268 réponses à ce sujet

[Dave666]

InvincibleHero wrote...

iakus wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

I think people put ME1 on a pedestal yet cannot even verbalize why exactly. I think this: The sense of wonder is gone by ME2. You have met your first quarian, krogan, asari, salrian, etc and fought the geth. Being a dirty harry type spectre above the law just gave it coolness. Seeing the citadel for the first time was impressive no doubt. ME1 was leaps above previous sci-fi games and the graphics advancements were part of it. it also had a who dunnit type of exposition with red herrings strewn throughout. In ME2 basically hand-fed plot points by Illusive Man.

ME2 made advancements and refined many things and IMO was much better. There had to be loads more dialog in ME2 and certainly more RPG choices. Graphics and gameplay were like going from a Yugo to a Camry. Cutscenes were done way better with more action. The missions had more choice/plot points in ME2. The diversity of actions is even more astounding. You could torture a prisoner for info. Socking a raving scientist pales when you can also slug a reporter. I love both games, but give the edge to ME2.

So I think most people miss the new car scent big time. Me2 does have been there done that but does that really make it worse? That would be saying a sequel in any media could never be better than the first. Some people seriously believe that which is a shame.

I look at ME 1 in comparison to the plot.  And ME2's failure to continue it.

As a character story and interaction goes, I look to Dragon Age for comparison.  ME 2 completely fails as a character-centered, loyalty based story in comparison (both MEs do, really, but at least the first one had a stronger plot to fall back on)  

It's funny how ME 2 is considered by so many to be the bestest rpg EVAR!  Yet, on some important (to me, anyway) Dragon Age 2, that pariah of Bioware games, did leaps and bounds better.

Well did you expect a reaper showdown in part two of the trilogy.  The fact that ME1 ended with a major win and ME2 ended with a mini-victory is kind of headscratching not that I'll complain about that. Doesn't make reapers out to be that much of a threat.

DA:O is my personal favorite RPG. Was BGII with ToB for the longest time.

I dont' think it is the plot of ME2 so much as the exposition of it. It is revealed in ACTI the collectors are the focus of the mission when it should have been built up a little more. We saw them on video before we fought them which was a bad idea. The tension (killing by early reveals) and pacing is more of a problem than the story itself which was good enough for a videogame. Then again besides the relay run IN ME1 I felt no time pressure either. Both were pretty laid-back low tension affairs. I thought recruitment worked better than randomly bumping into the best krogan the best quarian and best turian to do the job. Serendipity overload in ME1.

I see this argument all the time on the forums and it shows such a lack of imagination it staggers me.

Did we expect to fight the main enemy of a Trilogy in the second Chapter?  Well...let me think... No.

Here's what I expected to happen.

In ME:1 we learned that 50,000 years ago the Reapers invaded the Galaxy and wiped out all space faring life.  They arrived at the Citadel and shut down all Communications and Mass Relays, thereby stranding everyone, isolating systems one from the other.  They used Indoctrinated servants to sniff out those who hid.  We learn that the Reapers are due again and if it weren't for the Protheans they would in fact already be here.  Thats pretty vague.

If only there was a race around 50,000 years ago who left Beacons behind...

If only there was someone in the Galaxy that understood the language that they spoke 50,000 years ago and imagine if that someone was our protagonist Shepard...

Its one thing to be told what happened to the last Cycle, but its another thing entirely to see it happening through their eyes.

Can you imagine what ME:2 could have been like?  Shepard hunts down Beacons and slowly, piece by piece (s)he watches the last Reaper Cycle unfold before his/her eyes. Shepard sees how many Reapers attack each System and is able to piece together a rough estimate of how many (s)he'll be facing.  Shepard sees what tactics the Reapers used once they were in a System. (S)He watches waves of Husks attacking the Protheans and sees  the Reapers themselves.

When ME:3 came around Shep would at least have some idea of what to expect and have a few strategies already formulated.

Instead, what did we get?  A throw away enemy while we twiddled our thumbs.

