409 réponses à ce sujet

[Sandbox47]

Holy crap you drone on. I mean, I know that it was important to you, but "summarize". I think that it would do us all good to learn that.

[dreman9999]

StowyMcStowstow wrote...

This DLC was underwhelming. The shooting was ok (the five waves was kind of repetitive, though), although I didn't like how the Reapers we magically two days away, or how you were forced to kill off 300,000 Batarians. The length was also too short (I beat Arrival in under an hour). To me this DLC just felt pointless due to the fact that the Reapers are still coming (why not have Object Rho tell us something useful about the Reapers? learn a little history, or something, instead of acting as a predictable plot device), and the killing of the Batarians felt a little too forced.

Simple answer.....The flew there.......they started from ME2.........Also, you asking too much out of something thats a prelude. You quetion will be answer in ME3. Plus, Object rho is 100% reaper controled, the reapers will tell what ever they want to tell you. Also, for choice........it was ether ther collonist get killed off by reapers and then everyone else, or dieing a quick death. As for the dlc...... If you said no to it, everyone's doomed.

[tonnactus]

Itkovian wrote...


For one thing, we have no idea how far the Mu relay was from its exploding star. For another, who is saying the planets were destroyed by the explosion?

There is a big difference between wiping out all life on the planets, and destroying them. Take a look at this website:

http://qntm.org/destroy

I rahter look at this:
http://www.daviddarl...pulsarplan.html

"The problem is not that
the supernova would destroy any nearby planets "

[ErebUs890]

THIS DLC IS IN NO WAY, AN INDICATION OF WHAT ME3 WILL BE LIKE.

Period.

[Kaynos1972]

I havent bought it yet, but i think i'll pass just because of the fact that's it's a solo DLC. Mass Effect is a group game, going somwhere solo is gonna be boring to me. I enjoy using my party skills to progress through a level, just single shooting my way through seems boring.

[Itkovian]

tonnactus wrote...

Itkovian wrote...


For one thing, we have no idea how far the Mu relay was from its exploding star. For another, who is saying the planets were destroyed by the explosion?

There is a big difference between wiping out all life on the planets, and destroying them. Take a look at this website:

http://qntm.org/destroy

I rahter look at this:
http://www.daviddarl...pulsarplan.html

"The problem is not that
the supernova would destroy any nearby planets "

I disagree. I firmly believe that a website dedicated to exploring the various methods of Geocide is inherently cooler.

Itkovian

[SNascimento]

ME2 is an action/RPG. In combat it plays almost entirely as a TPS, but your squadmates and powers make it fairly unique. But combat is just a fraction of what the game is all about, when you are not shooting enemys, you are exploring the vast universe created by Bioware, you are talking to people, shaping your chracter and your history, etc. The kind of things that defines a RPG.
.
Now, even if it was not, even if it was just a pure Third Person Shooter, what would be the problem? So,, people would be angry because they saw ME1 as an RPG but it would be just it, a personal feeling about it.
.
A shooter is not worse than an RPG.

[Whatever42]

The definition of these terms is arbitrary. I could call ME2 an ice cream sundae if I wanted. There are millions of people who call ME2 an RPG. You can disagree with them but you can't stop them. Sorry.

[guacamayus]

I felt the same way, specially at the end when we get to talk to Harbringer only to have a very short and crappy conversation. They are removing choice from dialogues, they said something about it slowing gameplay when LotSB came out so I woudnt be suprised to see it again in ME3.

[blacqout]

Slayer299 wrote...

blacqout wrote...

Slayer299 wrote...

They respect artistic vision for having a logo that fits on the box???? Seriously???? That's just business sense, and it has nothing to do with respecting that company's vision. As for you assertion that ME and DA are 'better places for having EA involved', that is a matter of your opinion, do not try to force feed it to me as if it were fact.

If it is "just business sense" then they're the only publisher displaying any... making them a good choice to publish BioWare titles by default, surely.

You can choose to recognise it, or you can choose ignorance, but the fact that EA's care to alter their logo to fit an art scheme makes for a better case is just that - a fact.

Again, you're throwing your opinions around as if they are facts written in stone. They are just that, opinions, unless you have evidence that you can actually "show" said facts. If not, then be quiet and stop telling people they are ignorant for not agreeing with you. That's the behaviour of an 8yr old child....

