119 réponses à ce sujet

[aimlessgun]

Firstly, thank you for the well written defense. I feel restrospectively better about a couple of the points.

Re: Lack of Choice
I think most people realize that you cannot choose not to kill the Batarians. However, many felt that there was a lack of choice in reactions as well, that you couldn't roleplay and have much depth of emotion.

Re: Good or Bad Writing?
This is entirely subjective, but I think enough people had problems with Arrival that we can conclude, for a significant portion of their players, the writing was poor. When confronted with the 'huh' moments, people got knocked out of the story, and for many there were not enough cues to come to the 'correct' conclusions that you came to squee.

Avoiding 'huh' moments does not mean you are dumbing down a story, it usually means you're cleaning up sloppiness. Mystery and subtlety are great: but there are so many 'huh' moments in Arrival that it points to sloppiness rather than doing it intentionally. And if you hit someone with a 'huh' moment, and they don't manage to rationalize it in a way that is good for the story, they are very likely to automatically treat the next 'huh' moment like a problem as well.

Re: Drugs Wearing off and Prison Break
This bothers me because it's just lazy, sloppy writing to structure your whole story around getting KO'd, and then waking up at the perfect time that is convenient for the plot, then getting KO'd AGAIN only to wake up at a time convenient to the plot. It's a lazy, cheap way to build tension that ultimately backfires (for many people). Put some more effort into the story and get rid of the hackwork, please.

Modifié par aimlessgun, 14 avril 2011 - 08:17 .

[squee913]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Your etnire argument can be condensend to this part:

squee913 wrote...

It's a game where you shoot things. Move on.

This is how bioware treat it, and this is what we can expect from ME3 too. DA2 certainly doesn't give me any notions of thinking they still pay the same attention to story as they used to do.


Maybe Bioware got miffed at the comment from a reviewer that "Birds fly, fish swim and Bioware writes good stories. So they don't get any points for those anymore." and are dumping their quality to make reviewers give them credit when they mae a good story again. The world have seen stranger things. the comment is certainly not true anymore, and I am a bit disapointed in how fast they were able to blow their own rep in this regard.

I would have to disagree. The story in Arrival (with all it's flaws) is still head an shoulders above most shooter stories. I think the Mass Effect story in both games is great and it is obvious that a lot of time and effort was put into making them. I am sorry you do not like the story, but hat does not mean ME2 is a simple shooter.

[aimlessgun]

Sorry, broke this up into a 2 parter.

Re: Dismantling the Project
It is very reasonable to assume that they could sabotage the thrusters in the 2 days Shepard is KO'd (and at this piont they are clearly fully indoctrinated, since Kenson is screaming over the loudspeakers about not letting you stop the return of the Reapers). Most people aren't going to think "well, maybe the Reapers want thrusters on this asteroid for some Reason", since they probably don't, and there is nothing to hint at such a thing.

This wouldn't even be a problem if the story wasn't built around getting knocked out for a plot convenient length of time.

Unmentioned: Accelerating asteroid to high speed in 1.5 hrs.
Immersion breaking for some people. While maybe not impossible in the ME universe, the more reasonable, commonsense conclusion is that this is ridiculous.

RE: It's a Trap!
When the door opens and you see a room with a Reaper artifact just chilling there, it is reasonable to think "Um, time to pull out my gun and not go anywhere near that thing.". Or maybe "hey, Kenson, I need to go to the bathroom. *hurries into bathroom and frantically calls Normandy*". With Shep's experience of walking near artifacts and then suddenly being incapacitated by visions, you'd think she'd be wary of walking into that room.

Unmentioned: No visual cues of any attempts to avoid indoctrination.
This ties back to laziness: people would be less bothered by the stupidity of the Kenson's research team if there was at least some visually shown effort to stop indoctrination, even if in the end if was unsuccessful.

Unmentioned: Talking to yourself.
This is a nitpick. I just point it out because eventually nitpicks add up. Even the most discriminating audience will always let a few slide, but Arrival had enough that they became hard to ignore (for many people).