[The-Person]

Dave666 wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

iakus wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

I think people put ME1 on a pedestal yet cannot even verbalize why exactly. I think this: The sense of wonder is gone by ME2. You have met your first quarian, krogan, asari, salrian, etc and fought the geth. Being a dirty harry type spectre above the law just gave it coolness. Seeing the citadel for the first time was impressive no doubt. ME1 was leaps above previous sci-fi games and the graphics advancements were part of it. it also had a who dunnit type of exposition with red herrings strewn throughout. In ME2 basically hand-fed plot points by Illusive Man.

ME2 made advancements and refined many things and IMO was much better. There had to be loads more dialog in ME2 and certainly more RPG choices. Graphics and gameplay were like going from a Yugo to a Camry. Cutscenes were done way better with more action. The missions had more choice/plot points in ME2. The diversity of actions is even more astounding. You could torture a prisoner for info. Socking a raving scientist pales when you can also slug a reporter. I love both games, but give the edge to ME2.

So I think most people miss the new car scent big time. Me2 does have been there done that but does that really make it worse? That would be saying a sequel in any media could never be better than the first. Some people seriously believe that which is a shame.

I look at ME 1 in comparison to the plot.  And ME2's failure to continue it.

As a character story and interaction goes, I look to Dragon Age for comparison.  ME 2 completely fails as a character-centered, loyalty based story in comparison (both MEs do, really, but at least the first one had a stronger plot to fall back on)  

It's funny how ME 2 is considered by so many to be the bestest rpg EVAR!  Yet, on some important (to me, anyway) Dragon Age 2, that pariah of Bioware games, did leaps and bounds better.

Well did you expect a reaper showdown in part two of the trilogy.  The fact that ME1 ended with a major win and ME2 ended with a mini-victory is kind of headscratching not that I'll complain about that. Doesn't make reapers out to be that much of a threat.

DA:O is my personal favorite RPG. Was BGII with ToB for the longest time.

I dont' think it is the plot of ME2 so much as the exposition of it. It is revealed in ACTI the collectors are the focus of the mission when it should have been built up a little more. We saw them on video before we fought them which was a bad idea. The tension (killing by early reveals) and pacing is more of a problem than the story itself which was good enough for a videogame. Then again besides the relay run IN ME1 I felt no time pressure either. Both were pretty laid-back low tension affairs. I thought recruitment worked better than randomly bumping into the best krogan the best quarian and best turian to do the job. Serendipity overload in ME1.

I see this argument all the time on the forums and it shows such a lack of imagination it staggers me.

Did we expect to fight the main enemy of a Trilogy in the second Chapter?  Well...let me think... No.

Here's what I expected to happen.

In ME:1 we learned that 50,000 years ago the Reapers invaded the Galaxy and wiped out all space faring life.  They arrived at the Citadel and shut down all Communications and Mass Relays, thereby stranding everyone, isolating systems one from the other.  They used Indoctrinated servants to sniff out those who hid.  We learn that the Reapers are due again and if it weren't for the Protheans they would in fact already be here.  Thats pretty vague.

If only there was a race around 50,000 years ago who left Beacons behind...

If only there was someone in the Galaxy that understood the language that they spoke 50,000 years ago and imagine if that someone was our protagonist Shepard...

Its one thing to be told what happened to the last Cycle, but its another thing entirely to see it happening through their eyes.

Can you imagine what ME:2 could have been like?  Shepard hunts down Beacons and slowly, piece by piece (s)he watches the last Reaper Cycle unfold before his/her eyes. Shepard sees how many Reapers attack each System and is able to piece together a rough estimate of how many (s)he'll be facing.  Shepard sees what tactics the Reapers used once they were in a System. (S)He watches waves of Husks attacking the Protheans and sees  the Reapers themselves.

When ME:3 came around Shep would at least have some idea of what to expect and have a few strategies already formulated.

Instead, what did we get?  A throw away enemy while we twiddled our thumbs.

God, that is a worse storyline then what we got from ME2. If you see the Reaper attack in ME2, you lose the effect it has when they arrive in ME3. What strategy would you get from watching people get killed? So what you are saying is that if somebody watches footage of the destruction and killing in World War 2 they will be able to come up with tactics on how to beat the Germans? The most you would get out of it is thay things go boom and that you should avoid getting blown up. Anyways, Shepard already saw how the reapers destroy people from the beacon in ME1 and he also already saw Soverign in action.

