6494 réponses à ce sujet

[111987]

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

ME2 was nothing but filler.

How can you say that without knowing how all the things in ME2 will affect ME3?

[Notlikeyoucare]

111987 wrote...

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.

Then that's their right. The writing  is terrible however, if this adds to their overall enjoyment of the game, that's fine. I'm not asking people  to agree with me, I'm just raising points.

[Whatever42]

The LoTR movies recieved 5/5 stars from a huge number of critics and 95% of critics were positive in general about the movies. Yet 5% were actually negative about the movies.

Sometimes some people just don't like the genre or sometimes they get a bee in their bonnet about some aspect of the movie that diminishes it for them. For example, Ebert was critical of TTT movie because he was upset that the role of the hobbits seemed smaller than the first movie. He also criticized the movies for being too trivial - apparently he believed big movies should only be about weighty topics.

He is entitled to his opinion, of course. And those who share his tastes can use him as a guidepost to whether they want to see a certain movie. However, also it's also legitimate to dismiss him because he is far removed from our own tastes.

The ME series are video games told in a movie-like, cinematic style. The story-telling reflects that. Most of us accept that and like most of what we see very much. A few want something that the ME series is not - an old fashion RPG novel where a character can wax about a topic for an hour, providing all kinds of lore and context.

If that's what you expect from your games and nothing else is acceptable then I understand completely. Just be aware that most ME2 fans have different tastes.

[Notlikeyoucare]

111987 wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

ME2 was nothing but filler.

How can you say that without knowing how all the things in ME2 will affect ME3?

Because nothing of any value happend besides the Collector base, Arrival, and possibly Leigon's loyalty mission. Most of it doesn't affect the plot.

[Notlikeyoucare]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

The LoTR movies recieved 5/5 stars from a huge number of critics and 95% of critics were positive in general about the movies. Yet 5% were actually negative about the movies.

Sometimes some people just don't like the genre or sometimes they get a bee in their bonnet about some aspect of the movie that diminishes it for them. For example, Ebert was critical of TTT movie because he was upset that the role of the hobbits seemed smaller than the first movie. He also criticized the movies for being too trivial - apparently he believed big movies should only be about weighty topics.

He is entitled to his opinion, of course. And those who share his tastes can use him as a guidepost to whether they want to see a certain movie. However, also it's also legitimate to dismiss him because he is far removed from our own tastes.

The ME series are video games told in a movie-like, cinematic style. The story-telling reflects that. Most of us accept that and like most of what we see very much. A few want something that the ME series is not - an old fashion RPG novel where a character can wax about a topic for an hour, providing all kinds of lore and context.

If that's what you expect from your games and nothing else is acceptable then I understand completely. Just be aware that most ME2 fans have different tastes.

Ebert is a moron, he critisised War of the Worlds for the Tripods having 3 legs :/

Oh, and he called The Golden Compass a deeper fantasy epic then the Lord of the RIngs Trilogy.

[111987]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

111987 wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

ME2 was nothing but filler.

How can you say that without knowing how all the things in ME2 will affect ME3?

Because nothing of any value happend besides the Collector base, Arrival, and possibly Leigon's loyalty mission. Most of it doesn't affect the plot.

Nothing of value?

Arrival stopped the Reapers from conquering the galaxy! That's just as valuable as stopping Sovereign at the Battle of the Citadel.

What happened in ME1 that was so much more significant than in ME2? The major choices were

Save/Kill Rachni Queen
Save/Kill Council
Anderson/Udina

The major ME2 decisions were

Save/destroy greybox
Encourage/Discourage Quarian War against Geth
Destroy/Re-write Heretic Geth (or if you didn't do it at all, deal with the consequence of all Geth serving the Reapers in ME3...that's HUGE
Save/Destroy Genophage
Save/Destroy Collector Base

Since we don't know how any of the major choices from ME1 or ME2 will play out in ME3, you can't say nothing of value happened.

[Gatt9]

111987 wrote...
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.

You've got some major problems with that assertion.

-Some game press sites have been caught reviewing publishers and not games.

-Some press insiders have come forward and explained how you are required to preview a game.

