6494 réponses à ce sujet

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

SpiffySquee wrote...
Well, first keep in mind that I did not see any lead up for ME2 and started the game blind. At the end of ME1 everybody was as happy as an Ewok with a hair brush. We beat a Reaper! We proved it could be done! Shep was on top of the world! And in 10 minutes you lost your ship, your crew, and you life. If that is not a smack to the face I do not know what is. With one move, the Reapers reminded me that I had no idea what I was messing with. A lot of people say that all of this was invalidated by the resurrection. I disagree. The resurrection does not represent infinite lives. This is not Mario Brothers. It represented a second chance. That is it. I don't think Shepard would be brought back a third time.

While I did see the lead up to ME2. I would ultimativly feel the same way. Throughout ME2 I was just waiting for "that" moment where Shepard showed some humanity and his weaker side given what had happend him. But it never came. The game itself also seems to completely shrug the entire event off.

It also completely undermines all the dynamic between Joker and Shepard.
And from now on in the ME franchise. Everytime someone important dies.
It will just raise the question why people can't just throw the dead
guy's body in a freezer, sell some cookies and lemonade on the Citadel.
And ressurect him.

For ME being "Shepard's story" and ME2 being the most personal one of them. Bioware really should have dedicated some time to Shepard as a character and what the Lazarus project means (and not deal with it in ME3 when they realise they made a mistake ignoring it).

And what saddens me in the end is that if they just did that one simple thing. I would have liked the intro.

To me it set a dark tone. Shepard went from being on top, to being at rock bottom. Everything he had worked to build (his team, his reputation with the council, his push to fight the reapers) was taken form him. That is why I liked the opening. I don't care if other people thought it was over the top or did not add to the story. The collectors showed how dangerous they were right off the bat. After that, everything was just a little darker and a little more desperate. To me it says a lot about Shepard.

All of that could have been achieved without Shepard getting killed. They could easily have had Shepard pull of a Riply (of sorts) with him actually making it to an escape/medical pod. Only for it to get straffed. Putting it adrift and critically injuring Shepard. Cerberus could later find the drifting pod, recovering an injured Shepard who had put himself in a stasis pod. And then use this opportunity to upgrade him with cybernetics and whatnot.

Obviously this is not a very good idea and it would need alot of polish.

The Collectors killed Shepard, he/she picks themselves up, bushes the dirt off and goes after them. That takes balls. [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/wink.png[/smilie]

Or a brick-like protagonist.

[Gatt9]

SpiffySquee wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...

alright then... to keep things on topic until more opposition comes, Anything on my videos to Smudsy that you disagree with, or wanted better explanation?

Why are you satisfied with ME2's intro?

Well, first keep in mind that I did not see any lead up for ME2 and started the game blind. At the end of ME1 everybody was as happy as an Ewok with a hair brush. We beat a Reaper! We proved it could be done! Shep was on top of the world! And in 10 minutes you lost your ship, your crew, and you life. If that is not a smack to the face I do not know what is. With one move, the Reapers reminded me that I had no idea what I was messing with. A lot of people say that all of this was invalidated by the resurrection. I disagree. The resurrection does not represent infinite lives. This is not Mario Brothers. It represented a second chance. That is it. I don't think Shepard would be brought back a third time.

To me it set a dark tone. Shepard went from being on top, to being at rock bottom. Everything he had worked to build (his team, his reputation with the council, his push to fight the reapers) was taken form him. That is why I liked the opening. I don't care if other people thought it was over the top or did not add to the story. The collectors showed how dangerous they were right off the bat. After that, everything was just a little darker and a little more desperate. To me it says a lot about Shepard. The Collectors killed Shepard, he/she picks themselves up, bushes the dirt off and goes after them. That takes balls.

For me,  the opening started off a whole chain of "Um...wtf?".  The collector ship toasting the normandy was fine,  nothing really jumps out there as weird.  We've already covered the resurrection and it's problems.  But I never got the impression of being at rock bottom.  I was just handed a shiny new ship,  without any fuss at all.  My "Work" being undone was pretty iffy at best,  why would his reputation with the council suffer at all?  He got shot,  did the council say "Huh,  what a wuss,  his ship blew up,  everything he said must be bull!".  It makes no sense.  The whole "There are no reapers!" thing is just nonsensical,  they claim there are no Reapers by blaiming the Geth? 

So their solution to telling people that there's a armada hellbent on destroying them out there was to tell them it's a different armada hellbent on destroying them?  There's no gain there,  and in fact a massive loss in social results.  Rather than tell people that it was some random ancient creature intent on killing them,  leaving them with no idea of how strong it is but knowing that they killed it,  they instead tell them that a Race they know has vast numbers is capable of building a ship that can hurt the Citadel right under their nose?  And that said vast race can fly it into the heart of civilization with impunity?