[CroGamer002]

marshalleck wrote...


Of course, you're forgetting how Bioware went and undermined their new oh-so-lethal threat by having Shepard and pals run them off Horizon on foot, backed up by two GARDIAN betteries. 

So much for the Collector threat. Even their cruiser is a giant wuss. They'd be torn to shreds in seconds if they ever encountered a single Alliance cruiser or dreadnought, not to mention the whole Arcturus fleet should they ever try to hit Earth, which would be necessary for them to complete the human-reaper hybrid. The Collectors were never an actual threat to the galaxy; they would have run out of humans in the Terminus, and being unable to get more humans from Earth due to a) inability to survive an attack on Arcturus, which stands between Sol system and rest of the galaxy, and an increasing Alliance presence at Terminus colonies, their "plan" to build the human-reaper for who-knows-what purpose was doomed to failure with or without Shepard around to stop it. It would have inevitably stalled.

That's an argument AFTER the fact.


And they killed Shepard, a symbol of not just humanity, but everyone else to fight against the Reapers.
Oh but ofcourse you didn't payed attention, how typical.

onelifecrisis wrote...

I don't know why you went to the lengths of writing out what he said. I understood him just fine the first time, and he's wrong. Do I have to bold the key parts of my response? Actually, let me just edit part of what you wrote instead:

"itreminds everyone including Shepard, the crew and the gamer that Reapersare baddest threat that galaxy has ever seen. And just because you killed one of them that doesn't mean that they can't reach out and cost Cerberus some credits"

Ooo. Scary. If the Reapers keep it up, Cerberus might have to make budget cuts!

Thank you again for either not paying attention or ignoring my points just to make a lousy joke and/or arguing after the fact.

[Bluefuse]

At first after playing ME2 I said I loved it more than ME1. Then I played through ME1's story again completely with all the side-missions and found ME1 to be a far superior game because of the vivid description of the lore and obviously the story.

If only the Collectors had a role in ME1. It would have justified ME2's story so much...

Modifié par Bluefuse, 02 juin 2011 - 05:28 .

[snakeboy86]

why is it that the middle child is the one that causes the most trouble??jeez

[onelifecrisis]

Mesina2 wrote...

<large picture snipped>

Thank you again for either not paying attention or ignoring my points just to make a lousy joke and/or arguing after the fact.

You sure like posting that picture around here. I hate to break this to you, but that picture is not a win button. You might want to try giving reasons and/or arguments.

I wasn't making a joke. I don't know what arguing after the fact means. I do know that the ability for the collectors/reapers to "reach out and touch Shepard" isn't very scary when it can be fixed by Cerberus.

I played ME2 right after finishing ME1. I had seen no trailers, no spoilers. I had no idea that Shepard was going to die.

My reaction: Holy crap, Shepard is dead! So... do I play a different character in this game?
My reaction 60 seconds later: WTF? They just resurrected him? Just like that? I saw his body burning up in the atmosphere FFS! So now I'm immortal and can come back to life anytime I die. Whatever.
My reaction 30 hours after that: What was the point in his death?

I was not scared, and I did not feel more vulnerable. On the contrary, I felt considerably less vulnerable because it had been established that death wasn't really a problem, provided some scraps of my body could be recovered and that Cerberus continued to get several billion credits a year in funding.

This is what is called reasoning. Give it a try.

[Dave666]

The-Person wrote...

Dave666 wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

iakus wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

I think people put ME1 on a pedestal yet cannot even verbalize why exactly. I think this: The sense of wonder is gone by ME2. You have met your first quarian, krogan, asari, salrian, etc and fought the geth. Being a dirty harry type spectre above the law just gave it coolness. Seeing the citadel for the first time was impressive no doubt. ME1 was leaps above previous sci-fi games and the graphics advancements were part of it. it also had a who dunnit type of exposition with red herrings strewn throughout. In ME2 basically hand-fed plot points by Illusive Man.

ME2 made advancements and refined many things and IMO was much better. There had to be loads more dialog in ME2 and certainly more RPG choices. Graphics and gameplay were like going from a Yugo to a Camry. Cutscenes were done way better with more action. The missions had more choice/plot points in ME2. The diversity of actions is even more astounding. You could torture a prisoner for info. Socking a raving scientist pales when you can also slug a reporter. I love both games, but give the edge to ME2.