-Some press insiders have come forward and explained how publishers use the "Review embargo" to "Encourage" favorable reviews by permiting sites with favorable reviews to break the embargo,  while forcing sites with unfavorable reviews to hold to them,  decreasing their traffic and hence their revenue.

-DA2 was also given 10/10 at some sites. 

In closing,  I *very* highly doubt many will call ME2 one of the "Greatest Games of All Time",  for a variety of reasons it was lackluster at best in comparison to it's peers.  3 minutes with the AI alone is enough to preclude it from ever holding that title given that it didn't release in 1999.  People keep assuming that the press and "User reviews" are honest.

They aren't.  We already know EA has no problem with it's employees doing "User reviews" without disclosing their affiliation.  One other big name publisher very tightly controls the community and uses some pretty nasty underhanded tactics to do it.  We know manipulation is rampant,  in fact,  someone did a statistical analysis of review scores right around DA2's release,  and unsurprisingly discovered that big name publisher's titles mostly only fall in the 7-10 range(A few will fall as low as 5,  but almost never below that),  while indie titles use the full 10 point scale.

Some of the gaming press sites have even been demonstrated to cull user reviews below a certain threshold,  but don't cull the opposite end,  also creating a skewed environment.

So making the statement that the "Vast majority loves X" based upon the gaming press sites is folly.

Modifié par Gatt9, 02 septembre 2011 - 02:27 .

[111987]

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

111987 wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

ME2 was nothing but filler.

How can you say that without knowing how all the things in ME2 will affect ME3?

It was just a bunch of short stories put together. And most of those won't have an effect, I assure you.

If you say so...after all you clearly have insider information on Mass Effect 3.

I guess saving or destroying the genophage data won't be important, or possibly destroying, re-writing, or losing all Geth to the Reapers won't matter. Nor will saving or destroying the Collector Base. Or handing over the data from Tali's loyalty mission, which throws the Migrant Fleet into total chaos.

[camcon2100]

I have to argue what did you expect out of the second game in the trilogy. There always has to be some filler.We cant jump in and fight the reapers. ME2 was about understanding some of the reapers motives. Stopping them of a valuable asset (the collector base and its reaper) You cant expect the middle game to further the story to much. Look at most trilogys...Sure ME2 was alot of filler. But that filler was 12 characters that you actually care about along with the ones for ME1 and makes the fight against the reapers even more personal. I mean let's face it sure thousands of people may die....we may care a little in game but we don't know them so it really doesn't affect us. By introducing these people the game takes on a much more personal path. Not just saving the galaxy (which is very Cliched) But saving your friends and loved ones makes it much more powerful. This post is getting a little long but i think you get the message.

Modifié par camcon2100, 02 septembre 2011 - 02:29 .

[Whatever42]

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

111987 wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

ME2 was nothing but filler.

How can you say that without knowing how all the things in ME2 will affect ME3?

Because nothing of any value happend besides the Collector base, Arrival, and possibly Leigon's loyalty mission. Most of it doesn't affect the plot.

Basically this.

It looks like the genophage cure might have an impact. I suspect your Quarian flotilla fleet decisions will have an impact. If some squadmates died,that certainly will have an impact. We learned things from the dead reaper. The events in LotSB are crucial to the story. There will be certainly foreshadowing through ME2, such as Veetor's and Parasini's comments about dark energy. 

I'm not really sure how people can reach these conclusions.

[Killjoy Cutter]

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. ../../../images/forum/emoticons/wink.png

Or a brick-like protagonist.

Actually, it doesn't bother me that much that Shep just gets on with the job at hand instead of spending a bunch of screen time (and bytes) emoting about the whole thing.

[111987]

Gatt9 wrote...

111987 wrote...
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.

You've got some major problems with that assertion.

-Some game press sites have been caught reviewing publishers and not games.

-Some press insiders have come forward and explained how you are required to preview a game.

-Some press insiders have come forward and explained how publishers use the "Review embargo" to "Encourage" favorable reviews by permiting sites with favorable reviews to break the embargo,  while forcing sites with unfavorable reviews to hold to them,  decreasing their traffic and hence their revenue.

-DA2 was also given 10/10 at some sites. 

