63 réponses à ce sujet

[Kaiser Shepard]

I'll just quote this post I made in another topic 2 hours ago:

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

this isnt my name wrote...

This series should have been 2 parts not a trilogy.

I expect this will be more like DAO... IN SPACE. Each character you babysit will be some sort of ambassador to a race or some crap e.g Garrus for Turians, Wrex for krogan, Liara for Asari, etc.

While I liked the second game for everything new it brought to the table, I agree that it didn't advance the story that much.

The whole Collector plotline, were this a tv series, would probably be described as filler material. At the beginning of the game we're suddenly introduced to a completely new villain that was previously hidden and apparently just mindlessly obeys the established villain, Shepard dies and is resurrected two whole minutes later, other cool stuff happens, new characters are introduced, their daddy issues resolved and we go on to kill the monster of the week... after which we end up with the exact same status-quo we had at the end of the original.

Our former secondary enemy, Cerberus, now also appears to be just that again.

It's quite funny that most of the pushing forward was actually done by the two bridging DLCs (more specifically Arrival). Which, if you think about it, could just as well have taken place just after the Siege of the Citadel.

Personally, I'm a little sad that almost static, melancholic atmosphere the first game had going on is pretty much gone. Nowadays it just seems to be like "LOOK, COOL NEW ENEMY! BAM, SHEPARD DIES! WOAH, INSTANT RESURRECTION! YAY, GIANT SPACE EXPLOSIONS! CHECK THIS OUT, AWESOME LIGHTSABER KNOCK-OFF!"

While I can't say it's been a bad ride, I would have preferred it if they kept themselves to JUST the universe they initially established for themselves to work with. The universe I fell in love with. Stangely enough, the Dragon Age series - with its more radically different sequel - seems to have a better sense of purpose and direction (ME ironically being the one that's been working to just one specific moment), having introduced only one particarly questionable concept since it's inception (Red Lyrium), one which may still be justified.

Looking back on this post, this might be the most negative I've ever been about the series. Oh well...

[Collider]

LGTX wrote...

Collider wrote...

If none of the new squad mates in ME2 are squad mates in ME3, I'd say that ME2 comes close to being useless.

You were gathering a crew for a suicide mission in ME2, and that's done. As a side-note which was optional, you also created alliances for the Reaper war (by the way, that's why we ACTUALLY needed ME2). Which means: squadmates from ME2 are mostly irrelevant to ME3, regardless of how much you love them and want to have them back. Except, of course, for the ones who directly serve the purpose I mentioned above, like Tali/Legion and Mordin/Grunt. 

Very good point.

[byzantine horse]

Most stories are like this. You could ask the same question to Tolkien about "The Two Towers", just as an example.

[kaiki01]

Collider wrote...

LGTX wrote...

Collider wrote...

If none of the new squad mates in ME2 are squad mates in ME3, I'd say that ME2 comes close to being useless.

You were gathering a crew for a suicide mission in ME2, and that's done. As a side-note which was optional, you also created alliances for the Reaper war (by the way, that's why we ACTUALLY needed ME2). Which means: squadmates from ME2 are mostly irrelevant to ME3, regardless of how much you love them and want to have them back. Except, of course, for the ones who directly serve the purpose I mentioned above, like Tali/Legion and Mordin/Grunt. 

Very good point.

So if all the new ME2 squadmates had appearances in ME3 to serve the plot....would ME2 be useful then? What fraction of squadmates need to serve the plot in ME3 in order for ME2 to be useful? You already named 3/8ths of the non-DLC new squadmates.

[sponge56]

I don't understand why this is still going on, its like people are ignoring everyone who quotes the fact that as the second act it follows the general rule of trilogies. You can say that you didn't like the plot but you can't say it was pointless. I don't even think this is even debatable

[LGTX]

kaiki01 wrote...

Collider wrote...

LGTX wrote...

Collider wrote...

If none of the new squad mates in ME2 are squad mates in ME3, I'd say that ME2 comes close to being useless.