So I think most people miss the new car scent big time. Me2 does have been there done that but does that really make it worse? That would be saying a sequel in any media could never be better than the first. Some people seriously believe that which is a shame.

I look at ME 1 in comparison to the plot.  And ME2's failure to continue it.

As a character story and interaction goes, I look to Dragon Age for comparison.  ME 2 completely fails as a character-centered, loyalty based story in comparison (both MEs do, really, but at least the first one had a stronger plot to fall back on)  

It's funny how ME 2 is considered by so many to be the bestest rpg EVAR!  Yet, on some important (to me, anyway) Dragon Age 2, that pariah of Bioware games, did leaps and bounds better.

Well did you expect a reaper showdown in part two of the trilogy.  The fact that ME1 ended with a major win and ME2 ended with a mini-victory is kind of headscratching not that I'll complain about that. Doesn't make reapers out to be that much of a threat.

DA:O is my personal favorite RPG. Was BGII with ToB for the longest time.

I dont' think it is the plot of ME2 so much as the exposition of it. It is revealed in ACTI the collectors are the focus of the mission when it should have been built up a little more. We saw them on video before we fought them which was a bad idea. The tension (killing by early reveals) and pacing is more of a problem than the story itself which was good enough for a videogame. Then again besides the relay run IN ME1 I felt no time pressure either. Both were pretty laid-back low tension affairs. I thought recruitment worked better than randomly bumping into the best krogan the best quarian and best turian to do the job. Serendipity overload in ME1.

I see this argument all the time on the forums and it shows such a lack of imagination it staggers me.

Did we expect to fight the main enemy of a Trilogy in the second Chapter?  Well...let me think... No.

Here's what I expected to happen.

In ME:1 we learned that 50,000 years ago the Reapers invaded the Galaxy and wiped out all space faring life.  They arrived at the Citadel and shut down all Communications and Mass Relays, thereby stranding everyone, isolating systems one from the other.  They used Indoctrinated servants to sniff out those who hid.  We learn that the Reapers are due again and if it weren't for the Protheans they would in fact already be here.  Thats pretty vague.

If only there was a race around 50,000 years ago who left Beacons behind...

If only there was someone in the Galaxy that understood the language that they spoke 50,000 years ago and imagine if that someone was our protagonist Shepard...

Its one thing to be told what happened to the last Cycle, but its another thing entirely to see it happening through their eyes.

Can you imagine what ME:2 could have been like?  Shepard hunts down Beacons and slowly, piece by piece (s)he watches the last Reaper Cycle unfold before his/her eyes. Shepard sees how many Reapers attack each System and is able to piece together a rough estimate of how many (s)he'll be facing.  Shepard sees what tactics the Reapers used once they were in a System. (S)He watches waves of Husks attacking the Protheans and sees  the Reapers themselves.

When ME:3 came around Shep would at least have some idea of what to expect and have a few strategies already formulated.

Instead, what did we get?  A throw away enemy while we twiddled our thumbs.

God, that is a worse storyline then what we got from ME2. If you see the Reaper attack in ME2, you lose the effect it has when they arrive in ME3. What strategy would you get from watching people get killed? So what you are saying is that if somebody watches footage of the destruction and killing in World War 2 they will be able to come up with tactics on how to beat the Germans? The most you would get out of it is thay things go boom and that you should avoid getting blown up. Anyways, Shepard already saw how the reapers destroy people from the beacon in ME1 and he also already saw Soverign in action.

Fascinating insight into education standards...

So its your contention that observing an enemy as they attack a target other than you (an enemy that you will have to face later) teaches you nothing more than 'things go boom and that you should avoid getting blown up'?  

You might want to have a word with your governments military, it sounds like they've been doing it wrong.

Are you familiar with the term Reconnaissance? I've provided a link to help you.

Militaries since the dawn of man have used Scouts and Recon units to observe enemy troop movements, formations, tactics and strategies.  Do you mean to tell me that they've been doing it wrong all this time?  Who would have known!