RE: ME2's story pointless.
It's a dumb complaint, since the collectors had to be stopped. But ME2's story does seem less important in the light of Arrival. People see arrival and think "man, ME2 could have been so much better." Complaining about it is useless at this point though.

In conclusion: for many points I'm not saying something is definitely a plothole or a mistake or whatever. Just that it is quite reasonable to conclude the 'wrong' thing during all the 'huh' moments, given the information, and that concluding the wrong thing does not make you a dummy or a hater (not that you have said these things squee, but others have). I feel that Bioware should be held accountable if their writing isn't as good as it could be, and Arrival certainly could have been better.

Modifié par aimlessgun, 14 avril 2011 - 08:13 .

[ErebUs890]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Your etnire argument can be condensend to this part:

squee913 wrote...

It's a game where you shoot things. Move on.

This is how bioware treat it, and this is what we can expect from ME3 too. DA2 certainly doesn't give me any notions of thinking they still pay the same attention to story as they used to do.


Maybe Bioware got miffed at the comment from a reviewer that "Birds fly, fish swim and Bioware writes good stories. So they don't get any points for those anymore." and are dumping their quality to make reviewers give them credit when they mae a good story again. The world have seen stranger things. the comment is certainly not true anymore, and I am a bit disapointed in how fast they were able to blow their own rep in this regard.

I don't believe that. I believe that BioWare wants to be more than just a developer that just makes games with good writing. I believe they want their games to play as good as the story. Sometimes you have to sacrafice a little to improve upon certain elements. I believe ME2 had some of the best writing I've ever seen in a game. But it was really about the story of the characters than it was about the main plot. Which is exactly why 80% of the game you were recruiting and doing loyalty missions. It's the story within these characters that made ME2 such a wonderful game, while also having a very entertaining shooter experience. 

[Xeranx]

squee913 wrote...
HOW DO YOU KNOW THE REAPERS?

Another small point, but Kenson says that even a dead reaper has power. Even I said, "Ummm... how do you know this? I don't see the Cerberus logo anywhere..." Until you realize that she has been talking to one. We have no idea what naughty things Harby has been whispering to her in the night, but it is obvious she feels they are these wonderful, almost god like beings. Showing her that Reapers have power after death is a great way to do this. Again this is simply guess work, but since we do not know what she has learned, we cannot discount her knowledge as a plot hole. You could say, Shep should have asked about it, and I would agree. I never said the story was perfect. My guess is that the developers felt that such a conversation would do nothing to carry the story forward and left it out.

My issue with this beyond the fact that Kenson says even a dead reaper has power is that she stated a "[however many years] dead reaper" has power.  In order for that statement to be made she would have to be talking to one as you said, but that should have one's warning bells going off.  Shepard has been second-guessed repeatedly with the reaper business and while someone confirming what he/she knows should be a breath of fresh air, it should be an eyebrow raising comment to make.  I mean, Shepard knows that a however many million year dead reaper still has power, but that reaper was the only one that we were able to find and that was due to Cerberus.  And that knowledge, as I believe you noted, brings up questions on it's own.

And yes, I don't think it would carry the story forward so much as stop it in its tracks until Kenson gave a believable response to Shepard.  

[SalsaDMA]

ErebUs890 wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Your etnire argument can be condensend to this part:

squee913 wrote...

It's a game where you shoot things. Move on.

This is how bioware treat it, and this is what we can expect from ME3 too. DA2 certainly doesn't give me any notions of thinking they still pay the same attention to story as they used to do.


Maybe Bioware got miffed at the comment from a reviewer that "Birds fly, fish swim and Bioware writes good stories. So they don't get any points for those anymore." and are dumping their quality to make reviewers give them credit when they mae a good story again. The world have seen stranger things. the comment is certainly not true anymore, and I am a bit disapointed in how fast they were able to blow their own rep in this regard.

I don't believe that. I believe that BioWare wants to be more than just a developer that just makes games with good writing. I believe they want their games to play as good as the story. Sometimes you have to sacrafice a little to improve upon certain elements. I believe ME2 had some of the best writing I've ever seen in a game. But it was really about the story of the characters than it was about the main plot. Which is exactly why 80% of the game you were recruiting and doing loyalty missions. It's the story within these characters that made ME2 such a wonderful game, while also having a very entertaining shooter experience. 

