221 réponses à ce sujet

[ThePwener]

pablodurando wrote...

It's obvious that saving the Alliance base was the right choice.  If you save it they rebuild the colony.  If you destroy it then the colony can't rebuild and is deserted in the near future.

Really? It's better to kill off thousands of lives in the name of territory? That's the exact same choice TIM would have made. Shame on you.

[pablodurando]

Fata Morgana wrote...

pablodurando wrote...

Fata Morgana wrote...

- The mission where you have to fight your way through a group of mercs in order to stop missiles from hitting a human colony, but then you discover you can only stop one of the missiles? I love when the game gives moral choices where it's not instantly obvious which is the 'right' one.

It's obvious that saving the Alliance base was the right choice.  If you save it they rebuild the colony.  If you destroy it then the colony can't rebuild and is deserted in the near future.

Obvious?  If you save the base, many innocent people will die. There probably won't be time to move in new colonists before the reapers get here, anyway. I prefer saving human lives. 

If you save the colony many innocent people die in the base also.

[NugatRevolution]

Fata Morgana wrote...

If you like playing horror-style games, you should really seek out the husk mission. You can probably find out what planet/system it's in by googling. That mission is terrifying, in the best possible way.

Somehow, I don't think that mission would do anything after getting used to Dead Space..  

[pablodurando]

ThePwener wrote...

pablodurando wrote...

It's obvious that saving the Alliance base was the right choice.  If you save it they rebuild the colony.  If you destroy it then the colony can't rebuild and is deserted in the near future.

Really? It's better to kill off thousands of lives in the name of territory? That's the exact same choice TIM would have made. Shame on you.

Only a couple of hundred, Cerberus is awesome, fin.

[AtreiyaN7]

I have to laugh at the people who claimed that the ME1 side missions were good - the majority of them were as dull as dishwater. That goes for the ME1 side missions that had some sort of ostensible plot. Why? Because the base layouts were all exactly the same! Even though the story behind the Moon mission was nominally interesting, going through the same, exact three maps were tedious and dull.

I can't think of anything duller to do except for FedEx quests. The side missions in ME2 at least had different environments and map layouts, and some of the stories were interesting.

[Seboist]

ThePwener wrote...

pablodurando wrote...

It's obvious that saving the Alliance base was the right choice.  If you save it they rebuild the colony.  If you destroy it then the colony can't rebuild and is deserted in the near future.

Really? It's better to kill off thousands of lives in the name of territory? That's the exact same choice TIM would have made. Shame on you.

And that's why it's the right choice.

[NugatRevolution]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

I have to laugh at the people who claimed that the ME1 side missions were good - the majority of them were as dull as dishwater. That goes for the ME1 side missions that had some sort of ostensible plot. Why? Because the base layouts were all exactly the same! Even though the story behind the Moon mission was nominally interesting, going through the same, exact three maps were tedious and dull.

I can't think of anything duller to do except for FedEx quests. The side missions in ME2 at least had different environments and map layouts, and some of the stories were interesting.

The difference between bull**** and horse****  Some people have their preferences, but when you get right down to it, they're both ****

Modifié par NugatRevolution, 01 août 2011 - 06:48 .

[didymos1120]

pablodurando wrote...

ThePwener wrote...

pablodurando wrote...

It's obvious that saving the Alliance base was the right choice.  If you save it they rebuild the colony.  If you destroy it then the colony can't rebuild and is deserted in the near future.

Really? It's better to kill off thousands of lives in the name of territory? That's the exact same choice TIM would have made. Shame on you.

Only a couple of hundred, Cerberus is awesome, fin.

Wrong.  Here's what the mission complete screen says:

Saved residential area: Prevented batarian radicals from destroying colony on Franklin. Protected colony's residential core. Thousands of lives saved.

Not that "only a couple hundred" would have made it much better.

[pablodurando]

didymos1120 wrote...

pablodurando wrote...

ThePwener wrote...

pablodurando wrote...

It's obvious that saving the Alliance base was the right choice.  If you save it they rebuild the colony.  If you destroy it then the colony can't rebuild and is deserted in the near future.

Really? It's better to kill off thousands of lives in the name of territory? That's the exact same choice TIM would have made. Shame on you.

Only a couple of hundred, Cerberus is awesome, fin.

Wrong.  Here's what the mission complete screen says:

Saved residential area: Prevented batarian radicals from destroying colony on Franklin. Protected colony's residential core. Thousands of lives saved.

Not that "only a couple hundred" would have made it much better.

I stand corrected, I still save the military base.

[ThePwener]

Don't get me wrong, Im a Cerberus junkie all the way.... but even I have limits. TIM gives that organization a bad name with all of his quirks and random bad choices.

[ThePwener]

pablodurando wrote...
I stand corrected, I still save the military base.

And I have a Collector one full of good good tech. Hope it was worth the lives it took and helps you destroy the Reapers.

[pablodurando]

ThePwener wrote...

Don't get me wrong, Im a Cerberus junkie all the way.... but even I have limits. TIM gives that organization a bad name with all of his quirks and random bad choices.