Shepard saw information from a grand total of two Beacons, one on Eden Prime and one on Virmire.  The Becons were the Prothean version of a communication system, which was cut off after the Reapers invaded.  If the Beacons were cut off then they may well still hold information that was never sent, do you think perhaps that such information might be useful to Shepard given that (s)he now faces the same threat?  Given that Shepard is a member of Special Tactics and Recon it might have been a good idea for Shepard to actually do some Reconnaissance.

[CroGamer002]

onelifecrisis wrote...

You sure like posting that picture around here. I hate to break this to you, but that picture is not a win button. You might want to try giving reasons and/or arguments.

And I do give reasons and arguments.
You just don't get the point.

I wasn't making a joke. I don't know what arguing after the fact means. I do know that the ability for the collectors/reapers to "reach out and touch Shepard" isn't very scary when it can be fixed by Cerberus.

That's still argument after the fact.

But if you're gonna use it, then I'll do it as well. If Shepard dies in SM, he/she is dead. There's no Lazarus Project 2.0.

And it not suppose to be scary, but it suppose to mean that Reapers are still a threat even though they're in Dark Space AND if Shepard is dead( ignoring Arrival and SM) who will bring hope in fight against the Reapers?
Who else can unite galactic civilizations against the Reapers and lead them to victory?

Reapers killed that hope and if there was no Cerberus with Lazarus Project, galaxy would be doomed.

I played ME2 right after finishing ME1. I had seen no trailers, no spoilers. I had no idea that Shepard was going to die.

My reaction: Holy crap, Shepard is dead! So... do I play a different character in this game?
My reaction 60 seconds later: WTF? They just resurrected him? Just like that? I saw his body burning up in the atmosphere FFS! So now I'm immortal and can come back to life anytime I die. Whatever.
My reaction 30 hours after that: What was the point in his death?

Read above,

I was not scared, and I did not feel more vulnerable. On the contrary, I felt considerably less vulnerable because it had been established that death wasn't really a problem, provided some scraps of my body could be recovered and that Cerberus continued to get several billion credits a year in funding.

This is what is called reasoning. Give it a try.

Desperation≠get scared

If Shepard dies again he/she is dead for good.

There's no Lazarus Project 2.0!

Also it took 2 years to resurrect Shepard and that's more then enough time for Reapers to kill every resistance that is real threat to them.


Death is still a problem, not just for Shepard but for whole galaxy.

[onelifecrisis]

Mesina2 wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

You sure like posting that picture around here. I hate to break this to you, but that picture is not a win button. You might want to try giving reasons and/or arguments.

And I do give reasons and arguments.
You just don't get the point.

I wasn't making a joke. I don't know what arguing after the fact means. I do know that the ability for the collectors/reapers to "reach out and touch Shepard" isn't very scary when it can be fixed by Cerberus.

That's still argument after the fact.

But if you're gonna use it, then I'll do it as well. If Shepard dies in SM, he/she is dead. There's no Lazarus Project 2.0.

And it not suppose to be scary, but it suppose to mean that Reapers are still a threat even though they're in Dark Space AND if Shepard is dead( ignoring Arrival and SM) who will bring hope in fight against the Reapers?
Who else can unite galactic civilizations against the Reapers and lead them to victory?

Reapers killed that hope and if there was no Cerberus with Lazarus Project, galaxy would be doomed.

I played ME2 right after finishing ME1. I had seen no trailers, no spoilers. I had no idea that Shepard was going to die.

My reaction: Holy crap, Shepard is dead! So... do I play a different character in this game?
My reaction 60 seconds later: WTF? They just resurrected him? Just like that? I saw his body burning up in the atmosphere FFS! So now I'm immortal and can come back to life anytime I die. Whatever.
My reaction 30 hours after that: What was the point in his death?

Read above,

I was not scared, and I did not feel more vulnerable. On the contrary, I felt considerably less vulnerable because it had been established that death wasn't really a problem, provided some scraps of my body could be recovered and that Cerberus continued to get several billion credits a year in funding.

This is what is called reasoning. Give it a try.

Desperation≠get scared

If Shepard dies again he/she is dead for good.

There's no Lazarus Project 2.0!

Also it took 2 years to resurrect Shepard and that's more then enough time for Reapers to kill every resistance that is real threat to them.