Oh I liked ME2 if you ignore the last DLC.

I just vehemently disliked Arrival and the implications it, and the IGN preview, sets for ME3. Coupled with their recent 'success' of of DA2 I'm just holding really low expectations for ME3 and biowares allowance by EA to take the time needed to create quality games.

[aimlessgun]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Oh I liked ME2 if you ignore the last DLC.

I just vehemently disliked Arrival and the implications it, and the IGN preview, sets for ME3. Coupled with their recent 'success' of of DA2 I'm just holding really low expectations for ME3 and biowares allowance by EA to take the time needed to create quality games.

What, the story implications? Well if its any consolation, the trial will be dramatic, and you'll get out of there pretty fast. So if you don't like it I think it's going to be like 5% of the story.

[RyuGuitarFreak]

This is nice squee. But I have my problems with Arrival. I had some high expectations.

First is that it's weak as a whole. Mostly everything, except music.

The plot is VERY predictable and average, there are no compelling characters, no real great moments (that's debatable of course, battle on Object Rho was cool, but nothing like the end of Stolen Memory, David revelation in Overlord or going through the exterior of the Shadow Broker base IMO), weak antagonist, repetitive, etc. I didn't feel the effort in it like I felt on the other story DLCs. Even the voice acting sometimes feel bad (Kenson).

Nitpicking:

- A relic that gives someone visions to your arrival, reapers? Nicely done.
- I think the Normandy could have followed the shuttle or Shep could have given the coordinates to Joker for well, getting outta there when he was done.
- Shepard sudden wake up was a bad moment. Just a bad scene. I mean, it really made the enemy seem dumb, weak and fragile. You don't do this. "Oh, it wasn't a glitch". I facepalmed. "But they were indocrinated". Ok, but...I mean, couldn't they come with a better excuse? You know, a "rescue Shepard" mission while controlling squadmates could be a very awesome situation. It would be problematic to do, due to ME2 suicide mission design, but it could end up way better and longer. Or Shepard could wake up after Joker screaming at his communication device after EDI found him. I don't know, but they shouldn't done it that way. It screamed "lazy writing" for me.
- Also, waking up on such time, so close to the end of the countdown? Talk about a coincidence. "Lazy writing" here too.

The whole DLC for me screams "rushed job". When you have 1 GOTY and 3 awesome mission packs the last one, most important, bridge to the sequel, you get hyped. And they made a job at hyping it too with the screenshots and the mistery surrounding it. Hackett's back was awesome but in the end it just left a bad taste in my mouth. It's not the worst thing ever but I was bored for the most part and tired in the end. When I finished I didn't get hyped for ME3. I think I should have been.

As ME2 story seems pointless? I lol at people who think like this. I mean, one thing has nothing to do with the other. Arrival was plan B to the attack on the Citadel and it doesn't exclude what the Collectors were doing. But has it made the Collector threat seem much less urgent and small? I sadly say yes.

Modifié par RyuGuitarFreak, 16 avril 2011 - 04:56 .

[Savber100]

squee913 wrote...

 
Some people think this makes ME2 pointless. I disagree. To me the point of ME2 was to learn to care about your team and the universe you are in. Think Two Towers. Most of the book was about taking down Saruman . He was not Sauron's main focus or plan. In the end, beating Saruman did not change much. Sauron was still coming. What it did do, was provide an excellent way to learn more about the world and the characters in it. That's how I feel about ME2. The Baby reaper was not plan B, it was just another weapon the Reapers planned to use. This does not mean it was not important to take it out. Anything you can do to hurt the Reapers is important. So the Reapers were already coming. So what? Are you saying that this makes it ok to just ignore what he Collectors were doing? Does this somehow change the fact that we eliminated a major base of operations for them in the galaxy? 

This. The TT example hits the point straight on.

