125 réponses à ce sujet

[Malanek]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

first let me say, i dont care about ME2. im talking about ME3. and in ME3 we already know our squadmates wont work like we are all familiar with. does captain anderson have overload???? what is my poor adept gonig to do after the trial in ME3 gets bombarded by reapers, when i dont have a squadmate with overload? use my pistol!!??!?!???! your definition of adept falls along the lines of what squadmats i have along with me. thats not a good design when your the only class that needs things in order to become an adept. even if youve accepted that by now or not.

You're making a statement on how squuadmates will work based on what is probably the first mission of the game? It likely equates the tutorial where you wake up on the cerberus base in ME2. The ME series is a squad based shooter/arpg. Squadmates will almost certainly work in a way that is similar to what we are familiar with. 

[MELTOR13]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

how does a vangaurds gameplay change from veteran to insanity? oh, it doesnt.

Except, it does. 

Shockwave becomes God Mode on Veteran, and Charge becomes worse because enemies always fly away from you. Pull can be used on basically anyone and everyone, so you're better off Pulling people towards you than Charging unprotected enemies only to have them fly away so you have to run them down. Cryo Ammo provides immediate freezing potential and is probably better than Incendiary ammo on Veteran because IA wastes it's armor bonus damage on people that don't have armor. What's the use in the 'fire dance' that IA provides when you can just freeze every enemy and get the double damage bonus on them. 

Do you think before you post?<_<

[The Spamming Troll]

i really dont see what your trying to point out to me by saying im playing the adept wrong. did i miss something along the way when i played my adept on insanity? personally, id love to see an excplanation as to how you think im playing the adept wrong.

but, if you want to classify my arguments based off the name i chose for this forum, then so be it.

[InvaderErl]

sbvera13 wrote...

InvaderErl wrote...

 I felt the ME1 world was a bit stale honestly until ME2 fleshed out these broad stroakes that had been painted prior.

I can see where that comes from, there is only so much you can squeeze into gameplay.  That's why I mentioned the codex.  I mean, when you read about ship design and how the pressure/habitation hull is squeezed in under the exterior/armor hull, and then you look at the Normandy airlock and can see the distance between the interior and exterior hull and actually walk through it, it's a stunning moment of "Oh, wow.  They actually built the game world according to it's own rules."  This is a sci-fi fans' wet dream.  Although the details are light, they are there, and they are consistent.  This is why ME1 holds it's own weight to me.  Even the small artistic details match up with the written and dialogue desriptions.  Put the epic story into this environment and it comes alive.

ME2 changed so many premises that it took the wind out of the entire universe for me.  The character backstories add depth, and I liked them all (Mordin's especially).  However, the gritty, I-can-get-my-hands on this world doesn't exist anymore, because reloading ammo, cloaking devices, holographic armor, kinetic accelerator guns that sound and look like lasers and shooting-everything-that-moves was more important then creating an immersive environment.  Also, I should note, a distinctive and MARKETABLE IP environment.

See the thing is ME1 had a bad case of telling and not showing. For a game that dumps SO much info onto the player its remarkable how little of its supposed scope we actually see. The Presidium  is the only populated alien location that Shepard visits and its incredibly sterile and devoid of personality other than peaceful/boring. Otherwise we're bumping around human held worlds for the length of the entire game save Iilos and Virmire which are both not inhabitated by anyone save enemy Geth.

We're told as a pureblood Liara is seen as inferior but we don't see it, we're told the Krogan race is dying and in decline but we don't see it, we're told about the conditions on the Migrant fleet but we don't see it, we're told Salarians have to live faster than everyone else because of their lifespans but we don't see it.

Over and over again throughout ME1 the game just tells you things in this sort of abstract manner that ultimately I didn't feel as if I was in the' sci fi fan wet dream' because I care less about how thrusters in your universe work, that's not why I watch sci-fi, but rather what kind of stories can you tell and with what kind of characters in this world you created. In ME1 it was as if I was listening to somebody explain how cool and inventive this universe they were writing about was without any substance to back that up.

It was in ME2 when we finally got to see what it means to be a Salarian, or a Krogan or a Pureblood, or an AI and I could finally interact and be a part of all these cool things that were relegated to a codex that finally it felt like a universe that was worth saving.

