462 réponses à ce sujet

[Il Divo]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

ME2 is simply parallel to ME1 in structure because we are experiencing the game from the renegade-side faction instead of the paragon-side faction. That is entirely intentional. It is like playing part 1 of the campaign as the human faction and part 2 as the orc faction, except we get to keep the same character.

During both games we can resist our faction and at the end we can set both factions back and advance the other.

In ME3, we get to choose which faction triumphs. Its all pointed and deliberate.

Storywise, the plot against the Reapers does advance, we gain new allies, we learn more about the enemy. Its actually a very nice construction overall.

This. This times a million.

Good to see you posting again, What.

[Fixers0]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

ME2 is simply parallel to ME1 in structure because we are experiencing the game from the renegade-side faction instead of the paragon-side faction. That is entirely intentional. It is like playing part 1 of the campaign as the human faction and part 2 as the orc faction, except we get to keep the same character.

During both games we can resist our faction and at the end we can set both factions back and advance the other.

In ME3, we get to choose which faction triumphs. Its all pointed and deliberate.

Storywise, the plot against the Reapers does advance, we gain new allies, we learn more about the enemy. Its actually a very nice construction overall.

The Problem is, is that Mass effect 2 lacked three fundamental element's for a good story.
1. depth
2.  tone
3. Cohesion.

The problem isn't much the story (even though the whole Collector/harbinger plot as poorly written) or the Character's it self, it is the way they are tolled to us.

[bjdbwea]

I would say that the story was badly thought out to begin with. Indeed it lacks all the elements that you mentioned. But it's true that, as is often the case, the basic ideas could still have made for a good story. To name just one example: Shepard's death and resurrection. An interesting theme, that would provide rich possibilities to add depth to the writing. But what did the writers do with it? Nothing at all. It's rarely ever mentioned again after the intro. Not even Shepard seems to care. It's tossed aside like the cheap plot twist to allow the reset of gameplay and story that it was.

And the companions don't care either, which only further proves how much each of them only lives in their own universe. While it goes without saying that companions should have their own goals too, the writing for ME 2 just stopped after that basic element and didn't bother to make them care about anything else, like the story, the missions, the other companions, or Shepard.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 08 février 2011 - 07:17 .

[Moiaussi]

bjdbwea wrote...

I would say that the story was badly thought out to begin with. Indeed it lacks all the elements that you mentioned. But it's true that, as is often the case, the basic ideas could still have made for a good story. To name just one example: Shepard's death and resurrection. An interesting theme, that would provide rich possibilities to add depth to the writing. But what did the writers do with it? Nothing at all. It's rarely ever mentioned again after the intro. Not even Shepard seems to care. It's tossed aside like the cheap plot twist to allow the reset of gameplay and story that it was.

And the companions don't care either, which only further proves how much each of them only lives in their own universe. While it goes without saying that companions should have their own goals too, the writing for ME 2 just stopped after that basic element and didn't bother to make them care about anything else, like the story, the missions, the other companions, or Shepard.

Not to mention the fact that Shep seems to be getting progressively more borg than human, something noone seems to care about even though there is an obvious likely paralell with the reapers there.

[AkiKishi]

bjdbwea wrote...

I would say that the story was badly thought out to begin with. Indeed it lacks all the elements that you mentioned. But it's true that, as is often the case, the basic ideas could still have made for a good story. To name just one example: Shepard's death and resurrection. An interesting theme, that would provide rich possibilities to add depth to the writing. But what did the writers do with it? Nothing at all. It's rarely ever mentioned again after the intro. Not even Shepard seems to care. It's tossed aside like the cheap plot twist to allow the reset of gameplay and story that it was.

And the companions don't care either, which only further proves how much each of them only lives in their own universe. While it goes without saying that companions should have their own goals too, the writing for ME 2 just stopped after that basic element and didn't bother to make them care about anything else, like the story, the missions, the other companions, or Shepard.

While that may have implications in todays world. Humans of the future don't seem to be particularly spiritual. It's also going to be top top secret and not the sort of thing you can talk about in the pub.

If it turns out that what the put in Shepard is the new beacon for the Reapers, that's hardly unexpected either.

[wulf3n]

Mesina2 wrote...
How?

You have Council if survived.

Yet all the work convincing them of the reaper threat, dissappears with no explanation as to why. Though that could be an oversight during ME1's development, as their are multiple endings some acknowledging the reapers others not.