The intro was a great start,  but it lead directly onto the path of "Um...What?" a few moments later on any number of levels.

[RAF1940]

Who cares what Smudboy says?

[Iakus]

Il Divo wrote...

You're confusing the expectations from the game with expectations from the character. Yes, Deus Ex (much more than Mass Effect 2) had alot of build up surrounding its release. But if you want to compare both character's "resurrections" (and here, I would agree that Jensen's was better handled from a character perspective), there is a huge difference. I was Commander Shepard for a 40+ hour campaign. I controlled him, chose what he would say, romanced Ashley, stopped Saren, etc. Then, while still riding that 'high', I watched the character die. I'm Adam Jensen for 10-15 minutes before he's remade, and so the emotional impact of watching him rebuilt is substantially less.

Yes you were Commander Shepard throughout ME1.  And yes, Commander Shepard dies at the beginning of ME2.  And then...he's back.  You're Commander Shepard again.  What changed? You may not have been as initially invested in Jensen as you were in Shepard.  But Jensen's experience resonated throughout the entire game.  Shepard's is gone pretty much by the time he reaches Freedom's Progress.
 

I never said that Shepard's death was anything other than shock value. I agree with you there. Hell, did you reach the part in Human Revolution where you find out what happened to the mirror in Adam's apartment? Mass Effect 2 had nothing close to it.

Indeed I did see it.

And even better is a line of dialogue you can speak if you have a certain aug and talk to a certain detective who insists on calling you a soulless robot.  I wish Shepard's death had half the depth that one line gave.

But that's for another thread.

[C9316]

Why are we giving this guy so much attention?

[ObserverStatus]

C9316 wrote...

Why are we giving this guy so much attention?

idk lol

[SpiffySquee]

Lizardviking wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...
Well, first keep in mind that I did not see any lead up for ME2 and started the game blind. At the end of ME1 everybody was as happy as an Ewok with a hair brush. We beat a Reaper! We proved it could be done! Shep was on top of the world! And in 10 minutes you lost your ship, your crew, and you life. If that is not a smack to the face I do not know what is. With one move, the Reapers reminded me that I had no idea what I was messing with. A lot of people say that all of this was invalidated by the resurrection. I disagree. The resurrection does not represent infinite lives. This is not Mario Brothers. It represented a second chance. That is it. I don't think Shepard would be brought back a third time.

While I did see the lead up to ME2. I would ultimativly feel the same way. Throughout ME2 I was just waiting for "that" moment where Shepard showed some humanity and his weaker side given what had happend him. But it never came. The game itself also seems to completely shrug the entire event off.

It also completely undermines all the dynamic between Joker and Shepard.
And from now on in the ME franchise. Everytime someone important dies.
It will just raise the question why people can't just throw the dead
guy's body in a freezer, sell some cookies and lemonade on the Citadel.
And ressurect him.

For ME being "Shepard's story" and ME2 being the most personal one of them. Bioware really should have dedicated some time to Shepard as a character and what the Lazarus project means (and not deal with it in ME3 when they realise they made a mistake ignoring it).

And what saddens me in the end is that if they just did that one simple thing. I would have liked the intro.

To me it set a dark tone. Shepard went from being on top, to being at rock bottom. Everything he had worked to build (his team, his reputation with the council, his push to fight the reapers) was taken form him. That is why I liked the opening. I don't care if other people thought it was over the top or did not add to the story. The collectors showed how dangerous they were right off the bat. After that, everything was just a little darker and a little more desperate. To me it says a lot about Shepard.

All of that could have been achieved without Shepard getting killed. They could easily have had Shepard pull of a Riply (of sorts) with him actually making it to an escape/medical pod. Only for it to get straffed. Putting it adrift and critically injuring Shepard. Cerberus could later find the drifting pod, recovering an injured Shepard who had put himself in a stasis pod. And then use this opportunity to upgrade him with cybernetics and whatnot.

Obviously this is not a very good idea and it would need alot of polish.

The Collectors killed Shepard, he/she picks themselves up, bushes the dirt off and goes after them. That takes balls. [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/wink.png[/smilie]

Or a brick-like protagonist.

I understand what you mean, and I can't argue how you felt about it. I think the reason I did not feel the same way is because I beleive I should put the personalty into Shepard. It goes into my Whole "Actions vs. motivations" video. Actions are easy to do in a game because the player can put his own motivations behind the actions.

