NugatRevolution wrote...
You could tell that the ME2's Assignments were thrown together at the end of production.
Lack of dialogue, constant bugs, and repetitiveness are proof enough.
Someone With Mass wrote...
At least ME2's side missions weren't shamelessly recycled over and over again.
Riot Inducer wrote...
ME1's side-quest environments were terrible and repetitive but there was some serious depth and choice in the quests themselves.
Look at Major Kyle's mission in ME1; you can go in guns blazing or negotiate your way through, you can gun down the leader or convince him to disband his cult peacefully, depending on Shepard's history there's even additional dialogue that can bypass some of the normal combat or dialogue.
Now tell me that's not more engaging than an N7 mission where all you get is an MMO quality wall of text explaining why you're there and what you're supposed to kill.
Modifié par Il Divo, 02 août 2011 - 02:59 .
Il Divo wrote...
When every side mission follows the same pattern, none feel special, especially when you consider that the time spent reaching the quest location often out-weighs the time spent actually completing the quest. Mass Effect's side quests attempt to replicate that sensation of exploring the universe, but the end result is that everything feels the same and generic. Sure, I had a choice in how to handle the Major Kyle situation, and that's great, but it doesn't forgive the extremely generic presentation of the questline. You may as well have described the Geth Incursions storyline, for all their diversity.
Gatt9 wrote...
Il Divo wrote...
When every side mission follows the same pattern, none feel special, especially when you consider that the time spent reaching the quest location often out-weighs the time spent actually completing the quest. Mass Effect's side quests attempt to replicate that sensation of exploring the universe, but the end result is that everything feels the same and generic. Sure, I had a choice in how to handle the Major Kyle situation, and that's great, but it doesn't forgive the extremely generic presentation of the questline. You may as well have described the Geth Incursions storyline, for all their diversity.
Ironically, you just described most of the gameplay in ME2. Same corridors, when you hit an open room you're going to shoot something, with the same tactics in every battle since the AI just stands in one place, quite often with one of the same 4 endbosses.
Not saying ME was much better, but honestly, I really don't get why people keep complaining about ME's recycling buildings when ME2 recycled the entire level design for almost every battle.
Modifié par Fata Morgana, 02 août 2011 - 03:44 .
Fata Morgana wrote...
I'm sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about. Every single location in ME2 was different. The dig site was different from the Blood Pack story locations, which were different from the husk adventure, all of which were WAY different from the MSV Estevanico, which was again different from Jahhare station, which was way different from the crashed ship with the mechs everywhere. Mission after mission, all the level designs were distinctive and different.
For the people who seem to have this imaginitive view of ME1 sidequests being so varied, I have to ask: When was the last time you played ME1? I challenge you to try to start a new game on ME1 and go for 100% completion. As someone who's done something like 20 100% completions (recently), I assure you that doing so is a lot more like work than it is like gaming. You begin to loathe the sidequests in 1, because it's always the same mission, over and over again, forever. It never changes. For some reason, people seem to think that cheesy, stilted dialoge will make the same mission better. Which is why I suggest you try it now, instead of just remembering "how great" those missions are supposed to be, because you're wearing your nostalgia glasses.
Fata Morgana wrote...
I challenge you to try to start a new game on ME1 and go for 100% completion. As someone who's done something like 20 100% completions (recently), I assure you that doing so is a lot more like work than it is like gaming. You begin to loathe the sidequests in 1, because it's always the same mission, over and over again, forever. It never changes. For some reason, people seem to think that cheesy, stilted dialoge will make the same mission better. Which is why I suggest you try it now, instead of just remembering "how great" those missions are supposed to be, because you're wearing your nostalgia glasses.
MarchWaltz wrote...
The paragon and renegade missions were a great idea, I hope they return in some form or another. Maybe class based quests too.
Ahglock wrote...
As for the cheesy talking and context for why you are there making it a better mission, it is almost like this is also an RPG or something.
LPPrince wrote...
Someone With Mass wrote...
At least ME2's side missions weren't shamelessly recycled over and over again.
At least ME1's assignments had an actual reason to complete them lore wise.
Listen people, its down to gameplay vs. lore.
Some prefer gameplay, some prefer lore. I'm partial to lore for assignments.
Here's an idea for everyone in the thread-
Say what you prefer firsthand.
Do note that EVERYONE likes both. Everyone wants the lore to be as great as possible as well as the gameplay being the best it can be.
BUT-
Chances are if you prefer ME1's assignments, its for the lore. The gameplay didn't match up.
If you prefer ME2's assignments,chances are its for the gameplay. They were varied, but the lore was half-assed.
Course, even THAT is my opinion coloring my statement.
You decide. But my point stands- Clarify exactly WHAT it is you like about them. Lore? Gameplay? Combination of both?
For me, I'd like both, but lore is a higher priority for me, hence ME1's vastly beats out ME2's.
Modifié par AlanC9, 02 août 2011 - 07:44 .
Fata Morgana wrote...
Ahglock wrote...
As for the cheesy talking and context for why you are there making it a better mission, it is almost like this is also an RPG or something.
So what you're saying is, for a game to be a true RPG, the writing, directing, and acting have to be poor quality? They must be 'cheesy', otherwise it's not an RPG? Because the dialogue in 2 is so far above 1 it's not even funny.
Modifié par AlanC9, 02 août 2011 - 07:46 .
Ahglock wrote...
The sites in ME2 were different on a superficial level. Look this one in in an office building, this one is in a jungle, this one is in a barren world. But end of the day they were all narrow relatively straight corrdiors with cover you could advance with the occasioanl big fight room where you might have some minor ability to move around abit. I overall prefer the gameplay/shooter mechanics of ME2, but graphic changes don't hide that the levels were just as repetative as the ME1 levels.
Modifié par Whatever666343431431654324, 02 août 2011 - 01:22 .
AlanC9 wrote...
Is anyone actually saying those things?
Gatt9 wrote...
Ironically, you just described most of the gameplay in ME2. Same corridors, when you hit an open room you're going to shoot something, with the same tactics in every battle since the AI just stands in one place, quite often with one of the same 4 endbosses.
Not saying ME was much better, but honestly, I really don't get why people keep complaining about ME's recycling buildings when ME2 recycled the entire level design for almost every battle.
The Spamming Troll wrote...
AlanC9 wrote...
Is anyone actually saying those things?
yes, alan.
The Spamming Troll wrote...
"ME1s sidequests were much better. storywise, gaemplaywise, lorewise. BUT they had repetitive bunkers so id rather have ME2s."
Modifié par AlanC9, 02 août 2011 - 06:35 .
Retour en haut