Mesina2 wrote...
You have Rachni if not killed.
You have ME1 cameos that were effected by you( except Conrad do to bug)
You have ME1 LI if you had one

and all that equates to in ME2 is "hey look, were still alive." nothing done in ME1 affected ME2. Now i understand from a development perspective the exponential difficulty involved, that doesn't mean i have to like it. Bioware promised actions with "real" consequences, yet all we got were cameos.

edit: Not to mention, being a spectre is now irrelevant, as you can decide to reject you're reinstatement (sure they may have a mini reinstatement in ME3 if you rejected, but what if you reject that one as well)

wulf3n 
2) Characters were the main focus, but they weren't essential to the game.

Mesina2 wrote...
And how is that pointless?

Well it all equates to fluff. By the end of the suicide mission, i was thinking "so i didn't need to bring ANY of these people along?" with the exception of mordin (for the first half of the game) all of the characters can be replaced by anyone, and still manage to complete the suicide mission. eg, you can send a biotic in the vents and the doors still open, so you don't need a tech specialist, you just need people who are expendable. As enjoyable as it was, in the end, it was just getting to know characters for the sake of getting to know characters.


bare in mind, that this is merely how i felt, and should in know way should be taken as "this is fact!!!" as ppl seem to, as in the end, as much as i hate to say it, we won't know how "pointless" ME2 was until ME3, it might turn out that our actions in ME2 have more consequence in ME3 than ME1 does, rendering ME1 ultimately pointless.

Modifié par wulf3n, 08 février 2011 - 08:38 .

[OmegaXI]

It wasn't pointless, in the over all sense it was more of a proxy war with the reapers

[wulf3n]

OmegaXI wrote...

It wasn't pointless, in the over all sense it was more of a proxy war with the reapers

To what end? what did we really acheive by destroying the reaper?

[AkiKishi]

wulf3n wrote...
Well it all equates to fluff. By the end of the suicide mission, i was thinking "so i didn't need to bring ANY of these people along?" with the exception of mordin (for the first half of the game) all of the characters can be replaced by anyone, and still manage to complete the suicide mission. eg, you can send a biotic in the vents and the doors still open, so you don't need a tech specialist, you just need people who are expendable. As enjoyable as it was, in the end, it was just getting to know characters for the sake of getting to know characters.


bare in mind, that this is merely how i felt, and should in know way should be taken as "this is fact!!!" as ppl seem to, as in the end, as much as i hate to say it, we won't know how "pointless" ME2 was until ME3, it might turn out that our actions in ME2 have more consequence in ME3 than ME1 does, rendering ME1 ultimately pointless.

You wanted consequences there they are. Yes you can send anyone into any role but they will die. That is a consequence. No whether you care about that or not is irrelvent it's still a consequence of your actions.

I think ME1 was rendered pointless the moment the Reapers just carried on coming anyway after such a short time period. It makes the whole "Citadel" questionable at best.

[AkiKishi]

wulf3n wrote...

To what end? what did we really acheive by destroying the reaper?

Nothing directly. But in ME1 we thought the "ship" was the Reaper, when in fact there is something inside the ship that can be killed on foot with conventional weapons. That's a big shift in strategic thinking on how to fight a Reaper.

[OmegaXI]

wulf3n wrote...

OmegaXI wrote...

It wasn't pointless, in the over all sense it was more of a proxy war with the reapers

To what end? what did we really acheive by destroying the reaper?

Proxy war in the sense that it was fought between human henchmen and reaper henchmen. It was a small war between two faction that ultimately represent the two larger factions that will be fighting each other in ME3.

But I guess that all that was acheived was getting their attention even more and its like winning a battle but the war is still coming. But isn't it just vengence to show the reapers humans are done  messing around.

Modifié par OmegaXI, 08 février 2011 - 08:58 .

[Nightwriter]

Fixers0 wrote...

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

ME2 is simply parallel to ME1 in structure because we are experiencing the game from the renegade-side faction instead of the paragon-side faction. That is entirely intentional. It is like playing part 1 of the campaign as the human faction and part 2 as the orc faction, except we get to keep the same character.

During both games we can resist our faction and at the end we can set both factions back and advance the other.

In ME3, we get to choose which faction triumphs. Its all pointed and deliberate.

Storywise, the plot against the Reapers does advance, we gain new allies, we learn more about the enemy. Its actually a very nice construction overall.

The Problem is, is that Mass effect 2 lacked three fundamental element's for a good story.
1. depth
2.  tone
3. Cohesion.

The problem isn't much the story (even though the whole Collector/harbinger plot as poorly written) or the Character's it self, it is the way they are tolled to us.

Well said.

I would say also that if we change factions abruptly, it is important to the story that our character reacts to the change.

[wulf3n]

BobSmith101 wrote...
You wanted consequences there they are. Yes you can send anyone into any role but they will die. That is a consequence. No whether you care about that or not is irrelvent it's still a consequence of your actions. 