Death is still a problem, not just for Shepard but for whole galaxy.

Thanks.
What is SM?
It took 2 years the first time because it was new. The second time they can just rinse and repeat.

[AlanC9]

Dave666 wrote...

Shepard saw information from a grand total of two Beacons, one on Eden Prime and one on Virmire.  The Becons were the Prothean version of a communication system, which was cut off after the Reapers invaded.  If the Beacons were cut off then they may well still hold information that was never sent, do you think perhaps that such information might be useful to Shepard given that (s)he now faces the same threat?  Given that Shepard is a member of Special Tactics and Recon it might have been a good idea for Shepard to actually do some Reconnaissance.

Sure, the devs could have scattered more beacons around for Shepard to find. But since the Protheans didn't actually know enough about the Reapers to be able to stop them themselves, why would there be anything that useful in those beacons? It would have to be something that Vigil didn't know or Shepard would already have it at the end of ME1. Unless Prothean data discs are crappy, which I guess is conceivable.

[Dave666]

AlanC9 wrote...

Dave666 wrote...

Shepard saw information from a grand total of two Beacons, one on Eden Prime and one on Virmire.  The Becons were the Prothean version of a communication system, which was cut off after the Reapers invaded.  If the Beacons were cut off then they may well still hold information that was never sent, do you think perhaps that such information might be useful to Shepard given that (s)he now faces the same threat?  Given that Shepard is a member of Special Tactics and Recon it might have been a good idea for Shepard to actually do some Reconnaissance.

Sure, the devs could have scattered more beacons around for Shepard to find. But since the Protheans didn't actually know enough about the Reapers to be able to stop them themselves, why would there be anything that useful in those beacons? It would have to be something that Vigil didn't know or Shepard would already have it at the end of ME1. Unless Prothean data discs are crappy, which I guess is conceivable.

The way I envisioned it (and at this point its not like it matters, ME:2 is out and we're stuck with the Collectors and the Termireaper) is kinda like this:

If we imagine that the Prothean Beacons work by buffering information and then sending it in chunks, because lets face it, all the communications requirements of an entire planet couldn't be sent simultaneously, while recieving tons of information from other planets in the Galaxy.  Then after the Reapers cut communications, it was impossible for the Beacons to send the information they had stored in their buffers and they became repositories.

While fighting any enemy you learn more and more the longer you're fighting, some of what you learn is useful, some of it is not.  You might learn what kind of weaponry is depolyed against you, or what kind of troops etc. Knowing what you're going to be facing can be a huge strategic advantage, as I'm sure you'll agree.

Had the writers taken this route, then its entirely plausible that the Protheans might have learned some vital piece of information, but because they were cut off from everyone else they were unable to take advantage of this, or even let others know what they'd discovered.  Thats where the Beacons could have come in.  Thanks to the Protheans we won't suffer their fate, the Reapers can no longer simply arrive at the Citadel straight from Dark Space and sever all Communications and Relays so information that the Protheans could have discovered, might have actually been usable by our Cycle.

Can you imagine if they'd implemented this? Imagine seeing a cutscene in ME:2 of something happening then ME:3 comes along and something eerilly similar happens but with different people, on a different planet.  Imagine that sense of fate repeating itself before we're able to put our plans into action and start changing things up.

[Franzius]

FrostedFlake84 wrote...

Im pretty late finishing this game, but there is a reason. Due to other circumstances I only recently purchased my 360. Had one before but ended up losing it. So about some time ago I got ME1 and loved it. In fact I played through it 3 times before going to purchase ME2 and continue on my Shepards journey. I started playing ME2 and noticed the improvement in graphics and movement. Also some controls much better. Then as I kept playing I realized that ME2 lacked almost everything that made ME1 great. I kept playing but lacked the enthusiasm and suspense that I had while playing ME1. I found myself only playing to finish the story and not really enjoying it as much. It had its moments but Im dissapointed with ME2.


Does anybody else feel this way?

You are lucky to feel just disappointed by ME2...
Because I really HATE ME2 !!!!
ME2 is just a mediocre action spin-off and I fear that ME3 will be just more of the same!

BiowEA has wasted the opportunity to enter in the story of videogame forever with ME trilogy.

