185 réponses à ce sujet

[ziloe]

 I love how people are talking about the ending of a game in a section that clearly states in caps: (NO SPOILERS ALLOWED)

[Jacen987]

Evil Johnny 666 wrote...

Jacen987 wrote...
It makes for a really good sequel to a really good game.Its not just more of the same,it explores a different plot structure,and it evolves all major plotlines.On top of that it does,what every good sequel should.Brings the plot to a more personal character-based tale.IE Empire Strickes Back.

I only wish some plot concepts were better explored,i favor of others.

Only Empire Strikes Back was about important characters. The only thing we learned about Shepard is that he died and came back to life, at the beginning of the game. Every character in your crew is expandable. The only thing ME2 did is deepen the universe, rather than bringing the story ME1 introduced further, like Empire Strikes Back.

First of all.You are Shepard.Its a role-playing game.Shepard was always the focus in both games,he was never explored.Its your own personal motivations or that of the charakter your roleplaying that influence desigions.

Thats why its a roleplaying game.Because you decide,where the charakter comes from,with every choice he makes.

Apart from that all charakter depth was expanded 10 times over ME1.Not only  that but alot of returning charkters grew diractly as a result of ME1's events.

How much more important could the charakters have been.They are the STORY.The whole Collector thing,while fitting very  good with the overall ark,is just an excuse to bring these very vibrant and polirized individuals into your team,that would othewise have nothing to do with you.And the small chance of success,to finaly give them the determination and means to achieve they longtime goals.



And as i said ME2 -->ME3.The Reapers would not attack so soon if not for  the collectors failure.IE diract result.


:pinched:Wake up.70% of ME1 handled of none Reaper related plot.Its just the linearity and structure that fed people the illusion of a cohenrent structure.

ME2 is way too segmented....Even just bringing elevators and removing "Success Screen" would have made the story feel more cohesive.

Modifié par Jacen987, 24 janvier 2011 - 01:15 .

[habitat 67]

Jacen987 wrote...

ME2 is way too segmented....Even just bringing elevators and removing "Success Screen" would have made the story feel more cohesive.

Nice post.

Not elevators though .........

trams & monorails.  

Modifié par habitat 67, 24 janvier 2011 - 02:05 .

[Iakus]

Jacen987 wrote...

Really Nostadamus.Tell us please what happens in ME3,cause you;'ve obviously played it.

Like I said, no one knows what's going to be in ME 3.  But going by the transition from ME 1 to ME 2, I am not all that optomistic.

It makes for a really good sequel to a really good game.Its not just more of the same,it explores a different plot structure,and it evolves all major plotlines.On top of that it does,what every good sequel should.Brings the plot to a more personal character-based tale.IE Empire Strickes Back.

I only wish some plot concepts were better explored,i favor of others.

The specifics of the quality of ME 2 are for other threads, and in the spoiler section.  So I'll limit my response to "I found ME 2 to be a poor sequel and had disjointed story  that is wider, but not deeper than ME 1."

It had some good material, but never came together as a coherant story.  ME 3 could start with Shepard learning his clone has been working for Cerberus in the Terminus Systems while he's been out looking for a way to stop the Reapers, and it would make as much sense as anything else.

 

Honestly, it would not suprise me one bit if the SR 2 gets blown up and the ME 2 squad gets scattered across the galaxy (again)

<_

And yet it's been done before.  And was praised for it 

Hmm, I wonder what the circumstances would be to have Miranda or Jack accuse Shep of being a traitor and saying "You betrayed everything we stood for!"

-_-What a incredible,irreversable cinic.....

You said yourself:  "It's called 'change'"

Modifié par iakus, 24 janvier 2011 - 04:09 .

[Dem_B]

Mass Effect 2 is a good game, in mass effect 1 I'm not worried about the team like in the Mass Effect 2.
But the main thing in Mass Effect 2 - is to help the team solve their personal problems, so yes now we better to know Krogans, Quarians and most importantly the Geths, but the main storyline was transferred to the second plan. In Mass effect 1 I had a feeling that I am doing a great work, but in Mass effect 2 this feeling lost.

