309 réponses à ce sujet

[lastpatriot]

I kind of felt the same way that you do about ME:2 at first but once you get into the game a bit, there is such great content available that it's now one of those games I play over and over. The music, the subtle humor, and the great character development/acting really keeps me coming back.

Like you though, I HATE scanning the planets for resources so I just used Gibbed’s Save Editor to max out my resources. Basically, I just said screw it to the planet scanning.

Overall though, the detail to which you can build a character is above and beyond anything else I’ve played to the extent that my Shepard really IS mine. This becomes even better if you have a RP concept behind your character which determines how you will respond to various conditions.

[TowranPeter]

Hathur wrote... Mordin's loyalty mission alone is leagues more interesting that almost anything else in ME1... same goes for Tali's loyalty story (Both of these stories alone have massive implications on a galactic scale)... then there's Legion's as well (once again, massive implications on a galactic scale)..... Then there's Liaras, arguably one of the best / most interesting story developments... and once again, massive impact there as well.

Mordins & jacks loyalty missions made me feel like I was playing ME1 again.  That euphoria of goodness came back.  That was quickly destroyed when  I encountered an annoying bug at the end of mordins loyalty mission followed by having to scan those ****ing planets.


....... On a side note...

The Mako was awesome.  Remember when you were on Luna and you got to see earth? That was amazing, I loved that.  For a second I just looked up at Earth and imagined myself on Luna looking towards where I'm sitting. That is immersion for ya!   

The cool thing about the mako is it rewarded exploration.  

Modifié par TowranPeter, 16 février 2011 - 08:00 .

[Obadiah]

Obadiah wrote...

Femlob wrote...
...
The problem isn't that there are people who complain about ME2; the problem is that these same people generally treat ME1 as if it's a game created by God Himself and delivered to earth by Jesus Christ; a flawless product by The Father, The Son and The Holy BioWare.
...

Who said anything like that?

(Looks above at a few replies) Ok, I get it.

Modifié par Obadiah, 16 février 2011 - 08:07 .

[abaris]

Remember when you were on Luna and you got to see earth? That was amazing, I loved that.  For a second I just looked up at Earth and imagined myself on Luna looking towards where I'm sitting. That is immersion for ya!   

The cool thing about the mako is it rewarded exploration.  

That was great, but the mission you had to do there goes down in my most boring and tedious book.

Both games are flawed in certain aspects. And I don't believe there's any game out there that isn't.

[FataliTensei]

TowranPeter wrote...

I played Mass Effect 1 over & over again. I couldn't stop playing it. It was just so damn good, it reminded me of the old school genre of scifi. Scifi used to have deep, thought provoking meaning but you don't get that goodness anymore.  Mass Effect one reminds me a lot of the Blade Runner and Dune.   I think I discovered every nook and cranny in ME1.   When I finally beat it, it was a huge satisfying euphoria.

But now with Mass Effect 2, I don't know why but I'm bored.  There isn't enough mental stimulation and not enough dialogue. Sure it's a good shooter and sure I can up the difficulty, but that's not what I mean.  I'm talking about thought provoking content that makes you think and pushes your limits.  The exploration is really not there anymore, it all feels like a very straight and linear. The vastness is gone.  It feels like a "Video game" instead of an "epic experience".

I think the planet scanning really destroyed the game in a lot of ways.  It's so utterly boring that it discourages playing the game. The planet scanning is like this horrible punishment that Bioware bestowed upon us.  Maybe Bioware hates us in some way and they wanted to get back at us?  I immediately think if I did something wrong to ****** Bioware off for them to force this horrible task on us. 

Anyways, Mass Effect One was an epic masterpiece.  Mass Effect two story sucks so far but hey it shoots good, just like many other games out there.  Good shooter, no story, but at least you have a target to shoot.

Dont waste your time with ME2 there are better games, Marvel vs Capcom 3  for example

[Demonhoopa]

marshalleck wrote...

Ah, moron and troll. But if you like the game and you express that opinion, you're not a moron or a troll. Lovely.

There are definitely trolls in this thread, but OP isn't one.