You were gathering a crew for a suicide mission in ME2, and that's done. As a side-note which was optional, you also created alliances for the Reaper war (by the way, that's why we ACTUALLY needed ME2). Which means: squadmates from ME2 are mostly irrelevant to ME3, regardless of how much you love them and want to have them back. Except, of course, for the ones who directly serve the purpose I mentioned above, like Tali/Legion and Mordin/Grunt. 

Very good point.

So if all the new ME2 squadmates had appearances in ME3 to serve the plot....would ME2 be useful then? What fraction of squadmates need to serve the plot in ME3 in order for ME2 to be useful? You already named 3/8ths of the non-DLC new squadmates.

That doesn't matter because it already makes it relevant. 

But alright, I'll bite. Tell me your vision of the "useful" ME2 plot. 

[Dariuszp]

I killed everyone in my team that could be killed So there will be no use to me It was quite fun and I did try few combinations before i manage to do that

[tenshi_no_hone]

Could people please read previous posts before posting themselves? Answering the OP and those that follow is pointless if no one who posts reads any of the responses!

[No1Codename47]

To people that have critised ME3 for being so action focused....just what exactly did you want from the battles? Turn based combat or what? I don't see what's wrong with putting action in the game. I'm being serious though, they're provided some brilliant battle scenes and set-pieces but if you don't like the whole so called focus on action what would you prefer to have seen? We're getting the RPG stuff with weapon modding, character skill trees, etc.

But as for the main point, as many have said for the second in the trilogy it was always going to be tough for Bioware to advance the story...but not advance it too much. Could they have come up with a better story? Possibly but i wouldn't dismiss the game outright. To me, i'd define it as less about advancing the story but more about us finding out more about the universe. The genophage, the true nature of the Geth, Asari and Ardat Yakshi, etc. Still pretty fascinating stuff in my opinion.

[Icinix]

To set the scene and prep some plays for ME3.

It would have been too hard to put it all in one game. The squad members are linked pretty heavily to some big plays to come in ME3.

To start you've got the obvious - Legion / Tali - Geth / Quarian (This one is probably the biggest due to the size of their two fleets). Mirdan / Jacob - Links to Cerberus, both were pretty high ranking, have contacts etc. I belive their parts with the new look Cerberus will be enormous. In particular, their loyalty will be paramount.
Samara and Thane both provide links to their prospective races. Samara is hugely respected and her voice would carry a lot of weight in Asari council. Thane from what it seems worked for some pretty high up hanhar's...so don't know what they would offer tactically, but I'd love to see something with refugee harbouring or something for impact beyond the battles.

Jack, well, shes just there because shes awesome sauce . Grunt not much for tactical, but at the head of a Krogan army he'd be formidable. etc etc. It's a lot of speculation, but there is enough there I think to warrant the setup they were looking at creating, and hey, I'm all for more gameplay anyway!

[CaptainZaysh]

Well, at the end of ME1 it was decided we would fight the Reapers. Kick them back into dark space.

I think ME2's story might have benefited had it built upon that premise, rather than just ignored it.

[kaiki01]

LGTX wrote...

kaiki01 wrote...

Collider wrote...

LGTX wrote...

Collider wrote...

If none of the new squad mates in ME2 are squad mates in ME3, I'd say that ME2 comes close to being useless.

You were gathering a crew for a suicide mission in ME2, and that's done. As a side-note which was optional, you also created alliances for the Reaper war (by the way, that's why we ACTUALLY needed ME2). Which means: squadmates from ME2 are mostly irrelevant to ME3, regardless of how much you love them and want to have them back. Except, of course, for the ones who directly serve the purpose I mentioned above, like Tali/Legion and Mordin/Grunt. 

Very good point.

So if all the new ME2 squadmates had appearances in ME3 to serve the plot....would ME2 be useful then? What fraction of squadmates need to serve the plot in ME3 in order for ME2 to be useful? You already named 3/8ths of the non-DLC new squadmates.

That doesn't matter because it already makes it relevant. 

But alright, I'll bite. Tell me your vision of the "useful" ME2 plot. 