After a Mass effect 1, I was sure that all will be united before the threat and we will hold the line, but after the Mass effect 2, I do not believe in a logical victory. 
Because is not possible to resist this global threat without preparation.
No one is ready for large-scale war. Not everything depends on one man and several of his friends.
Without preparation, if be realistic, not possibly win.
I think in terms of plot, we stayed there where were at the end of the Mass effect 1 or even leaned back, because at the end of the mass effect 1 a Council recognized the threat, and Anderson said - "together we will drive them back into the dark space. " 
But what we saw in Mass Effect 2 - "Ah Yes ... Reapers" - Council does not believe in the Reapers again.
Сan easily confirm the existence of the Reapers, Liara also saw the message Prothean when helped to find Ilos.
Maybe this is the course of the plot, conceived by authors. They shows how Council is blind. But then they are doomed, they will all be killed in mass effect 3. But without their strength, without the united forces of the Council there is no way to win.
If everyone would fight on alone - no chance.
Attack will be completely unexpected, millions will die in seconds.
All this can be scheduled by the authors, a dark story.

I think the story of mass effect 2 does not have the most important - the feeling that we are ready for the greatest battle in history.
I do not believe in a logical victory and only a miracle can help.

It would be logical to direct all Reapers forces to attack at the Citadel and seize control of the relays, to deprive us of any chance for united. 

Reapers will have easy control of the Citadel, will have control over the relays and all the information about the key planets. 

Since no one will not be able to unite, then all will fight alone and will die. The cycle can not be broken. 
If the Reapers will attack at the Citadel, they get it, no one expects a blow. 
That's it, everything we did in Mass effect 1, but more so in Mass effect 2, it was in vain. 

[Chaos Gate]

Until we play the third game, we really can't tell.

But as it stands now, ME2's story was not only lamentable but completely forgettable.

Modifié par Chaos Gate, 24 janvier 2011 - 09:00 .

[Gleym]

habitat 67 wrote...

Nice post.

Not elevators though .........

trams & monorails.  

I'd have killed to see somethin' like this in the Citadel. Would've been awesome. Imagine rails that lead up and down and all around in some places, with elevators used to either ascend or descend buildings or levels.

[Nohvarr]

Chaos Gate wrote...

Until we play the third game, we really can't tell.

But as it stands now, ME2's story was not only lamentable but completely forgettable.

Speak for yourself. I loved the fact that the characters were the main story, instead of a bunch of mior plots by Saren that you just stumbled across. My favorite character story archs are that of Tali, Garrus, Thane, Samara, and Kasumi. Samara has my favorite Loyalty mission for spoiler reasons.

[Durgon Ironfist]

A better question to ask is if the complainers seeking attention are needed. I must say the "ME 2 was terrible because of X" arguments are beyond old and represent the small minority of Mass Effect fans. My father had a saying which applies here: "The baying of the disgruntled anarchists serve only to annoy the greater society."

[Gleym]

Does your father have a saying for ignoring blatant flaws in society that are bound to spell its demise, Durgon?

[Dem_B]

If someone unduly criticizes without a clear explanation, then do not need to pay attention, but necessarily need to listen to those who are considered with the dignities of and a clear talks about shortcomings. 

[Nozybidaj]

iakus wrote...

It makes for a really good sequel to a really good game.

 I'll limit my response to "I found ME 2 to be a poor sequel and had disjointed story  that is wider, but not deeper than ME 1."

ME2 is a sequel?  To me a sequel is a following chapter that expands and builds upon the previous.  What exactly is ME2 a sequel to?  I think I missed that game.

[marshalleck]

 Nozy! 

[Nozybidaj]

marshalleck wrote...

 Nozy! 

Just saying all my dislike of ME2 might actually be misplaced.  I'm missing the whole first chapter of the ME2 story. 

Still waiting on the sequel to ME1 though, that is gonna be epic.

[Getorex]

There are a FEW items from ME2 of (hopeful) importance to the series and big for ME3:



You make friends/alliance with the Geth. You do so by working with Legion (one of my FAVORITE characters from ME2 and I hope to see in ME3) and either wiping out the naughty Geth or changing them over to good Geth.



You do a solid for the Migrant Fleet and set Tali up to become a major leader of her people. You may even have bedded her to boot (OK, that's just an objective good in an of itself).



If you were a proper leader in ME1 you saved Wrex. Doing so you made him the growing leader of the Krogan and you re-upped your friendship with him in ME2. You may now have a united Krogan ally for ME3.



In those ME2 cases, as with the Rachni Queen in ME1, you have seemingly gained a set of solid allies for ME3.



Of course, this depends on the writers having any concern with continuity, logic, and story when it comes to ME3. Here's hoping...

[habitat 67]

Gleym wrote...

habitat 67 wrote...

Nice post.

Not elevators though .........

trams & monorails.  