Agree "moron" is a bit strong but the whole "Bioware is punishing us" was akin to a toddler's temper tantrum. Pretty much made me take the rest of his points with a grain of salt.

[Demonhoopa]

Metalunatic wrote...

I agree, the biggest letdown in ME2 was the lack of exploration and the linear feel to it. I really hope we get some more exploration in ME3.

I also agree that ME original is a great game and ME2 is ''very good to good' in comparison.

I just bought ME1 a few weeks ago (already on my 3rd playthrough. It's a very short game/under 25 hrs). I love the characters and the story is good (although the main quest is ridiculously short). However, the missions are very linear and the exploration is nothing special because the locations are cut and paste.

No opinion on ME2, will have it in about a week.

[Il Divo]

tonnactus wrote...

Disarming the bomb as as a warhero. Ruthless shepardt with major kyle...

Which amounted to slight differences in how the mission was approached. This still begs the question: what about how these side quests were handled is that you actually think was so great? You've mentioned 'tied to the main quest'. You've mentioned 'Shepard is personally involved', yet none of these instances still demonstrated any kind of reasonable depth.

Right,it looks exactly like in zaeeds mission. Funny,i would guess that there isnt much variety regarding plants on different planets regarding Mass Effect 2...

So a jungle on planet x looks exactly like the one on planet y. Is this the variety and uniqueness Mass Effect 2 gave us.Handcrafted earth enviroments?

How is it 'exactly' like Zaeed's loyalty mission? In the first, you're exploring a beach/jungle setting. In the second, you're killing mercs in a work factory. Shall I link you videos?

[Terror_K]

Femlob wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

Didn't you know, Nightwriter: the definition of a "troll" on these forums is "anybody who complains about ME2 in any way"

This one's from a few pages back, but I still want to respond to it.

The problem isn't that there are people who complain about ME2; the problem is that these same people generally treat ME1 as if it's a game created by God Himself and delivered to earth by Jesus Christ; a flawless product by The Father, The Son and The Holy BioWare.

I'll be the first to admit that ME2 has its fair share of flaws, but it's incredibly annoying to have these flaws pointed out to you by someone who refuses to acknowledge that ME1 is just as flawed - if not more so.

Just sayin'.

Personally speaking here, yes... ME1 was flawed. But as an experience and as an overall product I feel that the game itself was able to rise above it's flaws and become more than the sum of its parts. On top of that, most of the flaws were somewhat understandable and came down to poor execution of otherwise decent concepts or just mere overcomplexity. I looked at them and went, "You failed there, but I can see why. Better luck next time."

ME2 on the other hand I feels fails this completely. It's too much of a game and reminds me as such too often and never manages to rise above its flaws and be more than the sum of its parts. The experience just isn' t the same, and many of the flaws are just really stupid things and bad choices rather than poor execution, IMO. Instead this makes me go, "What the hell? Why did you do that?! That's retarded!"

Simply put, despite its flaws ME1 manages to pull me in and let me overlook them and really enjoy the experience. ME2 fails to do this entirely because of most of its flaws and the style of them.

Modifié par Terror_K, 16 février 2011 - 09:35 .

[Il Divo]

Evil Johnny 666 wrote...

MEh, personally, I thought ME2's loyalty missions to be nothing more than a on-rail shooter mission with a couple of dialogue lines here and there - there were exceptions of course, but they were still tied to a linear experience where you were dragged along.

But what side quest exists that isn't substantially linear, barring its conclusion? In Mass Effect, side quests typically did not allow multiple routes to approach the same goal, as was available on Noveria. Mass Effect offered the same style choices that you find in Mass Effect 2. Kill Major Kyle vs. spare Major Kyle. Kill Malon vs. spare Malon, although Mass Effect 2 also offered more interesting choices with the Genophage data and kill/brainwash the Geth.

I prefer much more the ME handling of side quests where you weren't teleported somewhere, but you had to find your way where you wanted to go and do what you wanted to do, without necessarily resorting to 15 minutes of shooting your way through with the same old, tired, repetitive and predictable encounters. 