This is the definition of useful that I will be using. "Having a practical or beneficial use."
This is the definition of plot that I will be using. "The main events of a play, novel, movie, or similar work, devised and presented by the writer as an interrelated sequence."

So, do the main events of ME2 have a practical or benficial use. Yes and yes. 
First, the benefical use that the main events have. The story, characters and settings in ME2 were enjoyable to experiance. The plot served as the way in which the players could navigate these fictional elements in an attempt to maximize entertainment. So, short answer, the plot of ME2 is enjoyable to experiance. Or, at least I found it enjoyable to experiance. That is the beneficial use of the ME2 plot, it provided entertainment.
Second, the practical use that the main events have. What would be missing from the over-arching plot of the ME story if ME2 was not told. These missing elements can be broken down into a couple of points.

1. Insight into the Reapers
2. Setting up a Krogan & Council resolution to the genophage
3. Setting up a renewed Geth & Quarian conflict

Before I go into these points, there are the only elements that I can guess at, considering I have not played ME3 and do not know what elements from ME2 will come to play in ME3.

First point. The Collectors & final Reaper boss gives the players more information about the modus operandi of the Reapers. The facts that we know are that the Collectors used to be Prothean. And, that the Reapers use biological material to create new Reapers. Also, the Reapers are targeting humanity for reasons that may be related to the two previously stated reasons. I these facts give the suggestion that Reapers use whatever biological life they do not kill. Looking at the Keepers as additional backing for this idea. Coupled with the fact that the Reapers use biological material to create more of themselves, it seems that the Reapers are more complex then intelligent machines bent on wiping out all biological life. I speculate that this will come into play in ME3 as we learn more about the Reapers & their motivations.

Second point. While in ME1 we know about the genophage, in ME2 a possible cure for the genophage is introduced in a more sophisticated fashion then "smash cure, stop Saren army". Not only is a possible cure introduced, we are given the context around that cure. The environment the Krogan survive in due to the genophate, the guilt of some Solarians, etc. By now we know that ME3 will involve organizing the galaxy to fight the Reapers. I would speculate that this issue will be at the heart of if the Krogan join on Shepards side, or some other factor we do not know. Without ME2 we would lose most of the information players have and the context of that information. It is one thing to be told by the codex that Solarians are trying to cure the Krogan & the Krogans suffer because of the genophage. It is another to experiance that situation.

Third point. This will be short as the same arguments for my second point can be made here. ME2 provides more information, and context more importantly, about the Geth & Quarian situation. The player's involvment with the Quarians end with their Admiralty aruging over war wih the Geth. It is not far-fetched to believe this will be a major component of the ME3 plot.

Those three points were the practical uses of the ME2 plot. Context, information and providing the foundation for the ME3 plot.

[sp0ck 06]

I guess the plot hasn't advanced in the Two Towers either? Frodo still taking ring o Mordor, he's just a bit closer. Gandalf/Aragorn still trying to forge alliances to take on Sauron.

Think of the Collectors as Isengard (for you lotr nerds).

I mean, to say ME2 didn't advance the plot seems silly. Especially since we don't know the extent to which events of ME2 will influence the war in 3.

[Neo Hex Omega]

Mass Effect 2 is the set up, and Mass Effect 3 is the pay off.

So, in the end, the quality of the second game hinges upon the quality of the third, and how well it utilizes the set up material.

[Darkhour]

It never ceases to amaze me that people think ME2's main story was about the collectors.  It was all about the socio-political environment in the galaxy and important individuals who set the course of history unbeknowst. The collectors are just filler material to give the events that transpired a reason to have happened as they did.

Without ME2 to set to socio-political climate ME3 would be a mess in terms of story..

 
 

[Bad King]

Mass Effect 2 gave us an important weapon to use against the reapers- the collector base. That is once we prize it from Cerberus hands in ME3.

Modifié par Bad King, 08 juin 2011 - 01:36 .

[LGTX]

kaiki01 wrote...

LGTX wrote...

kaiki01 wrote...

Collider wrote...

LGTX wrote...

Collider wrote...