In closing,  I *very* highly doubt many will call ME2 one of the "Greatest Games of All Time",  for a variety of reasons it was lackluster at best in comparison to it's peers.  3 minutes with the AI alone is enough to preclude it from ever holding that title given that it didn't release in 1999.  People keep assuming that the press and "User reviews" are honest.

They aren't.  We already know EA has no problem with it's employees doing "User reviews" without disclosing their affiliation.  One other big name publisher very tightly controls the community and uses some pretty nasty underhanded tactics to do it.  We know manipulation is rampant,  in fact,  someone did a statistical analysis of review scores right around DA2's release,  and unsurprisingly discovered that big name publisher's titles mostly only fall in the 7-10 range(A few will fall as low as 5,  but almost never below that),  while indie titles use the full 10 point scale.

Some of the gaming press sites have even been demonstrated to cull user reviews below a certain threshold,  but don't cull the opposite end,  also creating a skewed environment.

So making the statement that the "Vast majority loves X" based upon the gaming press sites is folly.

Gamerankings averages official reviews from websites, not user reviews. Are all reviews honest? Probably not, but unless you can show me proof that all 73 of the reviews that made up that average were paid for by EA...

It is your opinion that ME2 was lackluster. A hell of a lot more people would disagree with you. There isn't some massive conspiracy going on. If a game is crappy, it won't get a good review. Plenty of EA games have gotten terrible reviews.

[111987]

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

111987 wrote...
Nothing of value?

Arrival stopped the Reapers from conquering the galaxy! That's just as valuable as stopping Sovereign at the Battle of the Citadel.

What happened in ME1 that was so much more significant than in ME2? The major choices were

Save/Kill Rachni Queen
Save/Kill Council
Anderson/Udina

The major ME2 decisions were

Save/destroy greybox
Encourage/Discourage Quarian War against Geth
Destroy/Re-write Heretic Geth (or if you didn't do it at all, deal with the consequence of all Geth serving the Reapers in ME3...that's HUGE
Save/Destroy Genophage
Save/Destroy Collector Base

Since we don't know how any of the major choices from ME1 or ME2 will play out in ME3, you can't say nothing of value happened.

The greybox is part of a DLC that's not story related, so that won't matter.
I got a good feeling that won't have an effect, as in ME3 we will actually decide if they go to war or not.
There's no proof of that.
That'll happen in ME3, as nothing actually happened in ME2.
That's the only one that matters.

Edited for grammar.

I'll give you the greybox, because it is DLC.

I don't care if you have a good feeling about it, that's not proof of anything.

There's no proof of what? If Legion is sold to Cerberus, what's stopping the Heretic Geth from releasing the virus and contaminating all known Geth?

Actually saving the genophage data means a cure is much closer to coming to fruition than if you destroy it.

[Notlikeyoucare]

111987 wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

111987 wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

ME2 was nothing but filler.

How can you say that without knowing how all the things in ME2 will affect ME3?

Because nothing of any value happend besides the Collector base, Arrival, and possibly Leigon's loyalty mission. Most of it doesn't affect the plot.

Nothing of value?

Arrival stopped the Reapers from conquering the galaxy! That's just as valuable as stopping Sovereign at the Battle of the Citadel.

What happened in ME1 that was so much more significant than in ME2? The major choices were

Save/Kill Rachni Queen
Save/Kill Council
Anderson/Udina

The major ME2 decisions were

Save/destroy greybox
Encourage/Discourage Quarian War against Geth
Destroy/Re-write Heretic Geth (or if you didn't do it at all, deal with the consequence of all Geth serving the Reapers in ME3...that's HUGE
Save/Destroy Genophage
Save/Destroy Collector Base

Since we don't know how any of the major choices from ME1 or ME2 will play out in ME3, you can't say nothing of value happened.

What I mean by nothing of value was that at the end of ME 2 we are in the EXACT same spot that we were at the end of ME 1 besides the knowledge of The Collectors being Protheans (which doesn't matter anyway since we killed them) and the recton of Reapers being semi organic constructs. The Reapers are still coming and we have no idea on how to stop them, nor have we tried to find out.

[111987]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

111987 wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

111987 wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

ME2 was nothing but filler.

How can you say that without knowing how all the things in ME2 will affect ME3?

Because nothing of any value happend besides the Collector base, Arrival, and possibly Leigon's loyalty mission. Most of it doesn't affect the plot.