Motivations (how Shep feels inside about what has happened, struggling with death, etc.) while really nice to see, is really hard to do. What if I felt my Shepard would not have a problem with it? After all, to him, he just went to sleep and woke up two years later. Maybe I play the type of Shepard that would not care. Now if Bioware starts diving into how Shepard felt about his death and my option is not there, I can no longer pretend I am making Shepard's personality.

Could it have been done? Yes, Shadow Broker showed it could in small doses, and they claim to do more in ME3. But it is incredibly difficult to tell the player what Shepard feels and still allow the player to control his personality.

In short, I would have LOVED for Shepard to have explored what happened, but I don't fault Bioware for playing it safe.

[Iakus]

Il Divo wrote...

iakus wrote...

To me the two questions are strongly linked.  I mean, if humans weren't somehow suitable for being Reaperized, there would be no human Reaper now, would there?

But you have to demonstrate why the questions are linked. If the Reapers turn every viable species into another Reaper, there's no reason why the "how" will be connected to "the why".

Ex: People theorize that the human Reaper was intended as a vanguard. If this is true, what relevance would this have to how a Reaper is made?

They're two entirely different questions.

The question isn't so much "Why?"  as "Why now?"  

I mean, clearly the humans have something that other races lack.  Something the Reapers want or need to create more Reapers.  So why tip their hand now, years before the rest of the fleet enters the galaxy?  It's a situation pretty much designed for a band of plucky heroes to discover and foil. So if it's something in humans, and Collectors want to keep a low profile:

Why not clone the material they need?
Why not grow the tissue in labs, raid blood banks or something?
If Reapers are such genetic experts that they can repurpose entire species, why not artificially induce whatever it is they're looking for?

What do genetics have to do with creating a cybernetic organism anyway?  Particularly the combined genetics of millions of individual beings?

[Iakus]

C9316 wrote...

Why are we giving this guy so much attention?

Because he raises very good points

[SpiffySquee]

C9316 wrote...

Why are we giving this guy so much attention?

We really don't. This thread will go pages and pages without his name even being mentioned. Mostly we debate the ideas brought up in the videos, which have don't have much to do with him specifically.

[111987]

iakus wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

iakus wrote...

To me the two questions are strongly linked.  I mean, if humans weren't somehow suitable for being Reaperized, there would be no human Reaper now, would there?

But you have to demonstrate why the questions are linked. If the Reapers turn every viable species into another Reaper, there's no reason why the "how" will be connected to "the why".

Ex: People theorize that the human Reaper was intended as a vanguard. If this is true, what relevance would this have to how a Reaper is made?

They're two entirely different questions.

The question isn't so much "Why?"  as "Why now?"  

I mean, clearly the humans have something that other races lack.  Something the Reapers want or need to create more Reapers.  So why tip their hand now, years before the rest of the fleet enters the galaxy?  It's a situation pretty much designed for a band of plucky heroes to discover and foil. So if it's something in humans, and Collectors want to keep a low profile:

Why not clone the material they need?
Why not grow the tissue in labs, raid blood banks or something?
If Reapers are such genetic experts that they can repurpose entire species, why not artificially induce whatever it is they're looking for?

What do genetics have to do with creating a cybernetic organism anyway?  Particularly the combined genetics of millions of individual beings?

Don't you think those questions would be answered in ME3?

[Killjoy Cutter]

iakus wrote...

C9316 wrote...

Why are we giving this guy so much attention?

Because he raises very good points

No, it's actually for the same reason people slow down when driving by a terrible car accident...

[Iakus]

111987 wrote...

Don't you think those questions would be answered in ME3?

I hope so.  And if so, that will make ME3 doubly great, because not only will ME3's story have meaning, it will save ME2 from being pointless too.

[Tantum Dic Verbo]

He's not saying very much that I wasn't laughing at while playing the game. In fact, he missed several spots I would have hit if I took the time to do play-by-play on plot inconsistencies.

Does enjoying the game mean that I'm supposed to be offended when someone points out said inconsistencies? There's plenty of goofery in the writing to be sure, but consider the scope of the game and the fact that the writers have to consider constant plot changes on the part of a protagonist they only control partially.

[bduff4545]

SpiffySquee wrote...

C9316 wrote...

Why are we giving this guy so much attention?

We really don't. This thread will go pages and pages without his name even being mentioned. Mostly we debate the ideas brought up in the videos, which have don't have much to do with him specifically.

AgreedB)

[Notlikeyoucare]

The thing about the "essence of a species" tthat bothered me is that both Shepard and EDI at like these are things the audience should know. Its just dumped in there with no WTF? reaction by anybody like the Collector. Prothean revalation, and then the game just moves on.

