes no sense at all because it asks you to go along with a lot of rather large holes in the logic.

ME2's story made complete sense. Its story was better because it was believable and the character were better. As far as I'm concerned everything about ME2 as better. Graphics, Combat, Characters, Story everything.

In hindsight, you are correct, but again, they didn't know what the conduit was. If they did as you suggested and were wrong, for all they knew they could have been defeated this time by a brilliant Prothean hacking attempt. The citadel could have been pre-booby trapped... Independance Day without having to fly a reaper fighter craft into the mother ship. To manually operate the citadel, Sovereign had to dock with it and connect directly. That was the whole point of the keepers being changed. So what then? Sail in and try to dock and if the Council are on the ball, the citadel gets closed and the attempt fails? And then the conduit turns out to be something actually dangerous to the reapers? An actual weapon against them?

How would Saren have gotten the Beacon after Eden 'cleanly?' The reaper plan relied on surprise. Right or wrong, their plans always rely on surprise. They are very cautious that way. They only were found out at Eden because of an Alliance mission that Saren simply didn't know about. If they hadn't gotten to the beacon first it might have been studied properly and people with more credibility to the council could have gotten the message it contained. Then instead of one lone newbie spectre he could dismiss and/or kill, the entire council would have been alerted, they would have had reason to take the Citadel battle seriously, plan accordingly, etc.

As for Saren simply wandering about the Citadel doing random diagnostics hoping to figure out what happened, if he starts tampering with the keepers other than by way of scans, it would have been noticed. If he starts tampering with the hull, it would have been noticed. How was he supposed to just stumble across this?

And even if he found something, it still wouldn't have told him what the conduit was or if it was something that could defeat the invasion. As it was it still let him get himself and troops on to the citadel directly rather than trying to land ships, meaning he could take out CEC and secure the citadel in advance of sovereign rather than risk sovereign being locked out.

Are the Reapers right to be that cautious? Maybe not. However it is believable that they are. Hence it isn't a plot hole.

[Moiaussi]

masterp1975 wrote...

I enjoy reading all the amature writing critics on these social forums.

"Everything sucks and is mediocre at best, but it's good enough for me to keep criticizing it and buying related products to criticize some more."

You're posting on a forum. Get over yourself.

Funny, you are posting on a forum too. Follow your own advice much?

[Pwner1323]

masterp1975 wrote...

I enjoy reading all the amature writing critics on these social forums.

"Everything sucks and is mediocre at best, but it's good enough for me to keep criticizing it and buying related products to criticize some more."

You're posting on a forum. Get over yourself.

Yeah, because it's not like gamers can be really professionals. I myself am a psychology student and aspiring writter who has studied character development and story consistency. just because you say we're amateurs does not make it so.

Oh, and you're trolling btw.

[Nightwriter]

I think you guys should try and break this habit of defending ME2 by attacking ME1.

I realize this is your first instinct because you perceive that others are attacking ME2 and you want to respond in kind, but no one is saying, for instance, that just because ME2's squad interaction is poor, ME1's squad interaction was great.

It clearly wasn't. Virmire was the first time I felt like they really came to life. However, ME2 didn't even have the menial elevator banter that ME1 had, there were no conversations where the crew acknowledge each other like Ashley does when she says she's nervous about Wrex and Garrus, etc...

[FeelTheMighty]

Nightwriter wrote...

I think you guys should try and break this habit of defending ME2 by attacking ME1.

I realize this is your first instinct because you perceive that others are attacking ME2 and you want to respond in kind, but no one is saying, for instance, that just because ME2's squad interaction is poor, ME1's squad interaction was great.

It clearly wasn't. Virmire was the first time I felt like they really came to life. However, ME2 didn't even have the menial elevator banter that ME1 had, there were no conversations where the crew acknowledge each other like Ashley does when she says she's nervous about Wrex and Garrus, etc...

It's not really "attacking". It's more like pointing out that both games had really similar flaws when it came to the story, and it's unfair to call out one game for this, while ignoring the other.

[Iakus]

RiouHotaru wrote...