Nothing of value?

Arrival stopped the Reapers from conquering the galaxy! That's just as valuable as stopping Sovereign at the Battle of the Citadel.

What happened in ME1 that was so much more significant than in ME2? The major choices were

Save/Kill Rachni Queen
Save/Kill Council
Anderson/Udina

The major ME2 decisions were

Save/destroy greybox
Encourage/Discourage Quarian War against Geth
Destroy/Re-write Heretic Geth (or if you didn't do it at all, deal with the consequence of all Geth serving the Reapers in ME3...that's HUGE
Save/Destroy Genophage
Save/Destroy Collector Base

Since we don't know how any of the major choices from ME1 or ME2 will play out in ME3, you can't say nothing of value happened.

What I mean by nothing of value was that at the end of ME 2 we are in the EXACT same spot that we were at the end of ME 1 besides the knowledge of The Collectors being Protheans (which doesn't matter anyway since we killed them) and the recton of Reapers being semi organic constructs. The Reapers are still coming and we have no idea on how to stop them, nor have we tried to find out.

First of all, the Reapers being part organic is not a retcon. It was never stated that the Reapers were fully mechanical. Just because that's the impression you got doesn't make it a retcon.

The plot of ME3 is figuring out how to stop the Reapers. And until you see how the impact of the ME2 choices play out, you shouldn't say they don't matter in stopping the Reapers.

[MrFob]

I have to say, I too was disappointed in Shepards lack of reflection on the Lazarus project. It would not have hurt to put something like this into the romance scenes for example. In LotSB when Liara is on the Normandy s/he gets to give a statement about how s/he feels about the fight against the reapers. That was a great moment and all I'd ask for is the same about Sheps resurrection. Give the player the choice to shrug it of or decide that Shep should have a (maybe deeply buried) scar there that s/he just shows shortly to someone trustworthy before hiding it again behind the leadership role. That is what I imagine for my Shep but it would have been nice to get the opportunity to express that to your LI at least. Not a big thing, just 1 minute of dialogue and maybe a fade out on a thoughtful Shepard, that would have been enough.
Well, they may have a chance to do something about that at the very beginning of ME3, after that, it would not make too much sense given that Shep never took the time before and apparently now is on the most time sensitive mission yet. I wont get my hopes up though. I am not convinced BW will get back into this issue.

EDIT: Oh sorry, last post I read was Killjoys and this was meant as a response to that conversation. I am actually not interested to discuss Smudboys stuff again, sorry for the OT.

Modifié par MrFob, 02 septembre 2011 - 02:45 .

[111987]

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

111987 wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

111987 wrote...
Nothing of value?

Arrival stopped the Reapers from conquering the galaxy! That's just as valuable as stopping Sovereign at the Battle of the Citadel.

What happened in ME1 that was so much more significant than in ME2? The major choices were

Save/Kill Rachni Queen
Save/Kill Council
Anderson/Udina

The major ME2 decisions were

Save/destroy greybox
Encourage/Discourage Quarian War against Geth
Destroy/Re-write Heretic Geth (or if you didn't do it at all, deal with the consequence of all Geth serving the Reapers in ME3...that's HUGE
Save/Destroy Genophage
Save/Destroy Collector Base

Since we don't know how any of the major choices from ME1 or ME2 will play out in ME3, you can't say nothing of value happened.

The greybox is part of a DLC that's not story related, so that won't matter.
I got a good feeling that won't have an effect, as in ME3 we will actually decide if they go to war or not.
There's no proof of that.
That'll happen in ME3, as nothing actually happened in ME2.
That's the only one that matters.

Edited for grammar.

I'll give you the greybox, because it is DLC.

I don't care if you have a good feeling about it, that's not proof of anything.

There's no proof of what? If Legion is sold to Cerberus, what's stopping the Heretic Geth from releasing the virus and contaminating all known Geth?

Actually saving the genophage data means a cure is much closer to coming to fruition than if you destroy it.

Since I have no real proof, just feelings, I can't say more on the geth and quarians.

You might be right on the genophage. But still overall, I think ME1 was more important storywise.

Fair enough. And your feelings could very well turn out to be right, but until we know the outcomes, we shouldn't hastily say they don't matter.