[Endurium]

To play devil's advocate, I tend to agree with what "some people" think about Arrival. It left me a bit confused as to all the work I'd just done in ME2's main plot, and why the heck Earth all of a sudden mattered for any reason. I can't even land there before ME3. (That's me speaking as a spacer I suppose; I feel more connection to the Citadel than Earth. I'm a spectre dammit.)

At any rate, I'm looking forward to seeing if ME3 can cap the story well. Hopefully it won't be another Ultima IX.

Modifié par Endurium, 16 avril 2011 - 06:51 .

[Taritu]

AlexXIV wrote...

Well it is not the worst DLC but behind Overlord and LotSB. If I'd really start ranting then about Firewalker and several armor/weapon packs. What disturbed me is the streamlining. It always disturbs me in RPGs if a supposed choice of your main character isn't one. Of course I realize that it would be stupid to let the Reapers invade. I mean what's the point of gunning for the Collectors while in Shep's back the Reapers attack Earth or the Citadel or whatever.

Why?  What difference does it make if the war happens now or later?

[wulf3n]

squee913 wrote...
I would have to disagree. The story in Arrival (with all it's flaws) is still head an shoulders above most shooter stories. I think the Mass Effect story in both games is great and it is obvious that a lot of time and effort was put into making them. I am sorry you do not like the story, but hat does not mean ME2 is a simple shooter.

Even if that were true, just because it's better than crap doesn't make it good!
why are people so willing to accept mediocrity?

[CroGamer002]

wulf3n wrote...

Even if that were true, just because it's better than crap doesn't make it good!
why are people so willing to accept mediocrity?

Because we don't think it's mediocre?

[Anacronian Stryx]

Arrival is pretty much the antithesis to ME 2 - ME2 had story but no plot, Arrival is all plot with little story.

Some how i cant get over the thought that Arrival was originally planned to be a part of the ME 2 core experience.

Remember back when the first info about ME 2 began to surface?

Back then the Devs were adamant about ME 2 would not have a NG+ feature and then like a 2 months later they came out and said that now ME 2 would have a NG+ feature after all, That and plus all the extra dialogue for Legion was recorded - even though Legion couldn't possibly be on most of the recruitment missions - seems to me to indicate that ME 2 had a story/plot change rather late in development.

[SalsaDMA]

Mesina2 wrote...

wulf3n wrote...

Even if that were true, just because it's better than crap doesn't make it good!
why are people so willing to accept mediocrity?

Because we don't think it's mediocre?

you have low standards then.

No, it's not meant as an insult, but if you think Arrival is good I can only asume that you are easy to please plotwise from games.

[SalsaDMA]

aimlessgun wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Oh I liked ME2 if you ignore the last DLC.

I just vehemently disliked Arrival and the implications it, and the IGN preview, sets for ME3. Coupled with their recent 'success' of of DA2 I'm just holding really low expectations for ME3 and biowares allowance by EA to take the time needed to create quality games.

What, the story implications? Well if its any consolation, the trial will be dramatic, and you'll get out of there pretty fast. So if you don't like it I think it's going to be like 5% of the story.

The implication that Bioware will take a dump on lore in order to easier make more 'incredible moments'...

I don't know what's worse, really. The fact that they do this, or the fact that they could arrive to those 'incredible moments' without butchering their own lore if they just put in a little more effort but choose to just shrug their shoulders and say "Can't be arsed to do more than this...".

[JeffZero]

Savber100 wrote...

squee913 wrote...

 
Some people think this makes ME2 pointless. I disagree. To me the point of ME2 was to learn to care about your team and the universe you are in. Think Two Towers. Most of the book was about taking down Saruman . He was not Sauron's main focus or plan. In the end, beating Saruman did not change much. Sauron was still coming. What it did do, was provide an excellent way to learn more about the world and the characters in it. That's how I feel about ME2. The Baby reaper was not plan B, it was just another weapon the Reapers planned to use. This does not mean it was not important to take it out. Anything you can do to hurt the Reapers is important. So the Reapers were already coming. So what? Are you saying that this makes it ok to just ignore what he Collectors were doing? Does this somehow change the fact that we eliminated a major base of operations for them in the galaxy? 

This. The TT example hits the point straight on.