It's impossible to prove a negative, so you'll have to forgive me for offering no evidence in support of my claim that EA are the only publisher to alter their logo for different game boxes. I'm just assuming that the people here pay attention to this sort of thing, in which case they'll agree with my assessment, but if that's an unreasonable assumption, i apologise.

As far as EA's altering of their logo to suit the ME and Dragon Age franchises, it simply does result in the aesthetic betterment of both brands.

You are the only person acting like a child here, Miss. I've been polite in my presenting my assessments, unlike you.

[Bourne Endeavor]

blacqout wrote...

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

If this is your belief, you are naive and gullible. EA frequently changing their logo for the sake of diversity and to sell more copies. If BioWare faltered financially, they would abandon them within seconds. That is not a shot toward EA, just a logical business approach.

If you believe that anybody buys an EA game because of their logo, then i'm not sure that i'm the naive and gullible person here.

And if BioWare cease to be profitable, then of course EA would abandon them. That doesn't mean they don't respect their vision.

They do not purchase because of the logo per se but with the negative reputation. The more obscure, the better. Half the people will not even notice it. You know, that casual market they love, who does not follow the game industry well. Granted, they could just hope people of your opinion too.

EA could not care less about BioWare's vision. They want money and nothing else.

Modifié par Bourne Endeavor, 30 mars 2011 - 02:41 .

[Whatever42]

guacamayus wrote...

I felt the same way, specially at the end when we get to talk to Harbringer only to have a very short and crappy conversation. They are removing choice from dialogues, they said something about it slowing gameplay when LotSB came out so I woudnt be suprised to see it again in ME3.

They never said any such thing. Again, the only reason LotSB and Arrival lacked choice is because these story elements will play significantly in ME3 but its optional content.

[mage1102]

What changes happen to me2 after the arrival dlc?

[guacamayus]

They didnt say 'we are removing choice' of course, they did say right before releasing LotSB that long conversations slowed gameplay, and the only long conversation in LotSB is with Liara at the end, the rest have almost no choice involved.

Modifié par guacamayus, 30 mars 2011 - 02:49 .

[Whatever42]

guacamayus wrote...

They didnt say 'we are removing chice' of course, they did say right before releasing LotSB that long conversations slowed gameplay.

Bioware has talked at length about this. They have metrics that tell them how many people skip conversations and found that it was really high. They want more cinematic conversations and less exposition. We already saw that in ME2. Tali didn't talk for 20 minutes describing Quarians to us - instead we got to see the Quarians.

[Ville L]

I didn't have any kind of disappointment feeling, maybe because I wasn't waiting for a god. In my opinion 5€ was good for this DLC

[guacamayus]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

guacamayus wrote...

They didnt say 'we are removing chice' of course, they did say right before releasing LotSB that long conversations slowed gameplay.

Bioware has talked at length about this. They have metrics that tell them how many people skip conversations and found that it was really high. They want more cinematic conversations and less exposition. We already saw that in ME2. Tali didn't talk for 20 minutes describing Quarians to us - instead we got to see the Quarians.

Yes, shorter conversations where the player is not choosing, is just being guided to more explosions. I think thats more shooter thn rpg, anyway Im not going to argue if its a good thing or bad, just comes down to opinion and mine is that I play ME because of its rpg elements so I kinda agree with the op in some points.

Modifié par guacamayus, 30 mars 2011 - 02:55 .

[Bourne Endeavor]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

guacamayus wrote...

They didnt say 'we are removing chice' of course, they did say right before releasing LotSB that long conversations slowed gameplay.

Bioware has talked at length about this. They have metrics that tell them how many people skip conversations and found that it was really high. They want more cinematic conversations and less exposition. We already saw that in ME2. Tali didn't talk for 20 minutes describing Quarians to us - instead we got to see the Quarians.

Those statistics are inaccurate for a plethora of reasons and nothing but adequately useful guesswork. 15% of conversations were skipped for instance. Does this account for people being killed and not having the desire to listen to dialogue they heard two seconds prior? Does it account for the first play through (most likely) or every play through?

[Uszi]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

The definition of these terms is arbitrary. I could call ME2 an ice cream sundae if I wanted. There are millions of people who call ME2 an RPG. You can disagree with them but you can't stop them. Sorry.

Agree.



It is completely unimportant if ME2 is an RPG or an ice cream sundae. 



If you liked the game, continue to play it.
If you didn't like the game, don't play it anymore and find a new game.

