Aller au contenu

Photo

Action over Story in Mass Effect 2 and 3


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
163 réponses à ce sujet

#101
celuloid

celuloid
  • Members
  • 277 messages

Gorosaur wrote...

Question: Do you consider the story of Han and Leia in Star Wars, Mary and Pippin in LOTR, Locke's struggle with faith in LOST part of the story?

Just because they are not part of the main plot does not cheapen side missions as being part of the game's story.


It cheapens if there are 12 of them all following the same pattern: Recruit and Loyalify. x12


The recruitment and loyalty missions all posess cinematics, dialogue, and indepth plots. The only difference being its character driven. Mass Effect 2 and opposed to the first game, is a character driven game. Like LOST the game centers its characters to drive the plot forward, but explores them at the same time. I'm not saying this was executed perfectly because some people have some valid complaints. However, claiming that these missions aren't the games plot for the reasons you gave is rediculous.



If it is a character-driven game, why don't I feel that its characters are important? In fact, they are pluggable at will.

"Lost the game"?
The show relied purely on obscurism to create any kind of plot, and in the end everyone met each other in heaven.
So lets say "Lost the game" somehow explores character-driven story that pushes plot forward. The only way ME2 pushes its plot forward is by incrementing counter X after you do character mission and when X > 3 holds true, the main plot pushes forward.

Modifié par celuloid, 27 juillet 2011 - 02:04 .


#102
Lumikki

Lumikki
  • Members
  • 4 239 messages

celuloid wrote...

Gorosaur wrote...

Question: Do you consider the story of Han and Leia in Star Wars, Mary and Pippin in LOTR, Locke's struggle with faith in LOST part of the story?

Just because they are not part of the main plot does not cheapen side missions as being part of the game's story.


It cheapens if there are 12 of them all following the same pattern: Recruit and Loyalify. x12

I agree. It's not that they are there, but when there is a lot of it, it turns too much focus to be something else.
How ever, same can be sayed also from ME1, those mako drivings in empty worlds.

Modifié par Lumikki, 27 juillet 2011 - 02:12 .


#103
AlanC9

AlanC9
  • Members
  • 35 816 messages

100k wrote...
By "forge", I believe he means train and discipline. Yes, you have a squad of professionals. But Shepard never gets them all together for a training run to allow each of them to stop working as individuals, and start working as a squad.


Hmm.. it'd be interesting, but OTOH doing that right would burn a fair amount of zots. I thought folks were already complaining that there isn't enough "plot" in ME2; wouldn't training exercises make that worse? Or would training exercises count as "plot"?

#104
Slayer299

Slayer299
  • Members
  • 3 193 messages
Lumikki, but the Mako trips through the side worlds was entirely optional. Feros, Noveria, Therum were all plot driven and pushed the story forward. The LM's in ME2 were repeatedly pressed to Shepard as mandatory for your squad to clear up before the SM but they didn't do anything to the main plot (such as it was) in ME2.

ME2 was supposed to be a character driven story it seems, but the char's didn't drive the story any, they each lived in their own universe separate from everyone else including the plot.

edit - mistype

Modifié par Slayer299, 27 juillet 2011 - 02:29 .


#105
Arppis

Arppis
  • Members
  • 12 750 messages
The game has absolutely awesome mix of action and dialogue, for me that is. I wouldn't go and change it too much. Well, I do wish there would be more dialogue heavy missions.

Which reminds me... I wish Mass Effect would have "dialogue points". You could spend them for charm or intimidate dialogue options. When you use either of those actions, you would lose some. You could get more points by level ups and doing some side quests or something... It would give those blue and red options meaning again and it would add to the gameplay.

#106
100k

100k
  • Members
  • 3 152 messages

Lumikki wrote...

100k wrote...

By "forge", I believe he means train and discipline. Yes, you have a squad of professionals. But Shepard never gets them all together for a training run to allow each of them to stop working as individuals, and start working as a squad.

How was ME1 any different?


Yes and no. ME1 didn't have anywhere near the focus on recruitment that ME2 had. The characters you met, you met within the first two hours of the game, and they stuck with you. You all had a single goal that wasn't hampered by loyalty missions: kill Saren. The people that were with you were all disciplined, trained, and already willing to follow orders (even Wrex), because they all wanted a piece of Saren.

Garrus, as an officer wanted to arrest or kill Saren.
Wrex, as a bounty hunter, wanted to simply kill Saren.
Ash/Kaiden wanted revenge for being the VS, and seeing what happened at Eden Prime.
Tali was ambushed by Saren.
Liara's mother was controlled by Saren.

And of course Shepard, whose perspective of Saren is to arrest or kill, because of what Saren does from start to finish of the game.

You see, Saren is the immoveable center of Mass Effect's original plot thesis, even before the Reapers are introduced: capture or kill Saren. Every character in the game knows who he is, and why he should be stopped. 