If none of the new squad mates in ME2 are squad mates in ME3, I'd say that ME2 comes close to being useless.

You were gathering a crew for a suicide mission in ME2, and that's done. As a side-note which was optional, you also created alliances for the Reaper war (by the way, that's why we ACTUALLY needed ME2). Which means: squadmates from ME2 are mostly irrelevant to ME3, regardless of how much you love them and want to have them back. Except, of course, for the ones who directly serve the purpose I mentioned above, like Tali/Legion and Mordin/Grunt. 

Very good point.

So if all the new ME2 squadmates had appearances in ME3 to serve the plot....would ME2 be useful then? What fraction of squadmates need to serve the plot in ME3 in order for ME2 to be useful? You already named 3/8ths of the non-DLC new squadmates.

That doesn't matter because it already makes it relevant. 

But alright, I'll bite. Tell me your vision of the "useful" ME2 plot. 

This is the definition of useful that I will be using. "Having a practical or beneficial use."
This is the definition of plot that I will be using. "The main events of a play, novel, movie, or similar work, devised and presented by the writer as an interrelated sequence."

So, do the main events of ME2 have a practical or benficial use. Yes and yes. 
First, the benefical use that the main events have. The story, characters and settings in ME2 were enjoyable to experiance. The plot served as the way in which the players could navigate these fictional elements in an attempt to maximize entertainment. So, short answer, the plot of ME2 is enjoyable to experiance. Or, at least I found it enjoyable to experiance. That is the beneficial use of the ME2 plot, it provided entertainment.
Second, the practical use that the main events have. What would be missing from the over-arching plot of the ME story if ME2 was not told. These missing elements can be broken down into a couple of points.

1. Insight into the Reapers
2. Setting up a Krogan & Council resolution to the genophage
3. Setting up a renewed Geth & Quarian conflict

Before I go into these points, there are the only elements that I can guess at, considering I have not played ME3 and do not know what elements from ME2 will come to play in ME3.

First point. The Collectors & final Reaper boss gives the players more information about the modus operandi of the Reapers. The facts that we know are that the Collectors used to be Prothean. And, that the Reapers use biological material to create new Reapers. Also, the Reapers are targeting humanity for reasons that may be related to the two previously stated reasons. I these facts give the suggestion that Reapers use whatever biological life they do not kill. Looking at the Keepers as additional backing for this idea. Coupled with the fact that the Reapers use biological material to create more of themselves, it seems that the Reapers are more complex then intelligent machines bent on wiping out all biological life. I speculate that this will come into play in ME3 as we learn more about the Reapers & their motivations.

Second point. While in ME1 we know about the genophage, in ME2 a possible cure for the genophage is introduced in a more sophisticated fashion then "smash cure, stop Saren army". Not only is a possible cure introduced, we are given the context around that cure. The environment the Krogan survive in due to the genophate, the guilt of some Solarians, etc. By now we know that ME3 will involve organizing the galaxy to fight the Reapers. I would speculate that this issue will be at the heart of if the Krogan join on Shepards side, or some other factor we do not know. Without ME2 we would lose most of the information players have and the context of that information. It is one thing to be told by the codex that Solarians are trying to cure the Krogan & the Krogans suffer because of the genophage. It is another to experiance that situation.

Third point. This will be short as the same arguments for my second point can be made here. ME2 provides more information, and context more importantly, about the Geth & Quarian situation. The player's involvment with the Quarians end with their Admiralty aruging over war wih the Geth. It is not far-fetched to believe this will be a major component of the ME3 plot.

Those three points were the practical uses of the ME2 plot. Context, information and providing the foundation for the ME3 plot.

I absolutely agree. That is why ME2 critically benefits ME3. Of course, some players may choose to skip loyalty missions and potentially miss your 2nd and 3rd points, but their presence remains as a scenesetter for what's to come.

And I apologize, I actually caught the vibe that you didn't agree on ME2 being relevant to the trilogy.

[kaiki01]

Apology accepted
On this post let it be known that BSN had peace in its' time.

[The Spamming Troll]

sponge56 wrote...