In ME1:
Crew "recruitment" is practically non-existant.  You get everyone BUT Liara before even leaving the Citadel, and two of those six while on Eden Prime.  It's possible to "skip" Garrus or Wrex, but why would you?  Once on the Normandy, they take up their own self-enclosed spaces and...that's it.  Tali is an exposition machine on the Quarian Race, and Ash/Kaidan/Liara give some background on themselves while ninja-ing you into a romance with them that you have to go specifically out of your way to avoid, lest you be forced into it by the end-game.  Squad interactions are also non-existant.  Ash and Kaidan get a few, which is to say I could count them all on ONE HAND, unique conversations, most everyone else gets pre-scripted elevator convos which are almost identical between characters.  Once you've heard a few of them, you've heard them all.

This is true.  It's also not as big (note not AS big) a problem, because ME 1 is not a character-based story.  It's plot based.  The game wasn't about recruiting a team to go after Saren, or to prepare for a suicide mission.   It was about "Go get Saren."  More dialogue and banter would only help ME 1, of course.  But   ME 2 needed it more!

Also, I never personally thought of the elevator conversations as being identical.  There weren't enough of them, though.

The ONLY other interactions are the debriefings between story missions, and even then, you only hear input from a few.  Ash and Kaidan once again get the most dialog here, with Liara in a close second.  Garrus, Tali and even Wrex get about...oh, ONE dialog line each, but for the most part keep their mouths shut any other time.  There's very little sense of connection of the squadmates to each other outside of the elevators, which barely counts for the above reasons.  There was some unique dialog on missions...like Liara vs. Benezia, but otherwise it doesn't exist.  The story missions don't offer any more interaction until you get to Virmire, whose only noteworthy moments are Wrex and the Sacrifice Decision.

Again, this isn't a good thing.  More interaction was needed But ME 2 needed it more because of the nature of the story Bioware chose to tell.  It's absence is more strongly felt.  ME 1 needed more elevator conversations, more talking between the squadmates.  But ME 2 took away even the elevators.  And called it a "character-driven game"  How does that make sense?

ME1's problem is that it was simply too BIG.  Too many things to do in the galaxy, probably almost twice if not three times the number of sidequests, only a few of which ever had anything to do with Shepard personally (the background-related missions), and the few squaddie-related quests as well, which was everyone BUT Ash/Kaidan.

ME 2 fixed a problem that was already solved.

People complained about the side missions because the feel of the game was a "race against time" so it felt immerssion breaking (understandably) to go off and do other missions while Saren already has a head start on you.  In ME 2 you're basically hanging around awaiting the pleasure of the Illusive Man.  Shepard has, theoretically, all the time in the world to do these massive sidequests.  Which, of course, no longer exist. save in the form of personal missions.

My thoughts:  there's no such thing as "too many things to do" in an rpg.  There's only the order in which to do them.

Story opens with Shepard's death, which IMO is a fantastic way to get things going.  I disregard the "but the resurrection makes no sense!" arguments because it doesn't break my personal suspension of disbelief.  Just because it breaks yours doesn't make it a plothole.  Now, sure, Miranda and Jacob fill the slots of Ashley and Kaidan, and aside from Mordin, the other squaddies are just there...which is just like ME1...only in ME2 they have a lot more to say than simply exposition about their species.  Sure, just like ME1, they take up spaces in different parts of the ship, but this time they have more to say.  More about themselves (except in the case of Garrus and Tali, who give minimal background because there's some assumption people have played ME1 already), and their issues, personal beliefs, etc etc.  Basically, the dialog you got from Ash and Kaidan, only this time you get it from everyone.

Since this isn't the thread for it, I'll just say that calling Shepard's death a" fantastic way to get things going" made me throw up a little bit in the back of my throat.  But that's just me.

As for talking to the squadmates.  I don't know about you, but I found that there may be more lines of dialogue, but that's only because there are more squadmates.  I found they had less to say than my ME 1 squaddies.  Unless of course, my Shepard's angling to sleep with one of them.  I still liked them.  I just found myself running out of things to talk about and leaving them in their respective closets after a while.

As for characters playing "third wheel" during loyalties, this makes perfect sense.  Not every squaddie has anything to say about the situation the other is in.  And most of them probably know well enough to NOT say anything.  After all, thematically the loyalty missions are about the squadmate themselves, so Samara wouldn't make any comment on Garrus' quest for revenge, she follows Shepard's orders.  Plus I'm sure she knows better than to comment in the first place.