Taking one step foward has the consequence of you being one step closer to your destination. And when i talk about conseqeunce i mean from ME1 to ME2, we were told the stuff we did in ME1 would have an impact on ME2. You'll have to forgive me for expecting that to mean something more than "look over here remember me, now get lost i've got nothing useful to say"

BobSmith101 wrote...
I think ME1 was rendered pointless the moment the Reapers just carried on coming anyway after such a short time period. It makes the whole "Citadel" questionable at best.

Sure they're still coming, but at least now you're aware of them, now you have the council backing you, now you can spend ME2 finding out a way to defeat them...oh wait, no you can't because for reasons unkown the council back flip mere weeks later, and you're forced to fight an enemy that never existed in ME1.

BobSmith101 wrote...
Nothing directly. But in ME1 we thought the "ship" was the Reaper, when in fact there is something inside the ship that can be killed on foot with conventional weapons. That's a big shift in strategic thinking on how to fight a Reaper. 

assumption.

[AlanC9]

wulf3n wrote...

OmegaXI wrote...

It wasn't pointless, in the over all sense it was more of a proxy war with the reapers

To what end? what did we really acheive by destroying the reaper?

From Harbinger's speech after you've blown up the new Reaper, it's fairly clear that it was going to open up the path to the main Reaper fleet in some fashion. How isn't especially relevant; maybe it's got some bearing on ME3, maybe it would have been something completely different.

[AlanC9]

wulf3n wrote...
Sure they're still coming, but at least now you're aware of them, now you have the council backing you, now you can spend ME2 finding out a way to defeat them...

So you wanted ME2 to end with us knowing how to defeat the Reapers, and in ME3 we would execute our plan? Really?

[AkiKishi]

wulf3n wrote...

Taking one step foward has the consequence of you being one step closer to your destination. And when i talk about conseqeunce i mean from ME1 to ME2, we were told the stuff we did in ME1 would have an impact on ME2. You'll have to forgive me for expecting that to mean something more than "look over here remember me, now get lost i've got nothing useful to say"

Sure they're still coming, but at least now you're aware of them, now you have the council backing you, now you can spend ME2 finding out a way to defeat them...oh wait, no you can't because for reasons unkown the council back flip mere weeks later, and you're forced to fight an enemy that never existed in ME1.

assumption.

Biowares fault for up-playing the "consequences" card. Obvious though that it would be nothing major because the games need a common point. Ideally ME2 would have been Paragon- go with the council, Renegade go with Cerberus. But disk space is limited (especially on DvD) and no one is really eager to go beyond 2 DvDs.

Politicians are like that, once the threat is over prefer to carry on like nothing happened. See it all the time in the real world even though the lurking threat is still there. Take first Gulf war for example, solves immediate problem , yet leaves root cause in place. Result second Gulf war (Lol I'm talking like Mordin).

Logic - We know that you can fly through a Reaper ME field now. Conclusion only stops fast moving objects. Strategy board Reapers and kill the "core". Whether or not Bioware choose to run with that of course remains to be seen, but its a very PRG party based solution.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 08 février 2011 - 09:11 .

[wulf3n]

AlanC9 wrote...

wulf3n wrote...
Sure they're still coming, but at least now you're aware of them, now you have the council backing you, now you can spend ME2 finding out a way to defeat them...

So you wanted ME2 to end with us knowing how to defeat the Reapers, and in ME3 we would execute our plan? Really?

I didn't say you would find a way to defeat them. I would have liked the reapers to drop in half way through the game, with the rest being spent trying to pick up the shattered pieces, ending the game on a dark/sad cliffhanger. But to be back where we were half way through ME1, (council not believing us, fighting geth) with no explanation is just insulting. Hell, ME2 could've even been about the council back flipping, leaving us worse off than ME1, causing the dark ending.

[wulf3n]

BobSmith101 wrote...
Politicians are like that, once the threat is over prefer to carry on like nothing happened. See it all the time in the real world even though the lurking threat is still there. Take first Gulf war for example, solves immediate problem , yet leaves root cause in place. Result second Gulf war (Lol I'm talking like Mordin).

Im not saying the council wouldn't have backflipped, but we weren't given a reason leading me to belive either the new writers didn't know what happened at the end of ME1, or they didn't know how to write in a valid explanation of why they backflipped. either way is annoying and negatively affects the story for me.

BobSmith101 wrote...
Logic - We know that you can fly through a Reaper ME field now. Conclusion only stops fast moving objects. Strategy board Reapers and kill the "core". Whether or not Bioware choose to run with that of course remains to be seen, but its a very PRG party based solution.

A bit to stargate for me, and would ultimately ruin the repears just like goa'uld.

[AkiKishi]

wulf3n wrote...