ME1  major choices were saving the Rachni, saving the Council, and choosing the Councillor. There were actually more big choices in ME2. And we have no idea how significant any of these choices will be, so yeah...

[dreman9999]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

111987 wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Stop trying to prove that a ship can deflect space debris we're past that already. The point is, it isn't consistent. As I've said earlier, Mass Effect Shields are just plot devices: they are what the plot needs them to be at any moment and nothing more, which is my problem.

So...what I'm gathering from this is that, despite being supported by both in-game examples and the lore (i.e. Codex), the shields are acting inconsistently?

At least use an example where the shielding isn't acting consistently, like on Haestrom. The shields drained there, when they shouldn't have. This is obviously a game play mechanic, but the point still stands

See, I can point out and admit to where ME2 has inconsistencies. You seem unable to accept that you, in this instance, are just plain wrong.

I'm not even sure that Haestrom counts... if the radiation is particle radiation, then it could interact with the kinetic barriers and cause them to "drain". 

The thing is the sun on Haestrom was frying all tech it had direct sun light on reguardless of protection. The shield going down was not indecating interactiontion shield. It was indecation of the interaction to the tech in general. The generator of the shield were just stop working, not the shield were  getting warn down.

The shields go down over time in the same manner as if being struck by enemy fire. 

Other equipment does not appear to shut down immediately, and indeed seems to function normally, including the weapons, which also use mass effect fields and complicated computerized systems.  The shuttle is able to fly in and land, without its barrier and mass effect generator(s) failing.  One possible explanation is that its barrier is strong enough to resist the particle radiation, while personal units are not. 

Another hint that barriers are able to resist particle radiation is the fact that ships are able to travel long times and distances in space without several meters of physical shielding against cosmic "rays".

You never realize that teck can be armor to protect agenst rediation over time. The ship landed in a shadow and quick got out before leaving. The guns are kept out of the sun because you are getting out of the sun.
Also, armor and metal is what protect things from radiation, like lead.

As I stated before. What your seeing with the shield is just the shield generator getting fried.

Your weapons are exposed for as long as your shields are, and suffer no degredation while exposed.  Your radios, suit computers, and so on, are exposed for as long as your shields are, and suffer no degredation while exposed. 

The only logical conclusion is that the shields are being affected in a way that the weapons, suit computers, radios, etc, are not.  That leaves us

As for the shuttle, it has to be exposed for the entire trip down, and the entire trip back up to the Normandy.  In fact, the Normandy itself is exposed if it's not in the shadow of Haestrom. 

A few millimeters of metal won't protect against what the magnetosphere and atmosphere won't protect against, by the way. 

That the thing.
Theirs a thing known as Electromagnetic shielding. http://en.wikipedia....netic_shielding

Electromagnetic shielding is the process of reducing the electromagnetic field in a space by blocking the field with barriers made of conductive and/or magnetic materials. Shielding is typically applied (1) to enclosures to isolate electrical devices from the 'outside world' and (2) to cables to isolate wires from the environment through which the cable runs. Electromagnetic shielding that blocks radio frequency electromagnetic radiation is also known as RF shielding
.....


Thiers also Radiation protection...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_shielding...



Radiation protection, sometimes known as radiological protection, is the science[citation needed] of protecting people and the environment from the harmful effects of ionizing radiation, which includes both particle radiation and high energy electromagnetic radiation.
Ionizing radiation is widely used in industry and medicine, but presents a significant health hazard. It causes microscopic damage to living tissue, resulting in skin burns and radiation sickness at high exposures and statistically elevated risks of cancer, tumors and genetic damage at low exposures.