I don't understand why this is still going on, its like people are ignoring everyone who quotes the fact that as the second act it follows the general rule of trilogies. You can say that you didn't like the plot but you can't say it was pointless. I don't even think this is even debatable

so the second act in any trilogy doesnt need to be any good, just because of the simply fact that its the "second act in a trilogy?"

ME2 did nothing for me in terms of story. it didnt do much for me in terms of anything, except warpbombs. ME2 was primarily sidequests and if something like helping some random quarian find her lost daddy can somehow miraculously save two entire species from years of oppression and alomst certain war, then YES, ME2 was worth it for me to play.

ME2 = super mario brothers 2

[Jonathan Shepard]

Cainne Chapel wrote...

Well using that logic, its basically like saying, why read the first and middle chapters of the book? Skip to the last chapter and read the epilogue and you'll get everything you need out of it.

or.... Read the Cliff Notes.

So I ask you... why do we need ME1 or ME2 if I can just play ME3 and boom have it all wrapped up in one game?

If Casey Hudson's new favorite saying is to be trusted: "It's the best place to start!"
Then, no, we don't need the first two games. In fact, you should really consider them more like "Mass Effect Prologue," and "Mass Effect side story with name-drops."

Fortunately, we know that Casey just likes to market the game to everyone and will lie through his teeth to make Mass Effect appeal to more people. Reference: The side-boob incident.

I'm not worried about tying in ME2... I'm worried about the logic behind Cerberus being "indoctrinated."

[Jonathan Shepard]

Neo Hex Omega wrote...

Mass Effect 2 is the set up, and Mass Effect 3 is the pay off.

So, in the end, the quality of the second game hinges upon the quality of the third, and how well it utilizes the set up material.

Set-up, joke, then: 
AWKWARD!!!

-cough-
South park references aside,
I also agree with the whole socio-political climate set-up. 

[Dave666]

For myself, I was hoping to find out information about the Reapers that would be actually useful. We learned that the Reapers are Synthetic-Organic Hybrids, great, how does this help us defeat them again? We learned that the last dregs of the Protheans were re-purposed into the Collectors, wonderful, and this helps us how?

We had this fantastic opportunity to learn about how the Reapers went about their last Cycle via the Prothean Beacons and we even had a protagonist who understood the Prothean Language and what did we do with it?

[Fiery Phoenix]

marshalleck wrote...

They needed filler.

In the simplest of words, this, basically.

That being said, ME2 wasn't really as irrelevant as you're making it out to be, but whatever.

[theelementslayer]

Well, I agree with Phedon or however his name is spelled. Look at it this way, we havent played the 3rd so how do we know its out of place. Or lets bring back my favorite example of how ME is following the style of a great trilogy, maybe even the best, Lord of The Rings.

1. Introduce characters and threats, fight off a vanguard of that certain evil, be introduced to the problem:
ME1-The reapers, Shepard, your main team, the galaxy. You fought off soverign, you were introduced to the reapers.
LoTR1-You fought off a bit of saramons (not right spelling) troops, and you got introduced to the main characters, the conflict and the ultimate bad guys. You fight off a vanguard for sarun, the ringwraiths, or riders or whatever they are called

2: You get a bit more in depth, you fight off a larger agent of the bad guy that you didnt know "existed". You get a bit mor ein depth with the story, however the main storyline doesnt change.

ME2: The collectors. You figure them out and defeat them, you get a bit more into the relationships of everyone on the planets.
LoTR 2: You are introduced to the riders of Rohan, you fight off a large army of saruns, (his minion saroman, you get a but more in depth but the plot doesnt change) Frodo still is walking towards that mountain.

3. YOu wrap up the main storyline, and the people introduced in the second will come into play

ME3: Probably will wrap it up with crazy awesome fighting with some of the things you figured out in ME2.
LoTR3: They certainly did this. The hobbits wrapped it up, the Riders of Rohan played a pivotal role in the battle of gondor, sarun was defeated.

Its just following any good trilogy overarching storyline, bottom line we dont know if it was useless until we play the last one
LoTR3