Im not saying the council wouldn't have backflipped, but we weren't given a reason leading me to belive either the new writers didn't know what happened at the end of ME1, or they didn't know how to write in a valid explanation of why they backflipped. either way is annoying and negatively affects the story for me.

A bit to stargate for me, and would ultimately ruin the repears just like goa'uld.

The way I saw it the council had zero reason to trust Shepard 2.0. Which made sense of their actions. You get to be a Spectre in name , as long as you keep to the Terminus. They get to use you , while having no comeback to them. It's very political.

Its almosts carbon copy of FFX even to the point of "growing" a shell and the cycle of destruction/re-birth. But given it's an RPG and some sort of end boss is almost 100% unless you get to some sort of homeworld it's more than likely going to be inside a Reaper.

Do you mean the difference between Stargate the movie and series? Got to say Amanda Tapping mitigated that for me...

[wulf3n]

BobSmith101 wrote...
The way I saw it the council had zero reason to trust Shepard 2.0. Which made sense of their actions. You get to be a Spectre in name , as long as you keep to the Terminus. They get to use you , while having no comeback to them. It's very political. 

Even before you die, they still get you going after geth, rather than let you go off to find out more about reapers. All im saying is a little exposition on why would be nice.

BobSmith101 wrote...
Do you mean the difference between Stargate the movie and series? Got to say Amanda Tapping mitigated that for me...

More a difference between the goa'uld at the start of the series, and the end. They go from being the ultimate threat in the galaxy to little more than an annoyance.

[Moiaussi]

wulf3n wrote...

Even before you die, they still get you going after geth, rather than let you go off to find out more about reapers. All im saying is a little exposition on why would be nice.

Lets try this again without the Cerberus propeganda.

The Geth were working for the Reapers. How is investigating them further materially different than investigating the Collectors, who were simply a different species also working for the Reapers?

If the Heretics had been sent out with seeker swarms instead of the Collectors having been, would we be questioning sending Shepard after the Geth? Remember, no colonies had disappeared yet, only ships.

More a difference between the goa'uld at the start of the series, and the end. They go from being the ultimate threat in the galaxy to little more than an annoyance.

They reproduce slowly and were taking losses. Given those two facts, what did you expect? They still had a role in intragalactic politics right til the end. Rather off topic, though...

[wulf3n]

Moiaussi wrote...
Lets try this again without the Cerberus propeganda.

The Geth were working for the Reapers. How is investigating them further materially different than investigating the Collectors, who were simply a different species also working for the Reapers?

For starters getting information of geth is notoriously difficult, and theres still the untapped potential of Ilos, and vigil. If anyone knows anything about the reapers it'll most likely be the protheans on Ilos, so that's where i'd have been heading directly after the speech to the council.

Moiaussi wrote...
They reproduce slowly and were taking losses. Given those two facts, what did you expect? They still had a role in intragalactic politics right til the end. Rather off topic, though...

Just saying that if the reapers end up being defeated by merely boarding their ship with a single squad and destroying the core, then i'll be majorly dissapointed. 

Modifié par wulf3n, 08 février 2011 - 10:40 .

[Wulfram]

wulf3n wrote...

For starters getting information of geth is notoriously difficult, and theres still the untapped potential of Ilos, and vigil. If anyone knows anything about the reapers it'll most likely be the protheans on Ilos, so that's where i'd have been heading directly after the speech to the council.

Ilos was investigated, but Vigil had shut down.  No reason to send Shepard, you don't need a soldier to play archeologist

[wulf3n]

Wulfram wrote...
Ilos was investigated, but Vigil had shut down.  No reason to send Shepard, 

But you don't find that untill after you've died, so at the time of you being sent to hunt geth, vigil is still an option. Sure it may have shut down already but shepard can't know that until he goes their. Not to mention there could be other vi's there, or data discs, or something.

Wulfram wrote...
you don't need a soldier to play archeologist

Don't forget that you had an expert on protheans, and one that had entertained the idea of reapers before even hearing about it from shepard on your crew.

Modifié par wulf3n, 08 février 2011 - 10:50 .

[Wulfram]

wulf3n wrote...

Wulfram wrote...
Ilos was investigated, but Vigil had shut down.  No reason to send Shepard, 

But you don't find that untill after you've died, so at the time of you being sent to hunt geth, vigil is still an option. Sure it may have shut down already but shepard can't know that until he goes their. Not to mention there could be other vi's there, or data discs, or something.

Wulfram wrote...
you don't need a soldier to play archeologist

Don't forget that you had an expert on protheans, and one that had entertained the idea of reapers before even hearing about it from shepard on your crew.

Sending Liara to Ilos would have made sense.  But fighting the only known agents of the reapers is a logical thing for Shepard to be doing.