Yeah, in reading this thread that was the piece I planned on quoting from the get-go. It's nice to see someone else who singled it out and concurs. Some of my fans who really dislike ME2's narrative have heard my TT rants before. I think they really fit the scenario. As a lover of both The Two Towers and The Empire Strikes Back, I wouldn't have minded either treatment for the second act of the Mass Effect trilogy. Ultimately, I got the former and not the latter, and I'm totally okay with that.

[aimlessgun]

Frankly Saruman was a much more credible threat than the Collectors. He had a substantial army, was going to be a huge problem if left alone, and needed some serious help to take care of.

The collectors are 1 ship. Zzzz. In ME2 you have bigger fish to fry and the ability to fry them, unlike TT where most of the characters don't have a spaceship at their beck and call.

ME2 sets up a huge problem for you: nobody believes in the Reapers, and the galaxy is not preparing. To me, that seems like a MUCH bigger problem than the collectors. A problem that the writers set up, and then refuse to let you even attempt to solve (can't tell anyone else about Derelict Reaper, can't tell anyone else about Collector Base if you keep it).


EDIT: Lastly, the comparison with TT is difficult because it's an ensemble cast and the author is choosing to show you certain things. If you were to translate it to a videogame, and your character is in the place of Frodo, you'd probably be pretty effing PO'd if the game forced you to take care of this Rohan BS instead of getting to Mordor. Luckily for him, Tolkien doesn't have to bring Frodo over to Helm's Deep to tell that story, but if it were a ME style videogame, Bioware would have to do that.

Modifié par aimlessgun, 16 avril 2011 - 04:30 .

[Gravbh]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

wulf3n wrote...

Even if that were true, just because it's better than crap doesn't make it good!
why are people so willing to accept mediocrity?

Because we don't think it's mediocre?

you have low standards then.

No, it's not meant as an insult, but if you think Arrival is good I can only asume that you are easy to please plotwise from games.

Gotta love the opinion-as-fact crowd.

[SalsaDMA]

Gravbh wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

wulf3n wrote...

Even if that were true, just because it's better than crap doesn't make it good!
why are people so willing to accept mediocrity?

Because we don't think it's mediocre?

you have low standards then.

No, it's not meant as an insult, but if you think Arrival is good I can only asume that you are easy to please plotwise from games.

Gotta love the opinion-as-fact crowd.

Gotta love the "can't say anything relevant to the topic, so let's just flame a random guy" crowd.

[Savber100]

aimlessgun wrote...

Frankly Saruman was a much more credible threat than the Collectors. He had a substantial army, was going to be a huge problem if left alone, and needed some serious help to take care of.

Number don't equal credible threat. But if you want numbers, the Collectors were a little force than manages to kidnap ten of thousands and wiping out entire colonies. Saruman had 10,000+ army, invaded the outerlying areas of Rohan (small villages etc) before his defeat at Helms Deep. I don't know about you but a smaller force that can match or even surpass the devestation caused by Saruman's 'greater force' is not a threat to cough at.

aimlessgun wrote...
ME2 sets up a huge problem for you: nobody believes in the Reapers, and the galaxy is not preparing. To me, that seems like a MUCH bigger problem than the collectors. A problem that the writers set up, and then refuse to let you even attempt to solve (can't tell anyone else about Derelict Reaper, can't tell anyone else about Collector Base if you keep it).

The galaxy is in conflict (quarian vs. geth, Krogan genophage, Collector threat) and the Council is hiding their heads under the sand. You show up when you're supposed to be dead for two years working with a terrorist organization, claiming about a threat they don't believe in. How likely will they believe you?  A freaking reaper invaded the Citadel and they still refuse to acknowledge the threat. They will say it's a ship not a living entity. I doubt the reveal of a dead Reaper will change their minds. It's just some big 'ol geth creation and good luck on trying to research it! Instead, Shepard went for the endgoal of obtaining the Reaper IFF. Also who said you can't tell anyone about the Collector's Base? The game ended (DLC aside) after the destruction or capture of the Collector's Base. Also, who would believe you destroyed a base that no one has ever seen before?

aimlessgun wrote...
Lastly, the comparison with TT is difficult because it's an ensemble cast and the author is choosing to show you certain things. If you were to translate it to a videogame, and your character is in the place of Frodo, you'd probably be pretty effing PO'd if the game forced you to take care of this Rohan BS instead of getting to Mordor. Luckily for him, Tolkien doesn't have to bring Frodo over to Helm's Deep to tell that story, but if it were a ME style videogame, Bioware would have to do that.