The Collectors should've been the same way in ME2-- an immoveable center that the game gravitates towards. Instead we see them four times in the game, they are silent, and it is later discovered that they aren't really evil. They're just enslaved protheans without minds. 

However, Shepard probably should've trained his original squad in ME1 as well. I guess the counter argument there is that he/she didn't really need to. No one on his squad displays rebellious and uncooperative attitudes, except Wrex, and even the krogan is a masterful professional. 

#107
Lumikki

Lumikki
  • Members
  • 4 239 messages

Slayer299 wrote...

Lumikki, but the Mako trips through the side worlds was entirely optional. Feros, Noveria, Therum were all plot driven and pushed the story forward. The LM's in ME2 were repeatedly pressed to Shepard as mandatory for your squad to clear up before the SM but they didn't do anything to the main plot (such as it was) in ME2.

ME2 was supposed to be a character driven story it seems, but the char's didn't drive the story any, they each lived in their own universe separate from everyone else including the plot.

edit - mistype

Yes, Mako driving is optional (fully), but so is most of recuit and loyalty missions. Yes, it does drive the story as well ME1 did, it's prespective thing, how you as player want to see it. If you expect story be A but it's B, then you see it wrong way.

#108
Lumikki

Lumikki
  • Members
  • 4 239 messages

100k wrote...


That's because you are looking PERSONAL connection, when ME2 doesn't have one. ME2 has PROFESSIONAL connection.

The Collectors should've been ....

Here is your issue. You are day dreaming as wishing somethign else than it REALLY is. You are unable to accept story as it is. That creates the issues you have. I could understand if story telling it self would not worked well, but that's not the case in ME2. The issue seem to be player wanting different story..

Modifié par Lumikki, 27 juillet 2011 - 03:01 .


#109
100k

100k
  • Members
  • 3 152 messages

AlanC9 wrote...Hmm.. it'd be interesting, but OTOH doing that right would burn a fair amount of zots. I thought folks were already complaining that there isn't enough "plot" in ME2; wouldn't training exercises make that worse? Or would training exercises count as "plot"?


Not at all. The training sessions would have been 100% plot integral, because the thesis of ME2 is to stop the Collectors. Training would've been an essential part of the story. Turning your ragged bunch of misfits into a well oiled machine would've been not only key, but highly entertaining. 

Every character would be assured survival of the SM after a certain level of success within the training sessions. This means that their survival wouldn't depend on something that didn't make any sense, like not killing Sidonis, or blowing up Telten, but rather how well team mates worked together.

On top of this, completing training sessions with good marks would allow Shepard's squad to develop new weapon, tech, and biotic skills. Samara trains with Jacob? She learns the ability to use a shotgun, and he learns to use new biotic attacks. You use Miranda as a fire team leader during these sessions enough times? She gains the respect of many of her crew mates, and can give squad bonuses. Shepard and Grunt training together with heavy weapons? Suddenly Grunt has the ability to carry a Cain (which he would only use when the player tells him to). 

This would've been superb for building squad banter, and it would be perfectly reasonable to assume that an NPC could survive the Collector assault if they were trained. 

Add the loyalty missions could stay in the game, as great looks into alien culture, and personal history, without eclipsing the focus of the main game.

Modifié par 100k, 27 juillet 2011 - 03:07 .


#110
100k

100k
  • Members
  • 3 152 messages

Lumikki wrote...

100k wrote...


That's because you are looking PERSONAL connection, when ME2 doesn't have one. ME2 has PROFESSIONAL connection.


You have only to play ME2 to know that it wants one to enjoy the characters in the game on a very personal level. For the most part, if succeeds. ME2's 'professional level' only applies to a handful of your squad mates. Jack isn't a professional. Neither is Grunt. Nor Legion. 

Here is your issue. You are day dreaming as wishing somethign else than it REALLY is. You are unable to accept story as it is. That creates the issues you have.


This is not a question of ideal wishes, but an explanation of how good story telling works universally. If you want the player/viewer/reader to side with the protagonist against the antagonist(s), you need to flesh out why. How bad are the bad guys? How good are the good guys? An off hand comment about Collector abductions of human colonies doesn't make the player feel bad for the humans. Watching a woman being ground into dust in a Collector pod is a big step in the right direction...but it is introduced within the final ten minutes of the game. 
The Collectors work for the Reapers? Great, lets work with that! Wait wait wait...the Collectors are enslaved by the Reapers? Well, how are they the bad guys again. 

You can create a moral grey for the antagonists and their condition for the story. But then the protagonist needs to voice it. 

So, we can change your original quote from this:

The issue seem to be player wanting different story.


to this:

The issue seem to be player wanting a story.


Modifié par 100k, 27 juillet 2011 - 03:08 .


#111
Slayer299

Slayer299
  • Members
  • 3 193 messages

Lumikki wrote...