TIM is a strategic mastermind, I fully agree with every decision he has made through the literature and games.

[didymos1120]

Seboist wrote...

ThePwener wrote...

pablodurando wrote...

It's obvious that saving the Alliance base was the right choice.  If you save it they rebuild the colony.  If you destroy it then the colony can't rebuild and is deserted in the near future.

Really? It's better to kill off thousands of lives in the name of territory? That's the exact same choice TIM would have made. Shame on you.

And that's why it's the right choice.

What is this?  The doctrine of TIM's Infallibility?  I don't care who it is: Jesus, Buddha, TIM, Daffy Duck, who-the-f*ck-ever. A choice is not justified based on who endorses it.  If it's the right choice, then it's the right choice on its own merits.

[Fata Morgana]

NugatRevolution wrote...

Fata Morgana wrote...

I thought the side missions in ME1 were bad.

However, the side missions in ME2 were amazing - at least some of them were.

- The terrifying one where you first find a datapad saying, "If you're reading this, GET OUT NOW!", and you hear the continuous moaning of husks, even if you can't see them? Chilling and memorable.

- Exploring the crashed ship, hoping and praying that it doesn't fall into the ravine before you get to the data you're searching? My heart was in my throat.

- Finding an intact prothean beacon and being allowed to see that vision from the first game... only with a hint regarding the collectors? I loved that tip of the hat.

- The mission where you have to fight your way through a group of mercs in order to stop missiles from hitting a human colony, but then you discover you can only stop one of the missiles? I love when the game gives moral choices where it's not instantly obvious which is the 'right' one.

The best thing about the ME2 side missions is how varied there were (especially as compared to 1). Instead of endlessly repeating the same kind of fights in 3 different environments, they actually came up with unique content for each mission. It's amazing!

I only played the last 2 you mentioned.  But the way you describe them, you could make a s*it popsicle sound good. 

*edit*

The way I would have described the last one would be you fight some blue suns, AGAIN.  All the while Shepard is completely silent and interacts with no one.  After killing all the blue suns (who saw that coming), you have to choose between saving some people, or saving some buildings.  Neither or which you really care about in the first place.  You're just here cuz you beat the game and you've got nothing better to do.

Sir, if killing filthy mercs holds no joy for you, then you are beyond help.  

[Sesshomaru47]

Arppis wrote...

Mass Effect 1 had pretty decent side missions. ME2 had sucky ones.

I thought the same thing. It was more fun tracking down geth outposts and crazy people than just pushing a button in every single side quest with no input from your team mates.

[Seboist]

didymos1120 wrote...

pablodurando wrote...

ThePwener wrote...

pablodurando wrote...

It's obvious that saving the Alliance base was the right choice.  If you save it they rebuild the colony.  If you destroy it then the colony can't rebuild and is deserted in the near future.

Really? It's better to kill off thousands of lives in the name of territory? That's the exact same choice TIM would have made. Shame on you.

Only a couple of hundred, Cerberus is awesome, fin.

Wrong.  Here's what the mission complete screen says:

Saved residential area: Prevented batarian radicals from destroying colony on Franklin. Protected colony's residential core. Thousands of lives saved.

Not that "only a couple hundred" would have made it much better.

Within the actual mission during the selection it describes the residential area as having hundreds.

ME2 contradicting itself ftw.

[LPPrince]

Fata Morgana wrote...

I thought the side missions in ME1 were bad.

However, the side missions in ME2 were amazing - at least some of them were.

- The terrifying one where you first find a datapad saying, "If you're reading this, GET OUT NOW!", and you hear the continuous moaning of husks, even if you can't see them? Chilling and memorable.

- Exploring the crashed ship, hoping and praying that it doesn't fall into the ravine before you get to the data you're searching? My heart was in my throat.

- Finding an intact prothean beacon and being allowed to see that vision from the first game... only with a hint regarding the collectors? I loved that tip of the hat.

- The mission where you have to fight your way through a group of mercs in order to stop missiles from hitting a human colony, but then you discover you can only stop one of the missiles? I love when the game gives moral choices where it's not instantly obvious which is the 'right' one.

The best thing about the ME2 side missions is how varied there were (especially as compared to 1). Instead of endlessly repeating the same kind of fights in 3 different environments, they actually came up with unique content for each mission. It's amazing!

Man, you could make poop sound delicious. 

In ME1, we had a REASON to do the assignments. They were important to someone in the galaxy, and we SPOKE to these people. Either Hackett told us why something was important or we met someone involved.

Whether it was a woman convincing us to take out her partners in crime(Helena Blake for UNC: Hostile Takeover), a scared and desperate asari asking us to save her sister(Nassana Dantius for UNC: Asari Diplomacy), a man looking for his lost brother(Garoth for UNC: Privateers), or a guy wondering what the hell happened to his dead squad(Admiral Kahoku for UNC: Missing Marines), we ALWAYS had a good reason to do the assignments.