The problem with Mass Effect doesn't even originate with content (although I'd say even this is inferior to the average loyalty mission, or Kotor side quest). It's a simple issue of presentation. Bioware style games are very main quest focused. In Kotor, most side quests are integrated in the settings already created for the game.

Ex: When helping Carth reunite with his son, I simply had to reach the Korriban academy, a main quest location.

Mass Effect features some side quests like this (Noveria, as you said) and they are amongst the better ones. However, Mass Effect attempts to flaunt 'exploration' with side quests that exist across the galaxy, which simply did not work as implemented. It's much more difficult to create a believable mercenary base when each one looks exactly alike. And it's more difficult to enjoy these side quests when I must spend more time reaching the location (between Hackett, planet-searching, and the Mako).

To be clear, Mass Effect has decent (though not incredible) quest content. The problem is the environments are generic and the content is diluted simply reaching the quest location.

Because playing the game on insanity, you ought to realize how EVERY mission, EVERY encounter are made the exact same way. ME2's shooting may be better than ME1's, but it's infinitely more boring, so I'd rather go back to ME1's shooting if that means less repetition. And in less quantity. There was so much shooting in ME2, you were beginning to wonder if you were playing a shooter with interactive elements rather than an RPG/shooter hybrid.

But with respect to this, I'd say playing most video games on their highest difficulty will eventually ruin the experience. Whether it's Ninja Gaiden on Master Ninja or Dragon Age on Nightmare, most games become old/boring for me when played on their highest difficulty.

Modifié par Il Divo, 16 février 2011 - 09:40 .

[Il Divo]

TowranPeter wrote...

Scanning Planets for Minerals/Metals/Symbols
- Not only did I feel the vastness of barren planets, but those little texts of discovery usually had comical references and thought provoking content (Eletania). 

I will concede that I certainly had a newfound appreciation for how boring space exporation can be having done those side quests.

But seriously, if the goal is enjoyable and thought-provoking content, there are about a million and one better ways to handle it than this. The mineral scanning, Matriarch Writings,etc, are merely an attempt at increasing game time without creating actual content.

[Evil Johnny 666]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

Evil Johnny 666 wrote...


MEh, personally, I thought ME2's loyalty missions to be nothing more than a on-rail shooter mission with a couple of dialogue lines here and there - there were exceptions of course, but they were still tied to a linear experience where you were dragged along. I prefer much more the ME handling of side quests where you weren't teleported somewhere, but you had to find your way where you wanted to go and do what you wanted to do, without necessarily resorting to 15 minutes of shooting your way through with the same old, tired, repetitive and predictable encounters. Because playing the game on insanity, you ought to realize how EVERY mission, EVERY encounter are made the exact same way. ME2's shooting may be better than ME1's, but it's infinitely more boring, so I'd rather go back to ME1's shooting if that means less repetition. And in less quantity. There was so much shooting in ME2, you were beginning to wonder if you were playing a shooter with interactive elements rather than an RPG/shooter hybrid.

I'm sorry but talking about rails, you all have gone clearly off them. In ME1 I ran from cookie-cutter structure to cookie-cutter structure across bland, generic terrain to blow the hell out of everything. Sometimes there was the odd line of dialogue at the end but it was very minor at best. ME1 had by-far the most pointless, awful quests I have ever played in a Bioware game. It was actually pretty shameful how awful they were.

Other than the more interest main quest story elements in ME1, ME2 absolutely blew it out of the water every step of the way.

Oddly, almost every review on the planet has this view, with half of them giving ME2 their GOTY and almost all the rest giving it RPG of the year. Yes, I know, being in the majority doesn't make you right and this is all subjective after all but you might want to consider if your personal biases is coloring your incredibly one-side and ridiculously subjective analysis.

I'm not even talking about N7 assignments. Sure, side quests outside the Citadel were a little bare-bones at times (maybe except around 2-3 in Noveria), but I'd take them over the: "shoot your way through and get a couple of dialogue lines in-between". Talk about boring as ****. At least the encounters in the cookie-cutter areas were more fun than almost any in ME2 because of the lack of pre-determined waves of enemies. Sure, they are nothing surprising, but it wasn't painfully redundant (not the amount of samey areas, the addition of all these encounters, but the encounters in themselves).