Modifié par InvaderErl, 30 juin 2011 - 09:54 .

[The Spamming Troll]

Malanek999 wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

first let me say, i dont care about ME2. im talking about ME3. and in ME3 we already know our squadmates wont work like we are all familiar with. does captain anderson have overload???? what is my poor adept gonig to do after the trial in ME3 gets bombarded by reapers, when i dont have a squadmate with overload? use my pistol!!??!?!???! your definition of adept falls along the lines of what squadmats i have along with me. thats not a good design when your the only class that needs things in order to become an adept. even if youve accepted that by now or not.

You're making a statement on how squuadmates will work based on what is probably the first mission of the game? It likely equates the tutorial where you wake up on the cerberus base in ME2. The ME series is a squad based shooter/arpg. Squadmates will almost certainly work in a way that is similar to what we are familiar with. 

ok, and you just assumed something as well! so whose assumptions are wrong? the devs made a point to say "squadmats wont work like your familiar with from ME1 and ME2."

im going off what ive sene and what i know, not what im hopeing for.

MELTOR13 wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

how does a vangaurds gameplay change from veteran to insanity? oh, it doesnt.

Except, it does. 

Shockwave
becomes God Mode on Veteran, and Charge becomes worse because enemies
always fly away from you. Pull can be used on basically anyone and
everyone, so you're better off Pulling people towards you than Charging
unprotected enemies only to have them fly away so you have to run them
down. Cryo Ammo provides immediate freezing potential and is probably
better than Incendiary ammo on Veteran because IA wastes it's armor
bonus damage on people that don't have armor. What's the use in the
'fire dance' that IA provides when you can just freeze every enemy and
get the double damage bonus on them. 

Do you think before you post?[smilie]../../../../images/forum/emoticons/angry.png[/smilie]

woah!!!! shockwave sucks on insanity?!?!? holy cow, who isnt aware of that???

playing a vanguard isnt about using shockwave, its about CQC. if enemy protectiosn stopped CQC, then wed have something tom compare.

[MELTOR13]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

i really dont see what your trying to point out to me by saying im playing the adept wrong. did i miss something along the way when i played my adept on insanity? personally, id love to see an excplanation as to how you think im playing the adept wrong.

but, if you want to classify my arguments based off the name i chose for this forum, then so be it.

Technically there isn't a 'wrong' way to play a class...you can do it however you want and beat the game, it's not hard enough to punish playstyles that badly. 

You are inefficient in your playstyle if you are only using singularity and warp. 

It would be akin to a person who chooses to drive a Ford Excursion complaining about their miles per gallon.

[MELTOR13]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

woah!!!! shockwave sucks on insanity?!?!? holy cow, who isnt aware of that???

playing a vanguard isnt about using shockwave, its about CQC. if enemy protectiosn stopped CQC, then wed have something tom compare.

Except CQC doesn't work well when you have to run across the map to every enemey that you've just charged because he flies across the level. Again, what's the point in charging someone so that you can get in close only to have them be launched away from you? Charge isn't an efficient power on Veteran and lower. Shockwave IS.

You asked how a Vanguard's playstyle differed from Veteran to Insanity. I gave a well-thought out answer. You replied with insults and disregard your original question. And you wonder why people have a hard time with you. 

[sp0ck 06]

InvaderErl wrote...

sbvera13 wrote...

InvaderErl wrote...

 I felt the ME1 world was a bit stale honestly until ME2 fleshed out these broad stroakes that had been painted prior.

I can see where that comes from, there is only so much you can squeeze into gameplay.  That's why I mentioned the codex.  I mean, when you read about ship design and how the pressure/habitation hull is squeezed in under the exterior/armor hull, and then you look at the Normandy airlock and can see the distance between the interior and exterior hull and actually walk through it, it's a stunning moment of "Oh, wow.  They actually built the game world according to it's own rules."  This is a sci-fi fans' wet dream.  Although the details are light, they are there, and they are consistent.  This is why ME1 holds it's own weight to me.  Even the small artistic details match up with the written and dialogue desriptions.  Put the epic story into this environment and it comes alive.