After the first timeless masterpiece they decide to move toward a bland corridor shooter...
I have told this so many time now why I hate ME2 and BiowEA...
Bah, I am very tired of BiowEA , of ME franchise.
No hope for ME3.

[CroGamer002]

onelifecrisis wrote...

Thanks.
What is SM?
It took 2 years the first time because it was new. The second time they can just rinse and repeat.

SM is Suicide Mission. You're here longer then me, how the hell you never heard of it?


And it may not take them 2 years this time but I highly doubt it will take them less then 1 year.
Also check on Youtube "Mass Effect 2 Everyone dies" and you'll see from Illusive Man that there will be no Lazarus Project 2.0, plus BIoware confirmed you can't import your dead Shepard since he/she is dead for good.


That can probably mean that this project can't work more then once per person. Money is not really an issues with Cerberus.

[onelifecrisis]

Mesina2 wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

Thanks.
What is SM?
It took 2 years the first time because it was new. The second time they can just rinse and repeat.

SM is Suicide Mission. You're here longer then me, how the hell you never heard of it?


And it may not take them 2 years this time but I highly doubt it will take them less then 1 year.
Also check on Youtube "Mass Effect 2 Everyone dies" and you'll see from Illusive Man that there will be no Lazarus Project 2.0, plus BIoware confirmed you can't import your dead Shepard since he/she is dead for good.


That can probably mean that this project can't work more then once per person. Money is not really an issues with Cerberus.

I see. So if I get to the end of the game and die, I'll be presented with a message saying there will be no LP2. I'm guessing there's no explanation for why not? Regardless, pray tell, until that point what reason is there to think that there will be no LP2?

[CajNatalie]

So you think that the Lazarus station that got destroyed with all its scientists and researchers (potentially excluding Miranda depending on how the SM went), can be rebuilt from scratch to do a project that very near failed the moment Shepard first regained consciousness, using a body that was trapped in a place that just blew the hell up or vaporized all life within.
TIM's just going to put all those billions and billions of credits in to do all that again from scratch?

Oh and should he actually be able to pull this off, he's going to do it before the Reapers reap everyone?

Modifié par CajNatalie, 02 juin 2011 - 11:04 .

[LPPrince]

CajNatalie wrote...

So you think that the Lazarus station that got destroyed with all its scientists and researchers (potentially excluding Miranda depending on how the SM went), can be rebuilt from scratch to do a project that very near failed the moment Shepard first regained consciousness, using a body that was trapped in a place that just blew the hell up or vaporized all life within.
TIM's just going to put all those billions and billions of credits in to do all that again from scratch?

Oh and should he actually be able to pull this off, he's going to do it before the Reapers reap everyone?

To be fair, ME2 had a bit of a misstep when at one time they said Lazarus Station was destroyed and at another time said it was taken back and in control of Cerberus again.

[mopotter]

onelifecrisis wrote...

I see. So if I get to the end of the game and die, I'll be presented with a message saying there will be no LP2. I'm guessing there's no explanation for why not? Regardless, pray tell, until that point what reason is there to think that there will be no LP2?  

 They could of course be lieing, but BioWare has said if you die in ME2 that Shepard will not carry over to ME3. and you may actually allready know this. 

I've been here since ME1, for years, also wasn't immediately sure what SM stood for. SM brings something else to my mind.

edit having trouble with quotes....again.

Modifié par mopotter, 02 juin 2011 - 11:16 .

[AlexRmF]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

woods26 wrote...

(...)

It's not math, it's art. People can argue if it was good or bad writing all day if they want to. But to post a link as if it's the set in stone rule to which all writers must follow is laughable.

Two things:

1) Shepard's death is quite literally the definition of sensationalism. That is to say, it is purely an attention-arousing plot device that has no real basis storywise.