And I'm not even speaking of the far superior level design everywhere else. Places felt much more like having purpose, instead of going through meaningless corridors and never looking back. Just take Noveria, there was actually a relatively well designed lab, with hallways, rooms, elevators and such. It wasn't the best design on Earth, but at least it wasn't a one-way corridor which you never needed to go back. You had to find a cure for something at one point, you had to put the place back on, going back and forth through areas. What does ME2 missions or side quests ask you to do? Shoot your way through. Garrus' recruitment mission was the one which was different, but awfully short. You're talking about ME1's not so good side quests, yeah, I never said they were perfect, I said they were better than those which requires you nothing to do but shoot. In case you hadn't noticed, Bioware are making less good games after the other. ME was less good than KOTOR. But at least it tried something a bit new and had a distinct feel.


And I can't take you seriously if you take reviews and meaningless awards seriously. Reviews are written by people who are paid to write reviews, that's the first hint. They can't play a game for too much, and they can't take too much time to review them. Not only that, but basically their reviews are first thoughts (can't find the right word for the moment) on the game. It's like, the first time you play a game and you come up on a forum to write your thoughts. They are going to be far more positive, or maybe less positive than your real thoughts on them. You need to digest, you need to analyze every aspect and all. Anyone who tells me they have their opinion fully formed on a game after a single playthrough (or even halfway through it, I'm willing to bet none those "professional" reviewers went through every ME2 loyalty quest at the least, or haven't tested enough Oblivion obviously) are full of ****. When I first played ME2, I loved it. Had I written a review, it would be 90+ like everyone else. Thing is, I rate ME1 in the very low 80ies, maybe high 70ies. So these reviewers are praising the moral system:lol: and all, things that you can't find their faults until a couple of playthrough trying different things. Even then, they could find some faults but chances are they played all paragon or all renegade.

So, they might also play another game and under-score it. They might like it better if they'd play it more. Happened to me plenty of times. But since these guys review and play games so much, they might not be keen on playing games all the time, so they may only play their big favourites a bit. And then comes the awards, with most of them being judged on first impressions again. Aren't reviews enough to judge a game? And then you have to remember the Gamespot Kane and Lynch fiasco, the teamxbox thing where they stopped reviewing for a long time after they reviewed FFXIII badly 2 times. Most of them seem to hate good games anyway, always citing the worst things as improvement, wanting the most un-gamely experience, prefering interactive movies. They also seem to ignore some obvious stuff too. Oh, and the obvious IGN thing "we blast Halo as much as we can but still rate them 90+". And then you have Black Ops getting praised by every reviewer.

And hey, most of their reviews are non-descriptive as they can be. Only saying there's cool moments, some things suck without entering too much in detail. Because obviously everyone wants to hear their favourite game's sequel (because that's all there is nowadays) are good, so that's what you do, you use superlatives without enough description for anyone to use the information and make up their mind about if they should buy the game or not, they must blindly trust or not. I've read far more detailed reviews from real gamers, positive or negative. A good review should be able to convince you buying a game even if it is negative, and the contrary too, something "proffesional" reviewers fail to do.

[havoc546]

 http://t2.gstatic.co...NFgzoGQqwFg35lg

[tonnactus]

Il Divo wrote...
 This still begs the question: what about how these side quests were handled is that you actually think was so great?

A story.Sometimes npc i could talk too.Someone who give me the quests and after the quests,i didnt got a "Press b to end the mission" but a debriefing with someone like hackett and/or a reward like licences from nassana dantius.
The N7 missions were pure and utter crap compared with this.Handcrafting didnt help to show how shallow and meaningless they were.

You've mentioned 'tied to the main quest'. You've mentioned 'Shepard is personally involved', yet none of these instances still demonstrated any kind of reasonable depth.

Funny.So what is dept in the case of the loyality missions isnt one when shepardts pasts is connected with them?
Some background about shepardt. Mass Effect is Shepardts story,right?