Yes, Mako driving is optional (fully), but so is most of recuit and loyalty missions. Yes, it does drive the story as well ME1 did, it's prespective thing, how you as player want to see it. If you expect story be A but it's B, then you see it wrong way.


The LM's were technically optional, but how many times was it told to Shepard your team would die if they weren't *focuse*? I disagree about seeing it the wrong way. It's not a matter of how I want to see the story as A instead of B, but there was no A in ME2, it was 90% (recruit and LM's). I know Casey said that the char's *were* the story, but they didn't *drive* the story forward, they seemed to be seperate from it.

If even *some* of the char's has moved the plot forward somehow with either the Coll or the Reapers I think that would have addressed a lot of what people are saying about there was little to no story in ME2.

#112
Buckwheat530

Buckwheat530
  • Members
  • 48 messages
I'm not sure what the complaints about LMs are for. Some of them have no direct impact on the story, but there were quite a few(Legion's, Tali's, Thane's, Mordin's, Grunt's, ect) WILL have visible effects in ME3. The LMs also(for the most part) dictate if a given character will die or not in the Suicide Mission. Yes, they aren't necessary to as long as Shepard survives, but having them around could make portions of ME3 easier on you. Other missions can change the way a character acts if they survive(Garrus, Jack, Miranda). I know those aren't as big of things, but the custom fit your game to you.

The nice thing about ME2 was that you get to RP your Shepard in non-galaxy shattering events and still have a reason that you aren't rushing off into the Omega 4(either your crew isn't prepared or you don't have the IFF needed to survive the trip).

#113
Eurhetemec

Eurhetemec
  • Members
  • 815 messages

celuloid wrote...

It cheapens if there are 12 of them all following the same pattern: Recruit and Loyalify. x12


I don't agree with all of what you're saying, and I still think ME2 is ahead, but yeah, the fact that they all worked exactly the same way was kind of weak. A bit more variation would have been nice.

If it is a character-driven game, why don't I feel that its characters are important? In fact, they are pluggable at will.


The same is true in ME1. Wrex doesn't matter. Garrus doesn't matter. Tali doesn't matter. All of them could have been NPCs who were only with you for "their" mission as it were, and the game would have been virtually identical.

I would say that all twelve of the squadmembers in ME2 has more depth than Wrex/Tali/Garrus/Liara do in ME1. Liara, much as I like her, is pretty much a one-note character in ME1, and she's only plot-important for her Vulcan Mind Melds in the end. So in terms of characters, ME2 is very very far ahead.

So whilst I think some of your criticisms have weight, "pluggable" characters doesn't. It's true of both ME games so far.

#114
levannar

levannar
  • Members
  • 160 messages

100k wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...Hmm.. it'd be interesting, but OTOH doing that right would burn a fair amount of zots. I thought folks were already complaining that there isn't enough "plot" in ME2; wouldn't training exercises make that worse? Or would training exercises count as "plot"?


Not at all. The training sessions would have been 100% plot integral, because the thesis of ME2 is to stop the Collectors. Training would've been an essential part of the story. Turning your ragged bunch of misfits into a well oiled machine would've been not only key, but highly entertaining. 

Every character would be assured survival of the SM after a certain level of success within the training sessions. This means that their survival wouldn't depend on something that didn't make any sense, like not killing Sidonis, or blowing up Telten, but rather how well team mates worked together.

On top of this, completing training sessions with good marks would allow Shepard's squad to develop new weapon, tech, and biotic skills. Samara trains with Jacob? She learns the ability to use a shotgun, and he learns to use new biotic attacks. You use Miranda as a fire team leader during these sessions enough times? She gains the respect of many of her crew mates, and can give squad bonuses. Shepard and Grunt training together with heavy weapons? Suddenly Grunt has the ability to carry a Cain (which he would only use when the player tells him to). 

This would've been superb for building squad banter, and it would be perfectly reasonable to assume that an NPC could survive the Collector assault if they were trained. 

Add the loyalty missions could stay in the game, as great looks into alien culture, and personal history, without eclipsing the focus of the main game.


No offense, but I'd hate to play a game like that. It could be added as an addition, but being forced to do it in order to keep everyone alive in the SM would be, IMO, far worse than the current system. Not because it doesn't make sense, but because it wouldn't be enjoyable--it sounds cool as you describe it, but I can't fathom a way they could possibly implement it that would be fun to play. It'd mean many short sessions, probably simulated aboard the Normandy, and unless BW put all focus on making completely unique levels for each, we would be dealing with hundreds of DA2-esque complaints about recycled environments. A more important problem is that it'd be like constantly playing a game within a game. There would be no stakes, no real enemies to kill. I don't know about you, but I want battles that matter, battles that produce results beyond "Congratulations! Henchman XY gained Z% bonus to <insert skill/ability here>. Just five more sessions, and they might even survive the SM!". Training could be a good addition to spice things up, but not as an actual prerequisite to the SM. That would reduce it to a chore like mining.