...Bad comparison. While ME2 might not be as large in scope as TT, the point remains. A second threat has presented itself and your character must deal with it. Does it not push the overarching plot in TT and ME2 when you took down Saruman, minion of Sauron, and when you took down the Collectors, minion of the Reapers? The struggle between the remanants of the Fellowship and Saruman was the main point of TT with Frodo's journey still playing pivotal but secondary role in moving the plot. The struggle between the Collectors and Shepard was the main point of ME2 while the secondary quests plays pivotal roles in moving the plot forward (genophage cure, geth vs. quarian, gathering of a team, keeping or not keeping the Collector's base). In fact, that's more in moving ME2's story than Frodo's journey to TT which basically had one plot thread being developed which is the continuation of Frodo's walk to Mordor and getting Gollum to help.

In the end, the middle story tend to feel pointless until the final act where most second films tend to expand more upon the characters and have the 'fiddling around' feel since it's the middle child of a trilogy.

Modifié par Savber100, 16 avril 2011 - 06:10 .

[aimlessgun]

Savber100 wrote...

aimlessgun wrote...

Frankly Saruman was a much more credible threat than the Collectors. He had a substantial army, was going to be a huge problem if left alone, and needed some serious help to take care of.

Number don't equal credible threat. But if you want numbers, the Collectors were a little force than manages to kidnap ten of thousands and wiping out entire colonies. Saruman had 10,000+ army, invaded the outerlying areas of Rohan (small villages etc) before his defeat at Helms Deep. I don't know about you but a smaller force that can match or even surpass the devestation caused by Saruman's 'greater force' is not a threat to cough at.

Tens of thousands of people in middle earth is a lot. Tens of thousands of people in Mass Effect, where the scale of the conflict is galactic, is less than nothing. People hear "oh my god, 300,000 people" and think it's a big deal. That's because imagining numbers in the trillions is not easy for people.

1 ship, which got run off by some random ground cannons on a podunk colony (and simultaeously proved that it can only shoot at things directly in front of it). The "they're going to earth" comment on the DCS was so hilarious because of how absurd the idea was. It's important to deal with, but mobilizing the literally trillions of beings in the galaxy is a bigger priority.

aimlessgun wrote...
ME2 sets up a huge problem for you: nobody believes in the Reapers, and the galaxy is not preparing. To me, that seems like a MUCH bigger problem than the collectors. A problem that the writers set up, and then refuse to let you even attempt to solve (can't tell anyone else about Derelict Reaper, can't tell anyone else about Collector Base if you keep it).

The galaxy is in conflict (quarian vs. geth, Krogan genophage, Collector threat) and the Council is hiding their heads under the sand. You show up when you're supposed to be dead for two years working with a terrorist organization, claiming about a threat they don't believe in. How likely will they believe you?  A freaking reaper invaded the Citadel and they still refuse to acknowledge the threat. They will say it's a ship not a living entity. I doubt the reveal of a dead Reaper will change their minds. It's just some big 'ol geth creation and good luck on trying to research it! Instead, Shepard went for the endgoal of obtaining the Reaper IFF. Also who said you can't tell anyone about the Collector's Base? The game ended (DLC aside) after the destruction or capture of the Collector's Base. Also, who would believe you destroyed a base that no one has ever seen before?

Yeah, it's not going to be easy. It's a big problem, and that's why it feels so pressing to solve. You can't expect to just pick up some evidence and wave it around and everyone will believe you. It would take some work...hey, maybe a whole game's worth of work!