How is it 'exactly' like Zaeed's loyalty mission? In the first, you're exploring a beach/jungle setting. I

So i must have been halluzinating the way i have to take to get to the factory. Looked like jungle for me...

Modifié par tonnactus, 16 février 2011 - 10:04 .

[Evil Johnny 666]

Il Divo wrote...

Evil Johnny 666 wrote...

MEh, personally, I thought ME2's loyalty missions to be nothing more than a on-rail shooter mission with a couple of dialogue lines here and there - there were exceptions of course, but they were still tied to a linear experience where you were dragged along.

But what side quest exists that isn't substantially linear, barring its conclusion? In Mass Effect, side quests typically did not allow multiple routes to approach the same goal, as was available on Noveria. Mass Effect offered the same style choices that you find in Mass Effect 2. Kill Major Kyle vs. spare Major Kyle. Kill Malon vs. spare Malon, although Mass Effect 2 also offered more interesting choices with the Genophage data and kill/brainwash the Geth.

I prefer much more the ME handling of side quests where you weren't teleported somewhere, but you had to find your way where you wanted to go and do what you wanted to do, without necessarily resorting to 15 minutes of shooting your way through with the same old, tired, repetitive and predictable encounters. 

The problem with Mass Effect doesn't even originate with content (although I'd say even this is inferior to the average loyalty mission, or Kotor side quest). It's a simple issue of presentation. Bioware style games are very main quest focused. In Kotor, most side quests are integrated in the settings already created for the game.

Ex: When helping Carth reunite with his son, I simply had to reach the Korriban academy, a main quest location.

Mass Effect features some side quests like this (Noveria, as you said) and they are amongst the better ones. However, Mass Effect attempts to flaunt 'exploration' with side quests that exist across the galaxy, which simply did not work as implemented. It's much more difficult to create a believable mercenary base when each one looks exactly alike. And it's more difficult to enjoy these side quests when I must spend more time reaching the location (between Hackett, planet-searching, and the Mako).

To be clear, Mass Effect has decent (though not incredible) quest content. The problem is the environments are generic and the content is diluted simply reaching the quest location.

Because playing the game on insanity, you ought to realize how EVERY mission, EVERY encounter are made the exact same way. ME2's shooting may be better than ME1's, but it's infinitely more boring, so I'd rather go back to ME1's shooting if that means less repetition. And in less quantity. There was so much shooting in ME2, you were beginning to wonder if you were playing a shooter with interactive elements rather than an RPG/shooter hybrid.

But with respect to this, I'd say playing most video games on their highest difficulty will eventually ruin the experience. Whether it's Ninja Gaiden on Master Ninja or Dragon Age on Nightmare, most games become old/boring for me when played on their highest difficulty.

I agree about everything you said barring the difficulty part. The highest difficulty should be both challenging and fun (like the Halo game's Legendary mode). And they also speak of the game's overall gameplay, they make it more visible, even if they are already quite visible. Playing CoD on Veteran makes you realize how much it is constructed as a shootig gallery game, shoot, hide, shoot, hide, advance, repeat. And shows how the enemy AI is terrible. But of course there's not only the game's gameplay, there's the fact that if the difficulty is of any good at all. But CoD IS a shooting gallery, you can't change that no matter how you change veteran. You can't change insanity to make encounters not always the same sequence of enemy types, nor change the level design that is basically: corridor, slightly open space that has only one exit, corridor, dialogue, corridor, ect.

But I don't find ME1 that good anyway, definitely a step down from KOTOR to me. But, ME1 had its charm, it had "all those little things" that helped it. It was a different game, with a different feel, story and had a couple of new things. Planet exploration was far from being perfect, but I still loved it. I thought that they were in the right direction, that putting a but of effort in it and they could make it even more unique and cool. Unfortunately, rather than improving such novel idea, they scrapped it for something totally boring that isn't. Plus, they almost completely scrapped all the uniqueness that I loved in ME1. No more old-school sci-fi feel, welcome Micheal Bay-style Hollywood crap. No more interesting mix of RPG and shooting, and instead of improving its far from perfect iteration, welcome using the totally overused path of generic TPS action. And you couldn't expect better, Bioware never made a shooter, it was obvious that it could turn to crap if they were not careful.