I also have concerns story-wise. The very reason you recruit these people is that they are already the very best. They don't need to improve their abilities. I understand that you want to train them to work together, but even the system you describe doesn't do that. It seems like you want to uniformize them: have Jacob learn Samara's biotic abilities, have Grunt learn to use the Cain, etc. The only thing that would achieve is reduce their uniqueness and make them interchangable on missions. I can't even imagine how you could create this system in a way that would accurately show them "learning to work together", and make their survival depend on that. What you're saying would still only improve them as individuals.

Overall, I don't really understand how this would be better than the current system. Specific training isn't necessary for a team to learn to work together--the same thing can happen naturally over the course of real missions. I'd say ME2's core problem is the lack of banter, and that you have a squad of 12, of which only 2 people can you ever take with you. Fewer characters and more banter would solve this issue without the need to implement a completely new and potentially un-fun feature.

All in all, my problem with this is that you want to make loyalty missions that actually have stakes and excitement optional, and instead make simulated training a compulsory part of the game, when I feel it should be the other way around. Sorry for the long post. :)

#115
Shepard the Leper

Shepard the Leper
  • Members
  • 638 messages

100k wrote...

Not at all. The training sessions would have been 100% plot integral, because the thesis of ME2 is to stop the Collectors. Training would've been an essential part of the story. Turning your ragged bunch of misfits into a well oiled machine would've been not only key, but highly entertaining. 

Every character would be assured survival of the SM after a certain level of success within the training sessions. This means that their survival wouldn't depend on something that didn't make any sense, like not killing Sidonis, or blowing up Telten, but rather how well team mates worked together.


I guess I played a different game than you did because all of this is already present in ME2.

You need a team to go after the Collectors which makes recruitment missions essential - you cannot do it alone.

After recruiting you have the option to gain their loyalty that requires you to complete a mission in which you're forced to use the squadmate in question. You're effectively training your buddies and you're learning how best to use each one. Every loyalty mission also throws enemies at you showing the strength of every squadmate - sounds a lot like training and building an unstoppable warmachine to me.

Point being, the game doesn't (and imo shouldn't) explain everything. Simply because you can't start a 'training' mission doesn't mean you're not training yourself and your squad along the way.

#116
100k

100k
  • Members
  • 3 152 messages
~Just to explain better how the training missions work, are kept fresh, and maintained throughout the game~

(important to note that the VR missions don't replace any of the current in-game content, except the survival tree)

*taken from this thread.

"Now, this is the only DLC/unique mission I would add that is "new".

It's called Training Room.

Tali (being the brilliant engineer that she is) builds Shepard some VR training equipment so that Shepard can begin training the best team in the galaxy. The equipment is a series of ingenious "blankets" made of a light metal weave and synthetic material that can create stunningly convincing VR worlds and enemies when covering walls. A few electronic crates that simulate the content being displayed through the blankets, that go on the outside of the sheets. The material disperses biotic abilities when hit, so the fabric won't tear. Tech skills and guns are all modded to not activate, as the VR will simulate the effects of omni tools and firearms.

The material blanketing the walls can simulate weather, terrain, and some temperatures, and can create visual illusions that mimic the feeling of great distances.

Tali sets up this in the one area of the ship that is rarely used, but utterly suitable for this sort of set up: the cargo bay. She blankets the walls in the sheets (resembling slightly sparkling cloth sheets that are over lapped together along the interior of the bay) when Shepard wants to set up a VR training session for the entire team. She can also drape them around the Shuttle and Hammerhead, and the boxes of cargo supplies are pushed off to the sides of the bay.

Think of this as the X-Men's training room, but with less material and more innovative construction.

This room serves two major purposes:To build and develop squad banter and relationships, and to allow our NPCs to learn new game play moves through these improved relationships.

I think we all love squad banter and discussion. Here, Shepard has to initially struggle to get his team of bad asses to work together. Some characters like Jacob, Garrus, Tali, Mordin, and Thane are willing to work together. Rivalries spark, egos clash, and disagreements flare with others in the crew.

Miranda always struck me as someone whose genetics, education, and abilities made her rather arrogant. So, during the first level of the VR training room, she is automatically assigned as Shepard's second in command, and, internally desperate to prove her skills, she isn't able to instill the same respect that Shepard squad can, and her fire team "dies" during a failed simulation as a result.

Miranda feuds with Jack (just like usual), and Garrus (who's experience and team building skills rival--even possibly exceeding her own). She can develop respect from/for Garrus depending on her progression through the story, and gain subject Zero's obedience in the sim, but Jack will always hate her (keeping in mind that we can't change the relationship between the two women as ME3 hasn't decided their fates yet).

Miranda's ruthless nature leads her to put "minimal purpose" fighters like Jack, Grunt, and Legion in the front lines as distractions while she is focused on completing the missions.

