292 réponses à ce sujet

[Charlieldom]

Please look at this rather really "up to the point" analysis of Mass Effect 2's story and its characters. I personally love your story, but this guy reveals some interesting flaws. Please take a look!!!!!

[CoffeeGamer]

You know... I lisen that guy, and I think he got some points, but there so much BUT in that video, so I think the story of ME2 is still good.

[AlexMBrennan]

This video link has been posted before

Note that smudboy (Youtube profile) also did a ME1 plot analysis somewhat recently

[ZachForrest]

Plot suffered for a much more polished experience.



also that guy has a great voice

[ilostmycookie]

This guy just comes off as a Mass effect 1 fanboy, and most of his points can be easily refuted (Except a couple on the whole Sheperd smashing into the planet thing. That was kind of weak..) Mass effect 2 having a good story still stands in my books.

[Pwner1323]

I loved ME2's story more then ME1's. It's not because of blind fandom but becuause you get to...

1. Work with a splinter cell that actually gets **** done
2. Longer story
3. Aweasome new squadmembers
4. Choices were more morally grey this time around
5. it's not about saving the galaxy but much more personal

The only thing bad: e-mails

It's obvious the guy didn't do his homework. It's also not the first time someone makes a thread about those videos. No one was impresssed.

Modifié par Pwner1323, 14 janvier 2011 - 01:36 .

[nutshell43]

Pwner1323 wrote...

I loved ME2's story more then ME1's. It's not because of blind fandom but becuause you get to...

1. Work with a splinter cell that actually gets **** done

Yeah, in ME1 you're doing what exactly? Saving the galaxy? How pedestrian. In ME2 you're stopping a bunch of mindless slaves attacking humanity with one ship that in the end gets killed off by a scout frigate. Great.

2. Longer story

The story is a few hours. Only if you add all those daddy-issues missions, that have no connection to the main story whatsoever, are you getting anywhere close.

3. Aweasome new squadmembers

ME1 had awesome new squadmembers, too. They weren't aweasome though.

4. Choices were more morally grey this time around

Huh? Which ones?

5. it's not about saving the galaxy but much more personal

No, it tries to have its cake and eat it, too. It pretends it's about saving the galaxy but it's just a bunch of side missions, many of them great on their own, that lack any cohesion besides a juvenile attempt to give them an overarching meaning by tieing them to the topic "daddy issues." It gives the game a lot of breadth but a lack of depth. Not that ME1 had either but it tied the story planets into a nice epic whole.

[Ja5ck]

Charlieldom wrote...

Please look at this rather really "up to the point" analysis of Mass Effect 2's story and its characters. I personally love your story, but this guy reveals some interesting flaws. Please take a look!!!!!

I actually disagree with most of his points (most of which are incoherent I may add) he has like four good arguments, if you could even call it that >.>

[ZachForrest]

I think they missed a trick with Shepards resurrection. Lots of themes to explore, none of which were. A shame.



No morally grey choices to my mind? Unless i've forgotten...



At the same time..it's a videogame. It's not going to stand up to the same kind of scrutiny that 2000 years of literature and 100 years of film can. Maybe one day it might catch up...maybe



(and i don't mean scrutiny about 'the science' or how unlikely it was Shepard could be brought back to life)

[nutshell43]

I don't expect Citizen Kane, Bioware needs mainstream appeal after all, but a bit more Dark Knight and less Transformers would have been nice.

Some handling of the psychological effects of Shepard's death, or why a sole survivor Shep would suddenly follow TIM. A bit of tying the different loyalty missions to each other and the main plot. And I don't give a **** about Wilson.

[ZachForrest]

nutshell43 wrote...

I don't expect Citizen Kane, Bioware needs mainstream appeal after all, but a bit more Dark Knight and less Transformers would have been nice.
Some handling of the psychological effects of Shepard's death, or why a sole survivor Shep would suddenly follow TIM. A bit of tying the different loyalty missions to each other and the main plot. And I don't give a **** about Wilson.

Agreed. As Inception (and Dark Knight) proved, can have a fantastic blockbuster film with 'splosions and obligatory snow level AND thoughtful, intelligent plot.

TAKE NOTE MICHAEL BAY

[TelexFerra]

I love this guy. You can see him around on the forums occasionally.

[StowyMcStowstow]

Randy_Mac wrote...

Some of that guy's analysis videos are just plain terrible.

This. The guy clearly didn't do any research, or read any codex or "investigate" options.

[tmelange]

I think the guy makes great points from a literary perspective. It always seemed to me as if the ME2 team had the idea for certain things to be and to happen: we're going with a larger team of unique characters; cool outfits; loyalty missions; suicide mission with different people dying, etc. Then they crafted a story around the cool pieces. There is so much that doesn't make sense and that is tenuously connected that you just give up on the actual story and simply enjoy the experience and the gameplay. Which I suspect is what they were trying to accomplish, and satisfies a non-reading fanbase. You come away thinking, "Great game!" but the actual underlying story won't ever be classic; it will never hold up over time.

[Epic777]

And people wonder why Bioware developers rarely post.......

Modifié par Epic777, 14 janvier 2011 - 03:22 .