There was emotion involved. SOMEONE cared. These were very story heavy and I LOVED that.

In ME2, no one cared. You didn't speak to someone who said, "Please, go here and do this, I need you to do it, please."

What we got in ME2 was, "Probe launched. Oh look, I found something. Land, shoot everything that moves, leave. Email."

That SUCKS.

I want to have to talk to someone first. Hear the emotion in their voice as to why I have to do this. Give me a reason to CARE. Don't just drop me on a planet and tell me to do it. Make me WANT to do it.

ME1 succeeded there where ME2 completely and utterly failed.

ME3 better be in ME1's vein on that regard.

As for those moments you mentioned, like the ship shaking and the GET OUT on the husk assignment-

Forgettable to me. Why? Because there's nothing that makes me feel like I had to do either of those.

Give me the desire and the will to complete them. Then I'll never forget them.

[Fata Morgana]

Sesshomaru47 wrote...

Arppis wrote...

Mass Effect 1 had pretty decent side missions. ME2 had sucky ones.

I thought the same thing. It was more fun tracking down geth outposts and crazy people than just pushing a button in every single side quest with no input from your team mates.

Wow, seriously?  There are people who like ME1 sidequests better than ME2 sidequests?

ME1 sidequests are a complete snore fest. If the environments were more varied, they would maybe be OK... but going into that same mine or prefab building that I have been in hundreds of times before loses it's charm very quickly.  Also: Ugh, the Mako. So glad they got rid of that lemon. 

Suggested shark name for whatever new ground vehicle they come up with for 3: Wobegong.

[InkognitoY]

ThePwener wrote...

Some were good. Some were bad. I got the sense they were there just for the sake of being there.

I got the sense that EA forced Bioware to make ME2 on a tight schedule. 

[ThePwener]

pablodurando wrote...

ThePwener wrote...

Don't get me wrong, Im a Cerberus junkie all the way.... but even I have limits. TIM gives that organization a bad name with all of his quirks and random bad choices.

TIM is a strategic mastermind, I fully agree with every decision he has made through the literature and games.

1st time: Shepard, Im sending you into a trap but Im not saying it's a trap.

2nd time: Shepard, go inside a Reaper.

3rd time: Okay, Implant this poor sucker with Reaper tech and let's see what happens.

4th time: Hey guys, let's go kill Shepard!

I hate my boss so much.

Modifié par ThePwener, 01 août 2011 - 07:03 .

[Weiser_Cain]

Twizz089 wrote...

Id prefer bad side missions to no side missions, its not like your forced to do them...

I was going to just leave this topic alone, but they do basically force you to do side missions or people die.

[Seboist]

InkognitoY wrote...

ThePwener wrote...

Some were good. Some were bad. I got the sense they were there just for the sake of being there.

I got the sense that EA forced Bioware to make ME2 on a tight schedule. 

There's no doubt about that. EA is a blight on gaming.

[Praetor Knight]

InkognitoY wrote...

ThePwener wrote...

Some were good. Some were bad. I got the sense they were there just for the sake of being there.

I got the sense that EA forced Bioware to make ME2 on a tight schedule. 

Umm...

“Mass Effect 2 was really a triumph of game development,” says Hudson. “On time, on budget, and exceeding quality goals. And we did this despite some major challenges that couldn’t have been foreseen. The recession that rocked the world economy hit the game industry pretty hard. Like other studios, we had to take a hard look at our costs and find ways to get through it without impacting our ambitious goals for the game. We also were hit hard by H1N1. Just as we were pushing to finish the game, much of the team went down with illness and we lost over a man-year of time over the span of a couple months. It’s a huge credit to the team that we were able to release a very high quality game on time, even though they had to push through some tough times.”

www.gamesradar.com/f/the-making-of-mass-effect-2/a-2010051114473989090/p-3

Kudos to Bioware

[AtreiyaN7]

NugatRevolution wrote...

The difference between bull**** and horse****  Some people have their preferences, but when you get right down to it, they're both ****

And if the ones in both games made your life that miserable, you could just ignore them.

[pablodurando]

ThePwener wrote...

pablodurando wrote...

ThePwener wrote...

Don't get me wrong, Im a Cerberus junkie all the way.... but even I have limits. TIM gives that organization a bad name with all of his quirks and random bad choices.

TIM is a strategic mastermind, I fully agree with every decision he has made through the literature and games.

1st time: Shepard, Im sending you into a trap but Im not saying it's a trap. Good luck.

2nd time: Shepard,go inside a Reaper. Nuff said.

3rd time: Okay, Implant this poor sucker with Reaper tech and see what happens. Probably nothing.... oh fu-

4th time: Hey guys, let's go kill Shepard! Surely no ill fated thing will happen to me by commiting to this.

1st time: If Shepard had known then he would have prepared in advance with countermeasure and that would have tipped off the collectors, thus Shepard would have not reached the information hub.

2nd time:  Reaper IFF was necessary

3rd time: Necessary expirement to study the effects of Reapers on organics

4th time: Well we don't know yet do we.