(this is not to say that these characters have literally no purpose, merely that this is how Miranda values and perceives them in her own mind)

Jack and Grunt aren't willing to take orders from anyone but Shepard at first, and must complete a few of the VR missions with Shepard before they start taking the program and other squad mates seriously.

Zaeed is at first a crazed leader, putting minimal effort into choosing how to use his squad mates, and more effort into killing. Jack and Grunt like this. Other characters hate it, because it means that they are killed completing objectives while the other three go off on rampages.

You can sort of see where this is going. If Miranda is assigned the role of fire team leader enough times, she will gain most of the team's trust, and will be able to lead successful VR runs, gaining both experience for the player, and vocal support from the other characters. Gaining Garrus's support would be very uplifting to her. Same with Zaeed, Thane, Garrus, Tali, and Samara. We'd be able to see these characters not only develop as individuals, but as a crew. Even if they remain professional, it would be great squad banter to see an initial squad go from being a group that argues over mission priorities in the field, to carefully planning out mission priorities later, to finally working like a well oiled machine. Hell, if we wanted to take the VR one step further, they could go from a well oiled machine to a group willing to sacrifice themselves for each other.

There are certain exceptions to the fire team leader rule though. Grunt, Legion, Kasumi, and Jack simply don't have what it takes to be fire team candidates. They'll fulfill other equally important roles in the VR.

Long story short, the better each character does in a VR round, the more experience the player gets, the better rep that character gets, and the more character interaction those characters get.

-When it comes down to abilities/weapons-

Here we get to see more personal relationships between smaller groups of squad mates, that eventually develop abilities and abilities for wider use. Player choice is constantly under the players control, but the pay offs are big.

Shepard can have one on one VR training sessions regarding gun play, biotics, infiltration tactics, or tech abilities (depending on Shepard's class) with squad mates that correspond with those abilities. This allows Shepard to interact with NPCs out of their SR2 rooms, and gain/give new skills and experience.

For instance-

Shepard-Adept and Jack are in the VR room. Jack is teaching you (with generous amounts of profanity) how to boost your LSx abilities even more. Through a series of excersizes, she can teach Shepard how to use more powerful pulls, throws, slams, or singularities.

Samara can teach Jack how having the strongest biotics isn't everything. Accuracy and refinement also make a biotic potent. Jack can scoff, but Samara will demonstrate incredible biotic skill by using her biotics more rapidly than Jack could. Jack then gains a quicker cool down time for her powers.

And so on and so fourth.

In another scene, we can see Thane and Samara philosophizing in the VRs simulated beautiful desert. They then begin to spar, and Samara surprises the assassin by activating a biotic gauntlet, which she can teach Thane. Thane gains a powerful biotic melee attack (to go with his martial arts abilities).

Then we have a scene where Thane is training Samara in the use of sniper rifles, and the Justicar gains the ability to use sniper rifles, giving her a three weapon limit instead of two.

OR

Jacob and Samara train in a VR junk yard world, and Jacob teaches the justicar in shotgun training. Or Samara trains Jacob in biotic attack training. But because Samara learned shotgun training AND sniper training, she can't carry both weapons at the same time, so you'll have to choose what she can carry at the start of missions. Similarly, Jacob now has advanced biotics now, AND assault rifle training from Zaeed, but he can only carry one of these into a mission with him.

(you can swap them up, so that Jacob can have advanced biotics in one mission, and AR training in the next, just never at the same time).

Shepard only, however, can train Legion, Grunt, Garrus, and Jacob in carrying heavy weapons, which can only be activated in-game like a special biotic attack via the scroll wheel (so you'll never get Grunt nuking people left and right).

This way, Samara could potentially train Shepard and Miranda to become a more powerful biotics, making them both eligible to fulfill the role of biotic barrier carrier during the SM. They won't be as strong as Jack or Samara, but Miranda's powers would now rival Kaiden's, and Shepard's would rival those of a long trained Asari commandos.

You can see how this sort of works. It boosts abilities/weapon count, while showing more character interaction.

Heh, imagine a comical scene where Grunt plans to train Jack in gaining a superior melee attack, and she smacks him with a biotic gauntlet that leaves a nasty bruise on his head. The result being that Grunt actually learns to use a stronger melee attack XD

Now, these VR training missions are similar to the Pinnacle station missions. Facing down hordes, securing locations, capturing territories, escorting civilians, infiltration and stealth, etc etc. The difference is that these game play elements come into play during the ME2 story missions, like Feris Fields, where you have to either escort civilians to safety, or face down a seven minute horde of endless collectors.

Also, depending on how good your team is at these VR missions (which they can retake if you're not satisfied with their progress in the VR missions), cutscenes in the SM will be slightly different, as you will have gained another level of loyalty for each character called "professional loyalty". Though completion of a characters loyalty quest ensures their survival, completion of their professional loyalty ensures that they can almost breeze through their roles in the SM. Rather than Samara struggling to keep up her biotic barrier under the seeker swarms, she can periodically cause the field to fluctuate violently, causing enemies outside of the field to take damage-- and ending that section of game play with a cutscene in which she easily makes it to safety, and hurls her biotic attack at Shepard's attackers.