ME2 changed so many premises that it took the wind out of the entire universe for me.  The character backstories add depth, and I liked them all (Mordin's especially).  However, the gritty, I-can-get-my-hands on this world doesn't exist anymore, because reloading ammo, cloaking devices, holographic armor, kinetic accelerator guns that sound and look like lasers and shooting-everything-that-moves was more important then creating an immersive environment.  Also, I should note, a distinctive and MARKETABLE IP environment.

See the thing is ME1 had a bad case of telling and not showing. For a game that dumps SO much info onto the player its remarkable how little of its supposed scope we actually see. The Presidium  is the only populated alien location that Shepard visits and its incredibly sterile and devoid of personality other than peaceful/boring. Otherwise we're bumping around human held worlds for the length of the entire game save Iilos and Virmire which are both not inhabitated by anyone save enemy Geth.

We're told as a pureblood Liara is seen as inferior but we don't see it, we're told the Krogan race is dying and in decline but we don't see it, we're told about the conditions on the Migrant fleet but we don't see it, we're told Salarians have to live faster than everyone else because of their lifespans but we don't see it.

Over and over again throughout ME1 the game just tells you things in this sort of abstract manner that ultimately I didn't feel as if I was in the' sci fi fan wet dream' because I care less about how thrusters in your universe work, that's not why I watch sci-fi, but rather what kind of stories can you tell and with what kind of characters in this world you created. In ME1 it was as if I was listening to somebody explain how cool and inventive this universe they were writing about was without any substance to back that up.

It was in ME2 when we finally got to see what it means to be a Salarian, or a Krogan or a Pureblood, or an AI and I could finally interact and be a part of all these cool things that were relegated to a codex that finally it felt like a universe that was worth saving.

This x100000000

So true.

[Malanek]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

first let me say, i dont care about ME2. im talking about ME3. and in ME3 we already know our squadmates wont work like we are all familiar with. does captain anderson have overload???? what is my poor adept gonig to do after the trial in ME3 gets bombarded by reapers, when i dont have a squadmate with overload? use my pistol!!??!?!???! your definition of adept falls along the lines of what squadmats i have along with me. thats not a good design when your the only class that needs things in order to become an adept. even if youve accepted that by now or not.

You're making a statement on how squuadmates will work based on what is probably the first mission of the game? It likely equates the tutorial where you wake up on the cerberus base in ME2. The ME series is a squad based shooter/arpg. Squadmates will almost certainly work in a way that is similar to what we are familiar with. 

ok, and you just assumed something as well! so whose assumptions are wrong? the devs made a point to say "squadmats wont work like your familiar with from ME1 and ME2."

im going off what ive sene and what i know, not what im hopeing for.

Well actually we have seen other videos with two squadmates. I think the assumption I am making is extremely safe.

[sbvera13]

InvaderErl wrote...

See the thing is ME1 had a bad case of telling and not showing....We're told as a pureblood Liara is seen as inferior but we don't see it, we're told the Krogan race is dying and in decline but we don't see it, we're told about the conditions on the Migrant fleet but we don't see it, we're told Salarians have to live faster than everyone else because of their lifespans but we don't see it.

All true, but even so I saw it.  I saw (heard?) it in Liara's voice acting when she shamefully admits she's pureblood.  I saw it in Wrex's strangely self-defeating anger when he's telling Shepard about giving up on his people.  I saw it in Nihilus' silent, stunned expression when he sees the recording of Sovereign, something clearly beyond anything he's ever imagined.  I saw it int he Salarian Councillor's meek subservience to the other two, overwhelmed by their colelctive experience and never stating a strong opinion without their support.  Like Babylon 5, the living universe is all there, seen in the effects it has on the characters.  Like any good fiction, it's the characters that live in the world and bring life to the fiction.  Writers know this, and for a bried moment (Most of ME1) I thought that game developers were learning it as well.  Or at least, hiring good writers.  Didn't last though.

Modifié par sbvera13, 30 juin 2011 - 10:05 .

[InvaderErl]

sbvera13 wrote...

InvaderErl wrote...