2) If there is one thing that could be credited to Shepard's death, it's joining Cerberus. That is, Shepard could have been killed off so that it would be more convenient to get her to work with Cerberus for the course of ME2. That much I will give it. But considering that was literally everything to it, then it is, so far, a pointless plot device. You do not kill off a protagonist to make such a simple change in a story--unless it is meant to have a much more significant impact later on through the story, in which case it would make sense. As it stands, however, it is anything but a good idea.

the only reason to kill Shepard is to get him to join Cerberus?
how about the whole change in game mechanic? that was actually the main reason for killing off shepard and allowing you re-construct him;)
there are also many other variables that couldn't be explained or started if he wasn't killed-off (shadow broker connection to the collectors comes to mind)
so, even though I don't agree with the mechanic change, the death of Shepard was a great moment in my ME2 experience ... I'll probably see in ME3 what extra bits they added:D

[Machazareel]

onelifecrisis wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

Thanks.
What is SM?
It took 2 years the first time because it was new. The second time they can just rinse and repeat.

SM is Suicide Mission. You're here longer then me, how the hell you never heard of it?


And it may not take them 2 years this time but I highly doubt it will take them less then 1 year.
Also check on Youtube "Mass Effect 2 Everyone dies" and you'll see from Illusive Man that there will be no Lazarus Project 2.0, plus BIoware confirmed you can't import your dead Shepard since he/she is dead for good.


That can probably mean that this project can't work more then once per person. Money is not really an issues with Cerberus.

I see. So if I get to the end of the game and die, I'll be presented with a message saying there will be no LP2. I'm guessing there's no explanation for why not? Regardless, pray tell, until that point what reason is there to think that there will be no LP2?

I'm gonna go out on a limb and assume there will be no LP2 because moments after Shepard plummets to his death the base either explodes or emits a massive raidioactive pulse, incinerating all organic matter in the process.

LP is kinda dependant on being able to recover the body, and said body being somewhat intact. Judging by the x-ray scans we see in the beginning of the game, Shepards body was broken, but everything was still there. I'm pretty sure if his head was missing or something there never would have been a Lazarus Project.

[HTTP 404]

onelifecrisis wrote...
I see. So if I get to the end of the game and die, I'll be presented with a message saying there will be no LP2. I'm guessing there's no explanation for why not? Regardless, pray tell, until that point what reason is there to think that there will be no LP2?

you won't get a message. you are dead.  You are arguing against the wall.  Its a development decision on bioware's part.  this was stated a long time ago.  You really should read up on whats going on with Me3 before posting asinine comments. 

[onelifecrisis]

This is amazing. Several of you are defending the bad writing with "Bioware said". Really? Are you serious?

[kaiki01]

onelifecrisis wrote...

This is amazing. Several of you are defending the bad writing with "Bioware said". Really? Are you serious?

If you take the posistion that nothing Bioware says can be trusted then there can be no discussion as there would be no credible information regarding ME3. So its on you to prove why nothing Bioware says can't be trusted.

[Da Mecca]

onelifecrisis wrote...

This is amazing. Several of you are defending the bad writing with "Bioware said". Really? Are you serious?

Some people in this fanbase really think Bioware cannot do any wrong and will defend them to the death.

But whatever.

[Bewiz]

two thought on the LP and possible LP2

1. seeing Shepard resurrected at the start, just dulls the sense of pending threat (s)he'll be facing thruout the game, at least it did for me, and seemed totally unlikely a terrorist organisation like Cerberus wouldve been the candidates to attempt or achieve it,

2. but thered be no chance whoever achieved it wouldve risked losing any of the research data on that ship, without off base backups of everything so having it destroyed wouldnt have been a huge setback, and yes it (seems) possible from the start if Shepard were really to die again, theyd probably consider starting the LP2 and rebuild him in a quarter of the time

imo its not a good story device, not much relevance to the ME universe, yet so amazing its strange to be glossed over as a story element after that. Its only like the holy grail of science they discovered there..

Modifié par Bewiz, 02 juin 2011 - 05:44 .

[onelifecrisis]

kaiki01 wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

This is amazing. Several of you are defending the bad writing with "Bioware said". Really? Are you serious?

If you take the posistion that nothing Bioware says can be trusted then there can be no discussion as there would be no credible information regarding ME3. So its on you to prove why nothing Bioware says can't be trusted.

No, that's not the position I'm taking.

Firstly, any piece of fiction that requires external clarification from the author before it can be understood is pretty ****ing bad fiction.

Secondly, Death of the Author.

Modifié par onelifecrisis, 02 juin 2011 - 06:17 .