Another example of professional loyalty might be a moment where, instead of having a squaddie calling Shepard to tell him to hurry up and blow up the base, instead getting a scene where you see your specialists utterly slaughtering wave after wave of enemies. Dozens of husks and collectors attacking your final fire team, and your squad creating pyramids of corpses. This is the most dangerous team in the galaxy, right? Wouldn't it be cool to see the combined power of the best mercs, scientists, assassins, and tacticians kicking the collectors asses?

Imagine this comical scene:

Thane, Legion, and Garrus are at a vantage point over the battle. Thane and Garrus are in the middle of a sniping contest, cutting down foe after foe, while Legion, struggling to keep up with them, can't get a shot off. After a snide comment from either the drell or turian, Legion pulls off a ridiculous quadruple headshot (he is a machine after all), and the other two stare dumbfounded momentarily at the geth. That could be a loyalty quest reward."

Modifié par 100k, 27 juillet 2011 - 05:50 .


#117
celuloid

celuloid
  • Members
  • 277 messages

Eurhetemec wrote...

celuloid wrote...

If it is a character-driven game, why don't I feel that its characters are important? In fact, they are pluggable at will.


The same is true in ME1. Wrex doesn't matter. Garrus doesn't matter. Tali doesn't matter. All of them could have been NPCs who were only with you for "their" mission as it were, and the game would have been virtually identical.


But all of them added something to the main plot. All of them added at least as much as Mordin, and he was the only guy in ME2 who possesed something to advance the plot.

I would say that all twelve of the squadmembers in ME2 has more depth than Wrex/Tali/Garrus/Liara do in ME1. Liara, much as I like her, is pretty much a one-note character in ME1, and she's only plot-important for her Vulcan Mind Melds in the end. So in terms of characters, ME2 is very very far ahead.

So whilst I think some of your criticisms have weight, "pluggable" characters doesn't. It's true of both ME games so far.


Of course they have more depth. Now imagine if that 1.5 hours of game-time spent on them had any influence on the effort to stop the Collectors. Would not that made them important to the main plot? Now they are just 1.5 hour long side-missions.

Modifié par celuloid, 27 juillet 2011 - 06:10 .


#118
Slayer299

Slayer299
  • Members
  • 3 193 messages

Buckwheat530 wrote...

I'm not sure what the complaints about LMs are for. Some of them have no direct impact on the story, but there were quite a few(Legion's, Tali's, Thane's, Mordin's, Grunt's, ect) WILL have visible effects in ME3. The LMs also(for the most part) dictate if a given character will die or not in the Suicide Mission. Yes, they aren't necessary to as long as Shepard survives, but having them around could make portions of ME3 easier on you. Other missions can change the way a character acts if they survive(Garrus, Jack, Miranda). I know those aren't as big of things, but the custom fit your game to you.

The nice thing about ME2 was that you get to RP your Shepard in non-galaxy shattering events and still have a reason that you aren't rushing off into the Omega 4(either your crew isn't prepared or you don't have the IFF needed to survive the trip).


Grunt??? He killed a thresher maw what effect can that have? I don't see joining clan urdnot that big a game changer as compared to re-writing the Geth Legion or the genophage with Mordin. Thane's son got stopped from being an assassin, how is that going to have an effect? 

The thing about the LM's is that other than Tali, Legion and Mordin's I don't see any others that had any outside reach beyond those specific individuals. 

With all the LM and RM's it feels as if you have all the time in the world to beebop all over the Milky Way solving everyone else's problems that have almost zero relevance to the SM and the only thing that is accomplished is lowering the overall merc population of the Terminus systems.

#119
levannar

levannar
  • Members
  • 160 messages

100k wrote...

~Just to explain better how the training missions work, are kept fresh, and maintained throughout the game~

(important to note that the VR missions don't replace any of the current in-game content, except the survival tree)

*taken from this thread.

*snip*


My problem with this is that I still don't see how it could be implemented. It sounds cool described, it would be great as a written story, but I can't for the life of me see how it could be played, experienced, enjoyed. The scenes, like the Thane/Samara one: how does Shepard get involved? Do we watch this as a cutscene? How many of such scenes are there? And so on. I don't see player involvement in them. The only thing I see is a series of cutscenes, and an endless stream of simulated Suicide Missions. What's more, from the description you gave, I get the feeling this would utterly ruin the Suicide Mission itself. Would the player get the same sense of epicness, the same sense of scale? No, the only thing they'd think is "Hey, this is the same crap I've played a dozen times in training. Damn, I expected something unique for the last mission in the game."

Furthermore, something of this scale could never be implemented in addition to all the content ME2 already has. The way it is described, this could make an entire game.