I'd have killed to see somethin' like this in the Citadel. Would've been awesome. Imagine rails that lead up and down and all around in some places, with elevators used to either ascend or descend buildings or levels.

NO WAY!!?!! I LOVE IT!

Was this concept art ever used anywhere? It's amazing.

[marshalleck]

Nozybidaj wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

 Nozy! 

Just saying all my dislike of ME2 might actually be misplaced.  I'm missing the whole first chapter of the ME2 story. 

Still waiting on the sequel to ME1 though, that is gonna be epic.

Actually I wasn't like laughing at you or anything. I was just wondering what happened to Nozybidaj the other day. Turns out you had some very valid criticism of ME2, though I stand by my belief that you should have played it first. 

[Nozybidaj]

marshalleck wrote...

Nozybidaj wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

 Nozy! 

Just saying all my dislike of ME2 might actually be misplaced.  I'm missing the whole first chapter of the ME2 story. 

Still waiting on the sequel to ME1 though, that is gonna be epic.

Actually I wasn't like laughing at you or anything. I was just wondering what happened to Nozybidaj the other day. Turns out you had some very valid criticism of ME2, though I stand by my belief that you should have played it first. 

I know its all good.

I still pop in from time to time just to see what's going on.  More so just for the interesting personalities on the forum though, lost interest in the series really a long time ago.

[marshalleck]

Nice. Did you play New Vegas? I thought that was a killer RPG, it's Fallout in a modern game engine done properly. I can't remember if you liked those Beth-engine games. As far as sequels improving upon their predecessors goes, FNV blows away ME2.

Modifié par marshalleck, 24 janvier 2011 - 04:02 .

[habitat 67]

New Vegas was fantastic.

[Nozybidaj]

marshalleck wrote...

Nice. Did you play New Vegas? I thought that was a killer RPG, it's Fallout in a modern game engine done properly. I can't remember if you liked those Beth-engine games.

I love Beth games.  I did play NV, thought it was pretty good, though I didn't get as addicted to it as i did Oblivion/FO3, not sure why.  11/11/11 though, I'm planning about 3 weeks of vacation time for Skyrim. =p

[mattmc]

anyone else get a sense that maybe, the citadel itself was the orignial reaper???

[Getorex]

Nozybidaj wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Nice. Did you play New Vegas? I thought that was a killer RPG, it's Fallout in a modern game engine done properly. I can't remember if you liked those Beth-engine games.

I love Beth games.  I did play NV, thought it was pretty good, though I didn't get as addicted to it as i did Oblivion/FO3, not sure why.  11/11/11 though, I'm planning about 3 weeks of vacation time for Skyrim. =p

Had to look that up (Skyrim). Sadly, I see it is just another sword and sorcery mortal combatty thing.

WIth the name Skyrim I had hopes for something beyond swords, armor, arrows, etc.

Drake's Deception looks good, however. Too bad it is console only (and PS3 at that).

Crysis 2 is soon on its way so there's that.

[Evil Johnny 666]

Jacen987 wrote...

Evil Johnny 666 wrote...

Only Empire Strikes Back was about important characters. The only thing we learned about Shepard is that he died and came back to life, at the beginning of the game. Every character in your crew is expandable. The only thing ME2 did is deepen the universe, rather than bringing the story ME1 introduced further, like Empire Strikes Back.

First of all.You are Shepard.Its a role-playing game.Shepard was always the focus in both games,he was never explored.Its your own personal motivations or that of the charakter your roleplaying that influence desigions.

Thats why its a roleplaying game.Because you decide,where the charakter comes from,with every choice he makes.

Beside choosing which personality "my" Shepard had (paragon, renegade or grey, unless I wanted someone with a split personality disorder), there wasn't much choice. Ah, my class and my LI... Personally, Mass Effect has never been about Shepard to me, but the story and universe. Shepard is one of the most boring, stereotyped character ever. The only thing that made him bearable in ME1 is that you actually had real choices that affected the story and universe, and that you could actually choose dialogue options that didn't contradict themselves.

He was not any more explored in ME2. Tell me how. What motivations? Shepard was forced to work with Cerberus and get a crew, do the errand boy for them, do a couple of short and lacklustre missions that actually dealt with something (loyalty missions were much more interesting though) and then game over. Shepard is just one, huge fat stereotype no matter which personality you choose.

Apart from that all charakter depth was expanded 10 times over ME1.Not only  that but alot of returning charkters grew diractly as a result of ME1's events.