See the thing is ME1 had a bad case of telling and not showing....We're told as a pureblood Liara is seen as inferior but we don't see it, we're told the Krogan race is dying and in decline but we don't see it, we're told about the conditions on the Migrant fleet but we don't see it, we're told Salarians have to live faster than everyone else because of their lifespans but we don't see it.

All true, but even so I saw it.  I saw (heard?) it in Liara's voice acting when she shamefully admits she's pureblood.  I saw it in Wrex's strangely self-defeating anger when he's telling Shepard about giving up on his people.  I saw it in Nihilus' silent, stunned expression when he sees the recording of Sovereign, something clearly beyond anything he's ever imagined.  Like Babylon 5, the living universe is all there, seen in the effects it has on the characters.  Like any good fiction, it's the characters that live in the world and bring life to the fiction.  Writers know this, and for a bried moment (Most of ME1) I thought that game developers were learning it as well.  Or at least, hiring good writers.  Didn't last though.

I like the Nihilus bit you mentioned as well though in the case of Liara it would have been much more interesting had she been called a pureblood by an Asari and then her explaining it rather than just info dumping it on Shepard because the writers were infodumping which is something the first Mass Effect does a lot. ME2 takes a more dynamic and less static kind of approach for the most part, with us actually seeing things rather than just hearing about them and it was likely that approach being more involved and hands-on with the texture of the Mass Effect universe that spoke to me as opposed to lots of texts being in the codex.

Modifié par InvaderErl, 30 juin 2011 - 10:17 .

[The Spamming Troll]

Sorry your explanation was weak. As if the after effects of charge is something to complain about?!?!

Now thatd be like someone complaining about having to poop after eating a meal.

[sbvera13]

InvaderErl wrote...

I like the Nihilus bit you mentioned as well though in the case of Liara it would have been much more interesting had she been called a pureblood by an Asari and then her explaining it rather than just info dumping it on Shepard because the writers were infodumping which is something the first Mass Effect does a lot. ME2 takes a more dynamic and less static kind of approach for the most part, with us actually seeing things rather than just hearing about them and it was likely that approach being more involved and hands-on with the texture of the Mass Effect universe that spoke to me.

True enough, but at least it was there.  Part of the problem is the lack of plot in the second (paragon interrupt: ok, Bioware, I understand you've been abused, but please step away from the BIG RED PLOT RESET BUTTON.  Nobody needs to die today...).  There are only 2 major plot revelations, and one of them is extremely minor and comes early in the game with minimal or no impact (fate of the protheans).  The second one comes at the very end with little explanation, and only the vaguest of foreshadowing.  ME2 is all about characters, and the individual loyalty missions DO stack up in storytelling quality with the best of the genre.   The game as a whole lost a magic something though, it feels separated into separate elements and characters and not integrated into one experience.  I suppose my complaints about gameplay mechanics that take away from the living universe (thermal clips? blech) is an extension of my dissatisfaction with the overal presentation.

Modifié par sbvera13, 30 juin 2011 - 10:18 .

[InvaderErl]

I can understand if you're more invested in those technical aspects that those getting toyed with can be a downer, I just ultimately don't have that perspective. I'd be upset if the Normandy started traveling through time or a transporter suddenly showed up but things like how the cooldown fits into the "world" is just something I have never been able to feel upset about regardless of what sci fi we're talking about - that's not why I brought my ticket so to speak.

As for the plot:

sbvera13 wrote...
ME2 is all about characters, and the individual loyalty missions DO stack up in storytelling quality with the best of the genre.

Ultimately that was enough for me. The vignette approach was a risk and it seems to have worked for the most part (especially when you consider the critical response as opposed to DA2 which also tried to break away from traditional Bioware plot structure) but not without some degree of criticism about the Collector plot that serves as a framework for all of these disparate stories to fit into.

Modifié par InvaderErl, 30 juin 2011 - 10:28 .

[DaveExclamationMarkYognaut]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Sorry your explanation was weak. As if the after effects of charge is something to complain about?!?!

Now thatd be like someone complaining about having to poop after eating a meal.

It's generally nice if the power designed to put you at close range puts you at close range. Although it doesn't really matter that much anyway if your run eviscerator.