Edit: Read it again, didn't get better. Sorry, but I hate this idea. Not only does it sound incredibly boring with barely any player involvement at all, it'd trivialize the Suicide Mission. So, I for one am glad ME2 is nowhere like this.

Modifié par levannar, 27 juillet 2011 - 06:48 .


#120
AlanC9

AlanC9
  • Members
  • 35 816 messages

Slayer299 wrote...
With all the LM and RM's it feels as if you have all the time in the world to beebop all over the Milky Way solving everyone else's problems that have almost zero relevance to the SM and the only thing that is accomplished is lowering the overall merc population of the Terminus systems. 


And this is different from ME1.... how? No different from any RPG since FO1, for that matter. (Even in MotB I believe you can get along with the curse forever)  This is a general failing of the genre.

The specific problem with ME2 is that the IFF mission isn't forced the way Horizon is. I believe one of the Bio devs said that was a mistake, but I don't know if he meant that as only his personal judgement or if it's Bio's consensus.

Modifié par AlanC9, 27 juillet 2011 - 06:44 .


#121
AlanC9

AlanC9
  • Members
  • 35 816 messages

levannar wrote...

My problem with this is that I still don't see how it could be implemented. It sounds cool described, it would be great as a written story, but I can't for the life of me see how it could be played, experienced, enjoyed. The scenes, like the Thane/Samara one: how does Shepard get involved? Do we watch this as a cutscene? How many of such scenes are there? And so on. I don't see player involvement in them. The only thing I see is a series of cutscenes, and an endless stream of simulated Suicide Missions. What's more, from the description you gave, I get the feeling this would utterly ruin the Suicide Mission itself. Would the player get the same sense of epicness, the same sense of scale? No, the only thing they'd think is "Hey, this is the same crap I've played a dozen times in training. Damn, I expected something unique for the last mission in the game."

Furthermore, something of this scale could never be implemented in addition to all the content ME2 already has. The way it is described, this could make an entire game.


The problem with the italed bit could be avoided. There's no particular reason to have a simulated SM bear any relationship at all to the real thing.

But in general, yeah. Not easily doable, and not worth doing. Maybe some players would be satisfied with the bulk of the game being fake combat. But not many.

Edit: the zots would be available after all; this plan means there's aren't any LMs, right?

Modifié par AlanC9, 27 juillet 2011 - 06:50 .


#122
levannar

levannar
  • Members
  • 160 messages

AlanC9 wrote...

levannar wrote...

My problem with this is that I still don't see how it could be implemented. It sounds cool described, it would be great as a written story, but I can't for the life of me see how it could be played, experienced, enjoyed. The scenes, like the Thane/Samara one: how does Shepard get involved? Do we watch this as a cutscene? How many of such scenes are there? And so on. I don't see player involvement in them. The only thing I see is a series of cutscenes, and an endless stream of simulated Suicide Missions. What's more, from the description you gave, I get the feeling this would utterly ruin the Suicide Mission itself. Would the player get the same sense of epicness, the same sense of scale? No, the only thing they'd think is "Hey, this is the same crap I've played a dozen times in training. Damn, I expected something unique for the last mission in the game."

Furthermore, something of this scale could never be implemented in addition to all the content ME2 already has. The way it is described, this could make an entire game.


The problem with the italed bit could be avoided. There's no particular reason to have a simulated SM bear any relationship at all to the real thing.

But in general, yeah. Not easily doable, and not worth doing. Maybe some players would be satisfied with the bulk of the game being fake combat. But not many.

Edit: the zots would be available after all; this plan means there's aren't any LMs, right?


Apparently, they want this in addition to the existing game, LMs and all. It's all about this "professional loyalty" stuff that would, as I see it, take this weird, complicated training, and use it to turn the SM into a walk in the park. <_< No, thanks.

Modifié par levannar, 27 juillet 2011 - 07:12 .


#123
Lumikki

Lumikki
  • Members
  • 4 239 messages

100k wrote...


So, we can change your original quote from this:

The issue seem to be player wanting different story.


to this:

The issue seem to be player wanting a story.

It's still you PERSONAL issue, because you refuse to accept the story.  Every Biowares games has story. Just because you don't like how it is, doesn't mean there isn't one. Sorry to say, but You point is beyond stupid and you know it.

Modifié par Lumikki, 27 juillet 2011 - 07:34 .


#124
Eurhetemec

Eurhetemec
  • Members
  • 815 messages

celuloid wrote...

But all of them added something to the main plot. All of them added at least as much as Mordin, and he was the only guy in ME2 who possesed something to advance the plot.


Hmmm, I couldn't agree, sorry :(. Garrus added far less to the plot than Mordin, in my estimation - he could definitely have been an NPC who simply said "Go see Harkin", and that's how much he added to the plot itself. Wrex and Tali are similar. They definitely added less to the plot than Mordin, and were about on-par with Legion. Liara was like the way less interesting version of Mordin in ME1 (necessary for the plot to go forwards). In ME2's DLC she was amazing.