[marshalleck]

Oh this thread again

[StowyMcStowstow]

With the exception of the fourth video. The fourth one actually brings up good points.

[War Houndoom]

They really do need to listen to this guy, Excellent find!

[Onyx Jaguar]

Hey look smudboy videos. yay

[Destroy Raiden_]

Think of all this as constructive criticism. They're artist if they can't take that then they shouldn't be artist people aren't necessarily saying I don't like this or change that just to be mean they're doing it so BW knows what works and what doesn't and they can then take all that in and choose to either change it, tweak it, or leave it alone.





And sense my post didn't up load here it is again on the video matter:



His voice is quite nice actually is he a VA? If not why not? Anyway what he’s saying about the plot not connecting well or making much sense is basically how I feel on the matter. In 2nd part he’s going over in more detail about how all the crewmen change emotionally but shep doesn’t and how sense this is one of sheps stories how this doesn’t make sense which is spot on. I’ve tried to get this across on the forms too but he’s put it very well detailing what should’ve happened dying would change anyone people who go through near death are changed forever a bad person becomes good a good person my just break down, ect. He also points out the very lacking change in Shepard we all want dialogue that allows us to feel and have our shepard's change SB is the closest we’ve gotten though throughout ME2 shep literly couldn’t’ change. The narrator brought up a good point if the events in the story don’t matter to Shepard and they don’t matter to the crewmen either experiencing it or third party why should it matter to the player?





He also went over the lack of prep work and I couldn’t stop laughing while what he said was true like if you’re going up against an unknown enemy you need to know not just what species wise they are, but you need to know their force strength (how many), how strong are they, how well trained are they, whats the command structure (ok I added this), their tech how much can they resist you and you them (I simi added this too), and where are they do they have one base? Multiple bases?, ect. I thought recon would be done in game at least stick some people 24/7 on the O4 relay but nothing and as he pointed out nothing you just pick up your men, do their loyalty missions, and then run off with zero clue of enemy strength, size, and capabilities into the O4.



I like at 6:36 on part 2 where he lays out a physical description of the plot comparing it with books in an easy to grasp concept to illustrate just how disjointed the main plot and the crew loyalties are to the over all story of the ME2.



I liked how at 7:28 in part 2 he gave an alternative to the antagonist (Harbinger’s) motivations sense in 2 all we learn is he loves to talk and stalks Shepard a lot. I like how he purposed BW should’ve just made the prothean general we saw at the end the antagonist and the game we could have meet up throughout and he like Saren would’ve been struggling with the whole slave or servant type of mentality





Part 3 The only thing I can say on this part is I agree with his analysis on the VS and how they are but shouldn’t necessarily be so indifferent to you and the known plot hole in how the heck did they get missed, ect. I’m not so hung up on how they got skipped but I’m still trying to fit the whole you’re a traitor throw down into all this looking at it from VA POV from sheps POV it still isn’t so nice and neat like it should’ve been even if it was the galactic version of lack of communication no option was given to say, “ Wait a sec, let’s both breath and start over. First off sorry I died, now do you still want to yell at me?” and the lack of explanation as to why the collectors want/ are interested in shep in the first place.



The lack of no aid what so ever being given to go the either downed ship and why the Normandy in orbit around Horizon didn’t fire a shot at the retreating collector ship. I thought it odd we shoot it with the towers the first time I saw it fly off I was sure the Normandy would at least take pot shots at it but nothing? Now that he repointed this out not a deal breaker with me but why didn’t they try to stop it?





Part 4 (and yes I’m going through all 6 and if I have an opinion on what is being covered I’ll put it down) so anyway part 4 Ahh the technicalities of the SM. It goes through it bit by bit but the part I most agree with starts: 6:28

I’ll just let that speak for it’s self. I agree that Samara was well qualified for the squad leader job but the game thought not…





Part 5 continues on with that thought and tries to figure out why terminator baby was even usesd. TB’s got us all scratching our heads on this one moving on…





Part 6 Continues with 5 and then also explains some ways all this could’ve been avoided which I agree with what he said on how the loyalty should’ve mattered more then it being flag for weather characters lived or died. Many have already brought this up like taking Samara on Zeeds mission she says nothing there was no conflict. I deliberately took Miranda on Jack’s mission so she could see first hand what her job is doing see the damage not the numbers yet she had nothing to say and two seconds after I boarded the ship Jacks trying to rip her head off and she still thinks Cerberus was no big deal with what they did to Jack. Those moments for instance Miranda seeing and where Jack was held when the fight came up Miranda could’ve been like yeah, you’re right I never knew of that project they did things no one should’ve done and she herself would start to reevaluate her role with Cerberus and start doubting that it always has humanities interest in mind. Jack would’ve realized Miranda is questioning her role and is not as cheerleader as she once thought, and Shepard would’ve been changed in this dislike Cerberus more if para think more highly of them if ren and his interactions with TIM would’ve changed too become more combative if para and more agreeing (if one could be) if ren, ect.

[didymos1120]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Hey look smudboy videos. yay

Nay.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Some of his arguments make sense, but most of them seem like not enough thought went into it.