[Darth Death]

C9316 wrote...
Why are we giving this guy so much attention?

Trolls are good at attracting the masses. He obviously has some sort of vendetta against ME (or BioWare games for that matter) seeing how his channel is dedicated solely to undermining the story. What's even more interesting is how he's able to convince many others into thinking ME2 story is the result of bad writing & laziness on the devs part. His videos are the result of personal bitterness, only discrediting but never complimenting (equally). I'm merely a person who enjoys the series, so I'll take what I can get. This is BioWare's story, not mine, they know what's best.   

[Notlikeyoucare]

Darth Death wrote...

C9316 wrote...
Why are we giving this guy so much attention?

Trolls are good at attracting the masses. He obviously has some sort of vendetta against ME (or BioWare games for that matter) seeing how his channel is dedicated solely to undermining the story. What's even more interesting is how he's able to convince many others into thinking ME2 story is the result of bad writing & laziness on the devs part. His videos are the result of personal bitterness, only discrediting but never complimenting (equally). I'm merely a person who enjoys the series, so I'll take what I can get. This is BioWare's story, not mine, they know what's best.   

If this is Bioware's story, why am I constantly being asked to fill in the blanks?

[Darth Death]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

C9316 wrote...
Why are we giving this guy so much attention?

Trolls are good at attracting the masses. He obviously has some sort of vendetta against ME (or BioWare games for that matter) seeing how his channel is dedicated solely to undermining the story. What's even more interesting is how he's able to convince many others into thinking ME2 story is the result of bad writing & laziness on the devs part. His videos are the result of personal bitterness, only discrediting but never complimenting (equally). I'm merely a person who enjoys the series, so I'll take what I can get. This is BioWare's story, not mine, they know what's best.   

If this is Bioware's story, why am I constantly being asked to fill in the blanks?

Not sure what you mean, but waiting for ME3 might help.

[SpiffySquee]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

C9316 wrote...
Why are we giving this guy so much attention?

Trolls are good at attracting the masses. He obviously has some sort of vendetta against ME (or BioWare games for that matter) seeing how his channel is dedicated solely to undermining the story. What's even more interesting is how he's able to convince many others into thinking ME2 story is the result of bad writing & laziness on the devs part. His videos are the result of personal bitterness, only discrediting but never complimenting (equally). I'm merely a person who enjoys the series, so I'll take what I can get. This is BioWare's story, not mine, they know what's best.   

If this is Bioware's story, why am I constantly being asked to fill in the blanks?

Because the disk is not big enough to hold all the information you seem to require in order for it to be a good game.

[Notlikeyoucare]

SpiffySquee wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

C9316 wrote...
Why are we giving this guy so much attention?

Trolls are good at attracting the masses. He obviously has some sort of vendetta against ME (or BioWare games for that matter) seeing how his channel is dedicated solely to undermining the story. What's even more interesting is how he's able to convince many others into thinking ME2 story is the result of bad writing & laziness on the devs part. His videos are the result of personal bitterness, only discrediting but never complimenting (equally). I'm merely a person who enjoys the series, so I'll take what I can get. This is BioWare's story, not mine, they know what's best.   

If this is Bioware's story, why am I constantly being asked to fill in the blanks?

Because the disk is not big enough to hold all the information you seem to require in order for it to be a good game.

I don't mind ME 2 as a game, though after playing Uncharted 2 the cover system feels frustratingly wonky.As a story however, the game is an atrocious piece of writing.

Not enough disk space?  F*** you 360! Oh wait, Bioware could have put it on more disks if they wanted, PC doesn't matter, PS3 has Blu-Ray. That's no excuse. Even when you take the game on its own merits, it comes off as the writer being lazy and not doing their job, that I payed them to do.

[111987]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

C9316 wrote...
Why are we giving this guy so much attention?

Trolls are good at attracting the masses. He obviously has some sort of vendetta against ME (or BioWare games for that matter) seeing how his channel is dedicated solely to undermining the story. What's even more interesting is how he's able to convince many others into thinking ME2 story is the result of bad writing & laziness on the devs part. His videos are the result of personal bitterness, only discrediting but never complimenting (equally). I'm merely a person who enjoys the series, so I'll take what I can get. This is BioWare's story, not mine, they know what's best.   

If this is Bioware's story, why am I constantly being asked to fill in the blanks?

Because the disk is not big enough to hold all the information you seem to require in order for it to be a good game.

I don't mind ME 2 as a game, though after playing Uncharted 2 the cover system feels frustratingly wonky.As a story however, the game is an atrocious piece of writing.