On topic, I'm not that much of a fan of the global cooldown either. Although it makes for some really fun vanguard gameplay to spam charge, the other classes (most notably solider and infiltrator) are hurt by having one of their powers often being the strictly best power to use in a given situation. Multiple cooldowns can be fast as well, because of the opportunity cost issue - if I'm a vanguard using pull on people while I'm waiting for my charge to cooldown, that's time I'm not spending blasting the people I just charged into in the face. Really, Bioware should just playtest a bunch of different cooldown builds and see what's the most fun.

[MELTOR13]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Sorry your explanation was weak. As if the after effects of charge is something to complain about?!?!

Now thatd be like someone complaining about having to poop after eating a meal.

Speaking of weak excuses.....

I like how you didn't provide any counter to my points other than 'that was weak'. Solid. 

I give. It's completely pointless to argue with you. 

[The Spamming Troll]

Malanek999 wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

first let me say, i dont care about ME2. im talking about ME3. and in ME3 we already know our squadmates wont work like we are all familiar with. does captain anderson have overload???? what is my poor adept gonig to do after the trial in ME3 gets bombarded by reapers, when i dont have a squadmate with overload? use my pistol!!??!?!???! your definition of adept falls along the lines of what squadmats i have along with me. thats not a good design when your the only class that needs things in order to become an adept. even if youve accepted that by now or not.

You're making a statement on how squuadmates will work based on what is probably the first mission of the game? It likely equates the tutorial where you wake up on the cerberus base in ME2. The ME series is a squad based shooter/arpg. Squadmates will almost certainly work in a way that is similar to what we are familiar with. 

ok, and you just assumed something as well! so whose assumptions are wrong? the devs made a point to say "squadmats wont work like your familiar with from ME1 and ME2."

im going off what ive sene and what i know, not what im hopeing for.

Well actually we have seen other videos with two squadmates. I think the assumption I am making is extremely safe.

right, and theres plenty of people around here who are under the impression that squadmates are only going to be available on their home worlds. so whats my adept to do then???

its far too easy for me to get off topic and i apologize for that. maybe im just a little more passionate about biotics then i should be.

[The Spamming Troll]

MELTOR13 wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Sorry your explanation was weak. As if the after effects of charge is something to complain about?!?!

Now thatd be like someone complaining about having to poop after eating a meal.

Speaking of weak excuses.....

I like how you didn't provide any counter to my points other than 'that was weak'. Solid. 

I give. It's completely pointless to argue with you. 

if your familiar with my name, you should be familiar with the excuses.

its really not hard to give a counter argument to "enemy protections are meaningless to an adept."

anyways, im sure i wont miss our conversations.

[DaveExclamationMarkYognaut]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

its really not hard to give a counter argument to "enemy protections are meaningless to an adept."

I'd sure hope they aren't meaningless, because there wouldn't be a point of them existing otherwise. But Adepts have singularity, warp, guns, and potentially stuff like flashbang or stasis. So enemy armor hardly eliminates them from the fight.

See also:

I will agree with you that a lot of Adept's powers are "win more" abilities on Insanity - pull, throw, and shockwave are all situational fight enders that are redundant with singularity on this difficulty level. But they aren't particularly worse off than any other class in terms of what abilities are actually useful in a given fight. class ability + warp + singularity + squad power is plenty of options in ME2 terms.

[The Spamming Troll]

DaveExclamationMarkYognaut wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

its really not hard to give a counter argument to "enemy protections are meaningless to an adept."

I'd sure hope they aren't meaningless, because there wouldn't be a point of them existing otherwise. But Adepts have singularity, warp, guns, and potentially stuff like flashbang or stasis. So enemy armor hardly eliminates them from the fight.