[Whatever42]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

guacamayus wrote...

They didnt say 'we are removing chice' of course, they did say right before releasing LotSB that long conversations slowed gameplay.

Bioware has talked at length about this. They have metrics that tell them how many people skip conversations and found that it was really high. They want more cinematic conversations and less exposition. We already saw that in ME2. Tali didn't talk for 20 minutes describing Quarians to us - instead we got to see the Quarians.

Those statistics are inaccurate for a plethora of reasons and nothing but adequately useful guesswork. 15% of conversations were skipped for instance. Does this account for people being killed and not having the desire to listen to dialogue they heard two seconds prior? Does it account for the first play through (most likely) or every play through?

As Mordin said, "please, not an undergraduate". Let's assume Bioware isn't totally stupid and knows how to analyze their data.

But this is a good thing, really! Wasn't it better to see the Quarian fleet rather than have Tali explain it? And do we really want a ton of exposition in our conversations or wouldn't it be better to keep them to real, interpersonal topic. I want to know how Tali feels about her father dying, not have her explain Quarian social policy.

And its not like they totally eliminated exposition. They still explained bubble children to us, for example. They just spread the conversations around and kept them more brief, rather than have one Quarian with an hour of dialogue explaining things.

The last thing I really could ever imagine someone complaining about is the dialogue in ME2. Sure, more banter. Sure deeper relationships. But we got twice as much talking from every character - it was just spread around in more conversations that were more relevent.

Modifié par Whatever666343431431654324, 30 mars 2011 - 03:06 .

[Remus Artega]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

LotSB was just as linear so it too was an action-shooter.

The problem with these bridging DLCs is because they will significantly impact ME3 and because they are optional, you can't really provide branching choices or they no longer really become optional.

Bioware should have just not made any DLC at all. It's obviously upsetting their very sensitive fanbase, who is now crying themselves to sleep every night because of their callousness.

You're quite right... they should get rid of all the DLC and released it as they supposed to in the first place...in vanilla game...

[Il Divo]

tonnactus wrote...

The biggest bullcrap was to destroy a mass relay by an asteroide.They were supposed to be nearly indestructable so even the Mu Relay was only mooved by a supernova,not destroyed.And now that??
Do some people actually realize that this Dlc made the whole Mass Effect 2 game to a joke? Shoot asteroid on the Omega 4 relay.Thats it for the collectors.

1) We don't have any idea how close the Mu Relay was to the Supernova.

2) Neither Shepard, Illusive Man, or damn near anyone thought about the repercussions of actually destroying a Mass Relay until Kenson came along. Illusive Man was also curious about finding more information on the Reapers.

Nice try.

[Il Divo]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

As Mordin said, "please, not an undergraduate". Let's assume Bioware isn't totally stupid and knows how to analyze their data.

But this is a good thing, really! Wasn't it better to see the Quarian fleet rather than have Tali explain it? And do we really want a ton of exposition in our conversations or wouldn't it be better to keep them to real, interpersonal topic. I want to know how Tali feels about her father dying, not have her explain Quarian social policy.

And its not like they totally eliminated exposition. They still explained bubble children to us, for example. They just spread the conversations around and kept them more brief, rather than have one Quarian with an hour of dialogue explaining things.

The last thing I really could ever imagine someone complaining about is the dialogue in ME2. Sure, more banter. Sure deeper relationships. But we got twice as much talking from every character - it was just spread around in more conversations that were more relevent.

This. I have no problem with long conversations, Kotor and DA:O are filled with them. But Mass Effect has been passed off from the start as a 'cinematic experience'. Dlc like Lair of the Shadowbroker or Tali's Loyalty Mission do seem to approach that cinematic quality alot closer than Tali's speeches on Quarian life.

[Commander_Adept]

I wouldn't say that DLC is what it would be in Mass 3. I think Mass 1 was TOO RPG-ish, them taking away the equipment aspect but keeping gun customization, look customization and skills was definitely an improvement, for me, in Mass 2. Plus (The story was better in 2).

[Remus Artega]

Commander_Adept wrote...

I wouldn't say that DLC is what it would be in Mass 3. I think Mass 1 was TOO RPG-ish, them taking away the equipment aspect but keeping gun customization, look customization and skills was definitely an improvement, for me, in Mass 2. Plus (The story was better in 2).

way to turn this topic into another ME1 vs. ME2 hassle...