Not enough disk space?  F*** you 360! Oh wait, Bioware could have put it on more disks if they wanted, PC doesn't matter, PS3 has Blu-Ray. That's no excuse. Even when you take the game on its own merits, it comes off as the writer being lazy and not doing their job, that I payed them to do.

You're right. The game play in Mass Effect 2 is just so so. The story is the worst thing to ever happen in the history of video games.

The 95.66% review score average for Mass Effect 2, based off of 73 separate reviews, is simply hogwash. This game sucked, all those reviewers are idiots, as are all the people that somehow liked this piece of crap game. We should boycott ME3 because Bioware just sucks so much...

[Notlikeyoucare]

111987 wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

C9316 wrote...
Why are we giving this guy so much attention?

Trolls are good at attracting the masses. He obviously has some sort of vendetta against ME (or BioWare games for that matter) seeing how his channel is dedicated solely to undermining the story. What's even more interesting is how he's able to convince many others into thinking ME2 story is the result of bad writing & laziness on the devs part. His videos are the result of personal bitterness, only discrediting but never complimenting (equally). I'm merely a person who enjoys the series, so I'll take what I can get. This is BioWare's story, not mine, they know what's best.   

If this is Bioware's story, why am I constantly being asked to fill in the blanks?

Because the disk is not big enough to hold all the information you seem to require in order for it to be a good game.

I don't mind ME 2 as a game, though after playing Uncharted 2 the cover system feels frustratingly wonky.As a story however, the game is an atrocious piece of writing.

Not enough disk space?  F*** you 360! Oh wait, Bioware could have put it on more disks if they wanted, PC doesn't matter, PS3 has Blu-Ray. That's no excuse. Even when you take the game on its own merits, it comes off as the writer being lazy and not doing their job, that I payed them to do.

You're right. The game play in Mass Effect 2 is just so so. The story is the worst thing to ever happen in the history of video games.

The 95.66% review score average for Mass Effect 2, based off of 73 separate reviews, is simply hogwash. This game sucked, all those reviewers are idiots, as are all the people that somehow liked this piece of crap game. We should boycott ME3 because Bioware just sucks so much...

I never said Bioware sucks. I never said ME 2 sucks, I said that the story is poorly written, and the cover mechanics somewhat annoying,

None of those reviewers analysed the plot, the one who did came to many conclusions brought up both by Smudboy and others.

Reviewers look at everything they can and give a score based on the overall product.

Not sure what your point is here, critical acclaim has been awarded to many works of entertainment unjustly, and the opposite is also true.

[111987]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

111987 wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

C9316 wrote...
Why are we giving this guy so much attention?

Trolls are good at attracting the masses. He obviously has some sort of vendetta against ME (or BioWare games for that matter) seeing how his channel is dedicated solely to undermining the story. What's even more interesting is how he's able to convince many others into thinking ME2 story is the result of bad writing & laziness on the devs part. His videos are the result of personal bitterness, only discrediting but never complimenting (equally). I'm merely a person who enjoys the series, so I'll take what I can get. This is BioWare's story, not mine, they know what's best.   

If this is Bioware's story, why am I constantly being asked to fill in the blanks?

Because the disk is not big enough to hold all the information you seem to require in order for it to be a good game.

I don't mind ME 2 as a game, though after playing Uncharted 2 the cover system feels frustratingly wonky.As a story however, the game is an atrocious piece of writing.

Not enough disk space?  F*** you 360! Oh wait, Bioware could have put it on more disks if they wanted, PC doesn't matter, PS3 has Blu-Ray. That's no excuse. Even when you take the game on its own merits, it comes off as the writer being lazy and not doing their job, that I payed them to do.

You're right. The game play in Mass Effect 2 is just so so. The story is the worst thing to ever happen in the history of video games.

The 95.66% review score average for Mass Effect 2, based off of 73 separate reviews, is simply hogwash. This game sucked, all those reviewers are idiots, as are all the people that somehow liked this piece of crap game. We should boycott ME3 because Bioware just sucks so much...

I never said Bioware sucks. I never said ME 2 sucks, I said that the story is poorly written, and the cover mechanics somewhat annoying,

None of those reviewers analysed the plot, the one who did came to many conclusions brought up both by Smudboy and others.

Reviewers look at everything they can and give a score based on the overall product.

Not sure what your point is here, critical acclaim has been awarded to many works of entertainment unjustly, and the opposite is also true.

My point is, you can pointlessly criticize the most minute details of Mass Effect 2 to your hearts content. Just don't expect many people to agree with you. Especially when the vast, overwhelming majority praise Mass Effect 2 as one of the greatest games of all time...story included.