I'm fairly sure that when ME3 starts you won't have told anyone about the base in an attempt to use it as evidence. And I'm talking about using it as such if you keep the base.

aimlessgun wrote...
Lastly, the comparison with TT is difficult because it's an ensemble cast and the author is choosing to show you certain things. If you were to translate it to a videogame, and your character is in the place of Frodo, you'd probably be pretty effing PO'd if the game forced you to take care of this Rohan BS instead of getting to Mordor. Luckily for him, Tolkien doesn't have to bring Frodo over to Helm's Deep to tell that story, but if it were a ME style videogame, Bioware would have to do that.

...Bad comparison. While ME2 might not be as large in scope as TT, the point remains. A second threat has presented itself and your character must deal with it. Does it not push the overarching plot in TT and ME2 when you took down Saruman, minion of Sauron, and when you took down the Collectors, minion of the Reapers? The struggle between the remanants of the Fellowship and Saruman was the main point of TT with Frodo's journey still playing pivotal but secondary role in moving the plot. The struggle between the Collectors and Shepard was the main point of ME2 while the secondary quests plays pivotal roles in moving the plot forward (genophage cure, geth vs. quarian, gathering of a team, keeping or not keeping the Collector's base). In fact, that's more in moving ME2's story than Frodo's journey to TT which basically had one plot thread being developed which is the continuation of Frodo's walk to Mordor and getting Gollum to help.

In the end, the middle story tend to feel pointless until the final act where most second films tend to expand more upon the characters and have the 'fiddling around' feel since it's the middle child of a trilogy.

But you're missing my main point, which is that a book with an ensemble cast, and a game with one primary protagonist that you always play as are completely different. It's not a comparable storytelling experience.

Anyways, I of course hope you're right that ME3 will make ME2 better retrospectively. But I'm not holding my breath.

[SalsaDMA]

One of the things I don't get with why people refuse to believe in inteligent machines (aka. reapers) are the fact that they know the Geth exists, yet somehow deem it impossible that any other living machine should exist in the entirity of the universe... While not even having explored our own galaxy fully.

The lockdown on unknown mass relays means there's ALOT of undiscovered space out there, and given the amount of different races there have already been encountered, believing roaiming AIs is only limited to the Geth in the entire universe is naive at best, and something a leadership responsible for as many people as the leaders in ME are shouldn't be..

[Il Divo]

SalsaDMA wrote...

One of the things I don't get with why people refuse to believe in inteligent machines (aka. reapers) are the fact that they know the Geth exists, yet somehow deem it impossible that any other living machine should exist in the entirity of the universe... While not even having explored our own galaxy fully.

The cases are not equal.

Geth: Intelligent machines.

Reapers: Intelligents machines which are responsible for exterminating all galactic life every 50k years for some reason which we cannot comprehend, and hide on the edges of dark space using the Citadel as a relay.

Intelligent machines are believable, as they've been proven to exist. Belief in Reapers, on the other hand, requires organic life to also accept that its entire existence has been manipulated from the start, which is much more difficult to prove for different reasons.

The lockdown on unknown mass relays means there's ALOT of undiscovered space out there, and given the amount of different races there have already been encountered, believing roaiming AIs is only limited to the Geth in the entire universe is naive at best, and something a leadership responsible for as many people as the leaders in ME are shouldn't be..

What you are suggesting is the equivalent of saying that because Geth exists, then vampires exist. Argument from ignorance is a logical fallacy. We do not believe that a new race has been discovered until it has been proven. Potential for existence is not evidence of existence.

Modifié par Il Divo, 16 avril 2011 - 11:27 .

[AlexXIV]

Taritu wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Well it is not the worst DLC but behind Overlord and LotSB. If I'd really start ranting then about Firewalker and several armor/weapon packs. What disturbed me is the streamlining. It always disturbs me in RPGs if a supposed choice of your main character isn't one. Of course I realize that it would be stupid to let the Reapers invade. I mean what's the point of gunning for the Collectors while in Shep's back the Reapers attack Earth or the Citadel or whatever.

Why?  What difference does it make if the war happens now or later?

That Shepard is on a rescue mission right now. I mean Arrival started for me right after Horizon. And the Normandy wasn't even fully upgraded.