I think what this shows though, is that how relevant a character is to the central plot has zero bearing, for me, on whether I enjoy interacting with them and so on. Garrus and Wrex are some of my favourite RPG characters ever - playing since 1986! I love those guys. Zaeed was totally rocking and he was a DLC character without proper interaction! Talk about pluggable!

Whereas VS, I don't hate either, but, gosh, I found them boring. Same for Liara in ME1. Yet they were important-ish to the plot.

In fact, here's a thing - I think that any character you MUST take is likely to be a bit more boring and middle-of-the-road than optional ones, because optional ones can safely run the risk offending X% of the playerbase. Some people loathe Zaeed and leave him to die. I love that guy. He's such an amazingly fun jerk.

If he was a "necessary" character, then I don't think he could be so edgy without making people kind of mad with the game.

Of course they have more depth. Now imagine if that 1.5 hours of game-time spent on them had any influence on the effort to stop the Collectors. Would not that made them important to the main plot? Now they are just 1.5 hour long side-missions.


Yeah, I dunno, Celuloid. Like, take Jack's loyalty mission. I absolutely loved it. Amazing mission, plot/story-wise, for my money. I loved the reversal and the surprise and so on, it was genuinely cool. Yet I don't see any non-artificial-seeming way that could have influenced success vs. the collectors - I mean, beyond what it did - Jack is as natural a choice as Samara for the biotic force field, and non-loyal Jack's field fails - so that kind of does influence the effort to stop the collectors, doesn't it?

So I dunno. I really liked pretty much all the loyalty missions. I think the two on the Citadel were the weakest for me (despite really liking Thane (duh lol!) and Garrus) - they were actually more fun for me than the main game.

Whereas in ME1, I found much of Feros and and Noveria to be a total chore - no fun at all. Lots of plot, sure, but not a lot enjoyment.

I do see your point, I think, I just feel like ME2 did such an awesome job that it didn't falter where it counted - the characters. For me, with ME, characters > plot. I know not everyone feels the same way. I think BioWare might, considering they recently described ME3 as "HBO meets Star Wars" - HBO doing almost exclusively mature, character-focused dramas (GoT and Mildred Pierce both had extremely strong characters, recently), and the SW universe being perhaps the closest universe to ME in terms of it's depth, age, and so on.

You certainly made me think about a lot of stuff though, so thank you! :wizard:

PS - I still totally agree that "Loyalty = do one mission for me" was waaaaay too formulaic. I would have liked to see, for example, Jacob become Loyal when he saw you make X other squadmates Loyal.

Modifié par Eurhetemec, 27 juillet 2011 - 07:43 .


#125
Buckwheat530

Buckwheat530
  • Members
  • 48 messages

Slayer299 wrote...

Grunt??? He killed a thresher maw what effect can that have? I don't see joining clan urdnot that big a game changer as compared to re-writing the Geth Legion or the genophage with Mordin. Thane's son got stopped from being an assassin, how is that going to have an effect? 

The thing about the LM's is that other than Tali, Legion and Mordin's I don't see any others that had any outside reach beyond those specific individuals. 

With all the LM and RM's it feels as if you have all the time in the world to beebop all over the Milky Way solving everyone else's problems that have almost zero relevance to the SM and the only thing that is accomplished is lowering the overall merc population of the Terminus systems.


Grunt's whole purpose is to be the genetically pure Krogan who could aid in overcoming the Genophage. If you don't kill the Thresher Maw, he doesn't get any mating requests. Also, having Grunt further solidifies Clan Urdnot as the leading Krogan Clan. No, I don't consider it as important as Mordin, Tali, or Legion's mission either, but it is something that adds to the difference between each individual's ME3.

As for the timing, it does feel like "you have all the time in the world to beebop all over the Milky Way," but this makes sense given that the events of ME2 take place over the course of a year. That year is filled with, as I said before, chances for you to RP your Shepard in non-galaxy shattering events that still hold a lot of weight and bide time for the Collector story line to come to a natural conclusion.

Also, this thread was linked in another post, but I think it does a very good job in showing why much of what is complained about in terms of lack of Collector interaction in ME2 is, in fact, necessary to the over-arcing plot of the series.

@what everyone else is talking about: I'll admit that I was anticipating something different out of the SM before my first run, such as characters having moments where they shine(ie. someone gave an example of Legion headshotting 4 straight Collector's after being taunted). This does not mean, however, that the SM was done poorly. Aside from being obscenely easy to figure out after you have done it once, the SM is one of the better pieces of cause and effect I've seen in any video game. I don't think enough people are giving BW credit for this being a middle game in the series and thus could not branch too much. They have stated that they learned a lot from the SM and plan on having scenarios where multiple choices are acounted for at a time(compared to there being only single checks per event, a la the space battle portion of the SM).