Added on....Shielding design...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_shielding#Shielding_design
Shielding reduces the intensity of radiation exponentially depending on the thickness.
This means when added thicknesses are used, the shielding multiplies. For example, a practical shield in a fallout shelter is ten halving-thicknesses of packed dirt, which is 90 cm (3 ft) of dirt. This reduces gamma rays to 1/1,024 of their original intensity (1/2 multiplied by itself ten times). Halving thicknesses of some materials, that reduce gamma ray intensity by 50% (1/2) include[2]:


That how radiation is blocked in general. Layers of metal can stop and reduce levels of radiation. The shuttle can have heavy amount metel protection to give it time to get to the planet and back and it still landed in a shade to drop you.
Your guns arn't out long enough to get really damaged, like how your shield generator can recover when you are in the shade. The time it would take for your weapons tobe fully damage, ou would be long dead. Let alone every comment on the mission explains the sun is frying equipment.
Metal can reduce the amount of effect of radiation like lead and iron can stop radiation. The thing is on that mission, the radiation was so much that all of it could not be fully stopped, just reduced. In the end any equipment will get fried it it stay long enough in the sun.
What your see is the sheild generator  failing. Not the shield being degraded.

I suggest you dig deeper into the science than a sloppily-quoted Wiki article. 

These quotes are my sources of my point. Their are ways to reduce radiation with metal. The sorce even say you can do it with wood. A shuttle can be layered this way to last long enough to get to haestrom.
Also, the mission quotes themselves state it the tech that get fired.
Also, Grunts armor never fails in the mision when he's in the sun....http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Grunt#Trivia
Which show that that the radiation is not effecting the protection itself but the power supply for the protection.
As I said before, what your seeing on Haestrom is the shield generator going out, not the shields being attacked directly.

[dreman9999]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

111987 wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

ME2 was nothing but filler.

How can you say that without knowing how all the things in ME2 will affect ME3?

Because nothing of any value happend besides the Collector base, Arrival, and possibly Leigon's loyalty mission. Most of it doesn't affect the plot.

So Tali's loyalty mission has no ground in furture quarian/human relations in ME3? The genophage cure will never come in hand in ME3? Aria's pull with the terminus system won't have any effect? Kasumis grybox has pointless in ME3? The results of overlord? The tech from the collector base and who lives and dies in the suicide mission?
All that ispoint less to ME3?

[dreman9999]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

111987 wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

111987 wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

ME2 was nothing but filler.

How can you say that without knowing how all the things in ME2 will affect ME3?

Because nothing of any value happend besides the Collector base, Arrival, and possibly Leigon's loyalty mission. Most of it doesn't affect the plot.

Nothing of value?

Arrival stopped the Reapers from conquering the galaxy! That's just as valuable as stopping Sovereign at the Battle of the Citadel.

What happened in ME1 that was so much more significant than in ME2? The major choices were

Save/Kill Rachni Queen
Save/Kill Council
Anderson/Udina

The major ME2 decisions were

Save/destroy greybox
Encourage/Discourage Quarian War against Geth
Destroy/Re-write Heretic Geth (or if you didn't do it at all, deal with the consequence of all Geth serving the Reapers in ME3...that's HUGE
Save/Destroy Genophage
Save/Destroy Collector Base

Since we don't know how any of the major choices from ME1 or ME2 will play out in ME3, you can't say nothing of value happened.

What I mean by nothing of value was that at the end of ME 2 we are in the EXACT same spot that we were at the end of ME 1 besides the knowledge of The Collectors being Protheans (which doesn't matter anyway since we killed them) and the recton of Reapers being semi organic constructs. The Reapers are still coming and we have no idea on how to stop them, nor have we tried to find out.

The reaper being part organicis not a retcon.

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...
As I said before, what your seeing on Haestrom is the shield generator going out, not the shields being attacked directly.

Is this actually said in the game?  "Fries your shields" is the phrase that's used repeatedly, and isn't specific as to what's going on. 

Given the other observable facts, it is highly unlikely that the barrier generators themselves are being affected, or the Normandy and the shuttle would also lose their barriers.  The shuttle has to spend longer in direct exposure to the star than Shep ever does.  And all the other equipment that is not harmed  is exposed for just as long as the barrier generators in the armor.  The radios and computers built into the same armor are not affected. 

Unless you can come up with a canon-compatible way in which the squad's kinetic barrier systems are more vulnerable than any other piece of equipment they're carrying, you have an unaddressed contradition in your theory. 

Given how the barriers work and what they do, they'd be affected by particle radiation.  We see the personal barriers fail when exposed directly to the star.  Draw a straight line. 

And again, the shell of a gun or the metal in an armored suit would not be enough to step particle radiation energetic enough to have just punched clean through Haestrom's magnetic field and through miles and miles of atmosphere.