Not every squadmate would have something to say in a given situation, but none of them having anything to say?  These are twelve highly independent individuals from a bunch of different backgrounds.  Barring Shepard having his own indoctrination field going, they should have something to say in situations that they have personal feelings about.  To Samara, burning a refinery should have gotten a reaction out of her, even if it's only to tell Zaeed that they will "discuss" this at a later time.  Tali learning about the Heretic and True geth?  Might be worthy of a line or two of conversation.  Garrus wanting to kill Sidonis, Thane has been down that road before, and it's his greatest regret.  These characters have information and insights that could have added to the mission, and yes to the depth of the game.  Yet they do nothing but shoot at stuff.

Honestly, ME2 develops the squadmates much, MUCH more than ME1 did, at least as individual characters with regards to Shepard.  You're right, they don't interact with each other much...but then they didn't in ME1 much either.  I'd much prefer NO interaction, than identical scripted interaction (Looking at you elevators!).  As for their "integration" into the Collector Plot, you're right, it does feel more like an episode of a TV series than a movie (which is what ME1 felt like).  But I liked that.

I like the characters too, but I never for a moment thought I was building a team.  If there had been more of a plot focus like ME 1's storyline or Dragon Age, maybe I would have liked the game more.  But if the point of the game is to build a team, we should be able to build a team, Not have 12 seperate adventures with twleve seperate characters and call it "teambuilding"

[masterp1975]

Aeowyn wrote...

masterp1975 wrote...

I enjoy reading all the amature writing critics on these social forums.

"Everything sucks and is mediocre at best, but it's good enough for me to keep criticizing it and buying related products to criticize some more."

You're posting on a forum. Get over yourself.

We're having a discussion. This is what forums are for. If you don't want to read stuff where people discuss the plot, the squad, the gameplay then why the hell are you hanging around on a forum?

It amuses me, greatly.  I love the game, love the story, love the characters... mostly.  Sure, I'll admit there's some issues with the story, but if I were a better writer/game developer I wouldn't be posting on a forum - I'd be one of the people getting paid to write/develop.

I came back to these forums after a recent play through because my interest was rekindled.  I was hoping to find some ideas on potential game plots and look for things I may have missed on my playthroughs.  Occasionally I find a recent topic discussing the things you mention and not bashing.  It seems very rare.  The majority of the posts seem to be - "I'm smarter than the writers and they suck."  It makes me chuckle.

Modifié par masterp1975, 09 janvier 2011 - 08:56 .

[Moiaussi]

Nightwriter wrote...

Riou, you've got really flimsy and convenient reasons for why characters don't speak up in ME2. Er, in my opinion, that is. I should point out that Tali gets involved in the entire Citadel quest, Garrus gets involved in the Citadel quest, Liara is involved in the Benezia plotline and Noveria, Wrex is involved in the Saren genophage cure debacle, and Kaidan/Ashley are involved in the Virmire decision. Everyone participates in the story events, personally, at one point or another. ME2? Not so much.

Not to mention several of the characters (particularly Garrus) show significant character development in ME1, which (particularly in the case of Garrus) gets tossed out the window in ME2.

The characters didn't  neccessarily all have to have plot related backgrounds or storylines (since they were recruited for raw ability rather than plot ties), but it would have helped a lot if they played larger roles in the plot based on those abilities.

The most obvious case in point is that even if you send a non-techie down the tube, there is no adverse affect on the mission. If it was allowed you could have sent noone and been no worse off. There could have been more interplay on the loyalty missions too, such as Miranda reading Thane's file and wanting to help, since she is very family minded, hence wanting to come along. Mordin should have had something to say about Thane's medical condition too. "The crew are all in top condition" makes no sense, considering.

[Nashiktal]

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.

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)

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.

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.

This.

[Moiaussi]

masterp1975 wrote...

The majority of the posts seem to be - "I'm smarter than the writers and they suck."  It makes me chuckle.

If the writer is the better judge of their writing than those reading it or those paying for the right to read it, I want the royalty cheques I feel I should be getting based on my perception of the quality of anything I have written.

including this post.

Pay up, buddy. I know my writing warrants it so your opinion is irrelevant. Pay up.

It isn't that any of us think we are smarter than the writers. It is that we are not impressed by ME2's writing. You imply that we should be told how much we like or dislike it rather than actually have opinions on our own feelings.