[tonnactus]

Il Divo wrote...


But what side quest exists that isn't substantially linear, barring its concluson?

Jahleeds Fear:
http://masseffect.wi...Jahleed's_Fears

A lot of outcomes and variants...

[Phaedon]

Terror_K wrote...

Didn't you know, Nightwriter: the definition of a "troll" on these forums is "anybody who complains about ME2 in any way"

Uh, no, the definition of the troll is the one who drops the bomb and then escapes. And trolls are smart.

The idiots who are incapable of providing non-constuctive criticism and claim that 'zomg you no tru rpg u pew pew noob' are far worse. You expect any rational person to read a comment like 'lol ME2 had no story' and assume that the poster is not a troll? In fact, some of us wish that they are trolls.

[Pwener2313]

But alas, they are not....

[Phaedon]

Pwener2313 wrote...

But alas, they are not....

Who is not what by whom and why.

[Pwener2313]

Phaedon wrote...

Pwener2313 wrote...

But alas, they are not....

Who is not what by whom and why.

Well played....

[Il Divo]

tonnactus wrote...

A lot of outcomes and variants...

And a completely linear path. Continue scanning keepers vs. killing Jahleed. How 'linear' content is does not simply mean having 5 outcomes; it's the method used to reach those outcomes. Noveria is a good example of non-linear combat, as there's approximately 3-4 methods in reaching Benezia

[Il Divo]

tonnactus wrote...

A story.Sometimes npc i could talk too.Someone who give me the quests and after the quests,i didnt got a "Press b to end the mission" but a debriefing with someone like hackett and/or a reward like licences from nassana dantius.

Which didn't amount to anything. If story to you means a paragraph of text explaining that Admiral Kahoku was murdered by Cerberus, then I mourn for the future of all RPGs.

The N7 missions were pure and utter crap compared with this.Handcrafting didnt help to show how shallow and meaningless they were.

Neither did creating 501 generic planets to 'explore'.

Funny.So what is dept in the case of the loyality missions isnt one when shepardts pasts is connected with them?

So exploring the background of your companions didn't qualify as 'deep'? Helping Mordin deal with the Genophage, watching his reaction with Malon, etc, this is not 'deep'? I say this because there was a good amount of content dedicated to exploring Mordin as a character. Same with Thane dealing with his son. Same with Legion and rewriting the Geth/destroying them, which is one of the more popular moral dilemmas on these forums.

I say there is more depth there, than in Mass Effect's paragraphs of text.

So i must have been halluzinating the way i have to take to get to the factory. Looked like jungle for me...

Hallucinating? Possibly so.

[Phaedon]

Badly played. Trolls, a lot of which have passed by this website and made alts, enjoy throwing the bomb in the form of the thread and then leaving while random people defend them for some reason. That doesn't require any great intelligence, but at least it requires more brains than spamming the forums about how ME2 was a horrible horrible game and switch to denial or in a -I have had enough talking to you!- if someone manages to prove you wrong.

Because comments like these are not opinions. 'ME2 didn't have a story'. Especially when you state them as facts. Yes, ME2 had a story. One that was written by multiple writers, praised by the majority of fans and critics.

But you know, rationalism and non-exaggeration are not "in" nowadays.

Because really, youtube comments in the form of "LLOL MEDAL OF HONOR SUCKED IN COMPARIOSN TO MW2, IT DIDN'T HAVE TACTICOOL WEAPOZN' are as much or more constructive and intelligent. The mask of correct punctuation, grammar, spelling, non-capital letters or even long paragraphs seem to fool quite a few.

Is it impossible for you to have opinions in the form of:
~ 'ME2's story was okay, but I personally liked ME1's better for the following reasons'

Modifié par Phaedon, 16 février 2011 - 10:51 .

[Cadaver19]

You reap what you sow.

[tonnactus]

Il Divo wrote...

So exploring the background of your companions didn't qualify as 'deep'? 

Intentionally misreading? Shepardts encounter with Toombs for example was as deep as most of the personal missions
in Mass Effect 2.