See also:

I will agree with you that a lot of Adept's powers are "win more" abilities on Insanity - pull, throw, and shockwave are all situational fight enders that are redundant with singularity on this difficulty level. But they aren't particularly worse off than any other class in terms of what abilities are actually useful in a given fight. class ability + warp + singularity + squad power is plenty of options in ME2 terms.

i would hope a video giving the most elite way of accomplishing a level would be exactly that. its essentially a walkthrough video. its not a video about adepts being awesome with biotics, its a video of the game forgetting to be challenging.  the cover he hides behind isnt random. hes picking specific points because he knows he wont die because of it. do you want more of that in ME3? someone will no doubt point out bozos vids, but those videos arent one adept, they are multiple adepts with multiple builds. an adept would be great if it had the AR, sniper, stasis, barrier, and dominate, but it doesnt. although its not enough for me to show me the best "adept on horizon"
video, when a minority of people attempted to play that way. ...well maybe a minority, im pullin rabbits out of hats here.

id also say melee is enough of an option to beat ME2.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 30 juin 2011 - 11:39 .

[DaveExclamationMarkYognaut]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

DaveExclamationMarkYognaut wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

its really not hard to give a counter argument to "enemy protections are meaningless to an adept."

I'd sure hope they aren't meaningless, because there wouldn't be a point of them existing otherwise. But Adepts have singularity, warp, guns, and potentially stuff like flashbang or stasis. So enemy armor hardly eliminates them from the fight.

See also:

I will agree with you that a lot of Adept's powers are "win more" abilities on Insanity - pull, throw, and shockwave are all situational fight enders that are redundant with singularity on this difficulty level. But they aren't particularly worse off than any other class in terms of what abilities are actually useful in a given fight. class ability + warp + singularity + squad power is plenty of options in ME2 terms.

i would hope a video giving the most elite way of accomplishing a level would be exactly that. its essentially a walkthrough video. although its not enough for me to show me the best "adept on horizon" video, when a minority of people attempted to play that way. the cover he hides behind isnt random. hes picking specific points because he knows he wont die because of it. do you want more of that in ME3? someone will no doubt point out bozos vids, but those videos arent one adept, they are multiple adepts with multiple builds. an adept would be great if it had the AR, sniper, stasis, barrier, and dominate, but it doesnt.

id also say melee is enough of an option to beat ME2.

ThatAverageGatsby's "Adepting Through Insanity" videos are  a series showing you how to use the full range of options the adept class has. So this is more of a case study for a larger set of tips than just a walkthrough. If you don't think Adept is viable as an option on Insanity, I strongly encourage you to watch the videos because they demonsrate exactly how that class can be effective on any difficulty setting.

And yes, I would absolutely love if ME3's hardest difficulty setting required you to actually think strategically. It was incredibly fun to play Vanguard on Insanity, and ME3 would be a lot less fun if they replaced my hanging-on-by-a-thread charge-based gameplay with some easy "awesome button" bullsh*t. In other words, I want an actual challenge, not this.

Modifié par DaveExclamationMarkYognaut, 30 juin 2011 - 11:44 .

[Ace of Dawn]

sbvera13 wrote...

True enough, but at least it was there.  Part of the problem is the lack of plot in the second (paragon interrupt: ok, Bioware, I understand you've been abused, but please step away from the BIG RED PLOT RESET BUTTON.  Nobody needs to die today...).  There are only 2 major plot revelations, and one of them is extremely minor and comes early in the game with minimal or no impact (fate of the protheans).  The second one comes at the very end with little explanation, and only the vaguest of foreshadowing.  ME2 is all about characters, and the individual loyalty missions DO stack up in storytelling quality with the best of the genre.   The game as a whole lost a magic something though, it feels separated into separate elements and characters and not integrated into one experience.  I suppose my complaints about gameplay mechanics that take away from the living universe (thermal clips? blech) is an extension of my dissatisfaction with the overal presentation.

While I can understand your thoughts on the story, I would like to add how I viewed it, though this is more or less a Watsonian, or in-universe way, of seeing it. See, not every moment in a hero's life is a grand epic or masterfully written story. Sometimes, life is just a series of disjointed events that leads towards a common goal. Not every revelation needs to be universe-shattering. I always felt that Mass Effect 2 was an important story to tell. The Reapers had their own agenda, and the Collectors were the important part of it. But in the grand scheme of things, it wasn't galaxy impacting the same way Sovereign's goals were in the first one. I hate to say this, since it has bad implications, but ME2 was sort of a side story in the whole of the Mass Effect universe. Not that ME2 was poor for it.