How much more important could the charakters have been.They are the STORY.The whole Collector thing,while fitting very  good with the overall ark,is just an excuse to bring these very vibrant and polirized individuals into your team,that would othewise have nothing to do with you.And the small chance of success,to finaly give them the determination and means to achieve they longtime goals.

Expanded 10 times over? What's the deal with your boring "I want to kill everything Krogan bred for war", how is that good character design? It's a cliché, and a bad one at that. Now don't mistake me, I don't care about clichés and a bit of cheesyness, but at least, please, there's good and bad clichés, choose the good ones. Then you have the angsty emo teenager who wants too, to kill everything she sees. Then you have the Asari who have some of the most ridiculous code ever invented, seriously, that was ridiculous. Mordin was admittedly good, but they retconned the genophage with him.  Garrus and Tali were good, but they were already established characters. Miranda was okay and Jacob expendable. Plus, I thought characters had much more depth and introduced much more interesting elements in ME1.

In ME2, it's ALL about those mostly boring characters. ALL about characters who have no interactions whatsoever between themselves, a random group of characters thrown together. And they are ALL expendable. How do you make a good story about characters which can disappear of the series right after the game? It's like if Empire Strikes Back was all about a group of characters who either disappear or die by the end, and you never ever see them in Return of the Jedi. How would have people reacted? And the point of bringing all those characters together, was for a suicide mission, so the "plot" is supposed to be important, yet the story telling was terrible at best. They thrown us chunks of information just like this, killing any possibility of making the Collectors an interesting enemy, a mysterious one, or trying to wrap the story and make it evolve in a steady way, picking your interest and all. Of course not they could do that, that would be too hard.

And as i said ME2 -->ME3.The Reapers would not attack so soon if not for  the collectors failure.IE diract result.

Well, if ME2 never existed, ME1-->ME3. The Reapers would not have made it all the way if not for Saren and Sovereign's faillure. IE direct result. In ME2, the Reapers were ALREADY coming as clearly stated at the end of ME1. We don't even know yet what was all the fuss about the collectors. What we're asking ourselves, is how the hell were they even relevant in any way to the story! How is that good story telling? Good story telling is gripping, engaging, makes you think about the mysteries kept. But in ME2, they either tell us everything when they shouldn't tell us everything so hastily, or tell us nothing at all. So we got to know everything about the collectors and why they abducted humans, but never got to know why they did it. Why did they want a human reaper when they are supposedly a formidable force which is already coming to destroy everything and no one should even stand a chance in the first place, because everyone says they don't even exist. And ONE? This is not the type of question someone ask himself after playing a game or watching a movie, not questions that make you wonder how something is not ridiculous, but instead you should be intrigued to know more, period.

:pinched:Wake up.70% of ME1 handled of none Reaper related plot.Its just the linearity and structure that fed people the illusion of a cohenrent structure.

Wait, you're telling me the fact that 70% of ME1 didn't talk about the Reapers gave an illusion of coherent structure? It WAS coherent! The fact that we didn't talk about the Reapers all the time, is that we had to find people/things to learn about them. That was the whole point. But then ME2 didn't used the fact that ME1 was just introducing the big baddies to delve further into them and more. We did learn a couple of things, but nothing I'd call important. Instead, we were offered a plot which we have NO IDEA how it is related to all we did/learn/know about ME1! All we know, is that we did those things, learned those things, but that's it. Where does it fit with ME1? Nowhere. After ME1, we knew the Reapers were coming. Boot up ME2, Reapers what? No! The Collectors! We were never told either why we should try to save a few colonists instead of trying to stop a race of machines to imminently annihilate the whole galaxy. But of course, Bioware catered the game to new players, so they didn't to confuse them with anything that ME1 was about<_<

[Evil Johnny 666]

Durgon Ironfist wrote...

A better question to ask is if the complainers seeking attention are needed. I must say the "ME 2 was terrible because of X" arguments are beyond old and represent the small minority of Mass Effect fans. My father had a saying which applies here: "The baying of the disgruntled anarchists serve only to annoy the greater society."

How pretentious. "The majority loves this, this obviously means that it is good". Good is subjective, everyone is entitled to their opinions, especially those who bother defending them instead of spewing bull**** like "see how everyone loves this, you're wrong":bandit:

I'd add to your father's saying: "so they can't get ripped off in peace"

Evil Johnny 666 wrote...

We learned plenty of things about
the universe, sure, but nothing really built upon ME1's story nor
brought that story forward in a meaningful way.

... what exactly were you expecting to happen?

Something?

Modifié par Evil Johnny 666, 24 janvier 2011 - 10:22 .