In a way, it was comparable to the Battle of Stalingrad in World War 2. It was a battle that people are aware of, though not necessarily knowing all the details of it (though, if you do know the details, more power to you, but please let me make a point! ) It was in retrospect a turning point. But at the end of the day, we only know World War 2 as a whole, over its finer nuances.

But that's just how I viewed it. It was turning point in it all, though not all turning points are grand and clear.

[sbvera13]

Ace of Dawn wrote...
...
But that's just how I viewed it. It was turning point in it all, though not all turning points are grand and clear.

Very much true.  I went into ME2 expecting the second act of a trilogy, which by nature and tradition is slower and darker then the opening or closing acts, and delves deeper into character motivations and personal demons.  On that count, it delivered. However, it's tie-in to the overall plot was weak, which in turn deprived the character development of a lot of it's power.  The Big Red Reset button that was the Lazarus Project was a big red flag the moment I first saw it.  When fiction resorts to reset buttons, it's generally a bad sign for plot development.

What it did have, I admit, was well written and sets a high standard compared to gaming in general. The potential of the characters, the universe, and what it could have done to the gaming industry from a storytelling/artistic standpoint have fallen sadly short.  It's like watching The Fellowship of the Ring, waiting a year for the sequel, and getting Pirates of The Carribean: Dead Man's chest instead.  Victim of it's own hype cliche, yes yes and all that, but I walk away saddened by opportunities lost every time I play the 2nd game.  That applies to gameplay as well (if not more), since it has the foundations of an exceptional squad-based shooter, something that is rare, amazing, and almost impossible to find in the gaming industry.  They "streamlined" that potential right out of the game as well.  Using global cooldowns as a crutch for actual game balance, for example.  Even the level design was "streamlined", with every non-suicide mission not only having one path to completion, but also precious little exploration and side material as well.

[Ace of Dawn]

sbvera13 wrote...

Ace of Dawn wrote...
...
But that's just how I viewed it. It was turning point in it all, though not all turning points are grand and clear.

Very much true.  I went into ME2 expecting the second act of a trilogy, which by nature and tradition is slower and darker then the opening or closing acts, and delves deeper into character motivations and personal demons.  On that count, it delivered. However, it's tie-in to the overall plot was weak, which in turn deprived the character development of a lot of it's power.  The Big Red Reset button that was the Lazarus Project was a big red flag the moment I first saw it.  When fiction resorts to reset buttons, it's generally a bad sign for plot development.

What it did have, I admit, was well written and sets a high standard compared to gaming in general. The potential of the characters, the universe, and what it could have done to the gaming industry from a storytelling/artistic standpoint have fallen sadly short.  It's like watching The Fellowship of the Ring, waiting a year for the sequel, and getting Pirates of The Carribean: Dead Man's chest instead.  Victim of it's own hype cliche, yes yes and all that, but I walk away saddened by opportunities lost every time I play the 2nd game.  That applies to gameplay as well (if not more), since it has the foundations of an exceptional squad-based shooter, something that is rare, amazing, and almost impossible to find in the gaming industry.  They "streamlined" that potential right out of the game as well.  Using global cooldowns as a crutch for actual game balance, for example.  Even the level design was "streamlined", with every non-suicide mission not only having one path to completion, but also precious little exploration and side material as well.

I can agree with you abou the linearity of many levels. While for many side quests, it made sense, many story related missions seemed fairly straightforward.

Though with that said, that's where I think ME3 will "fail". The problem is that ME1 and ME2, while have many similarities, are divergent in many areas. And while many things are apparently being done to take it back to ME1's style, not everything can be compromised on. And while you walked away ME2 saddened, I prefer to go back to ME2 over ME1 for the differences. ME3 will likely lean towards one or the other. Unfortunately, not everyone can be pleased. Hopefully we'll all still walk away with at least some good fun out of it.

[sbvera13]

True on all counts. I'm naturally a pessimist, and a debater by hobby, so I love discussing and dissecting things, especially when I disagree them. I call this entertaining. On the whole, ME2 was a great game. I admit it. Mordin's story is one of my all time favorite gaming moments. However, I've been here trolling the forums all day instead of actually playing it. That means something I suppose.