184 réponses à ce sujet

[PrinceLionheart]

Honestly, I got this feeling the second time I played through ME2. ME2 was really extended filler. I know a lot of the apologist will try to justify it by saying how the "characters were the story", but really when it comes down to it the only real advancement made in the plot was the Arrival DLC.

[Yuoaman]

I didn't mind the suicide mission, probably because I thought it was pretty easy to choose who would do what, given what I knew about the characters - but I can see the hurdles in creating a game for every possible combination of survivors.

[onelifecrisis]

I don't see how ME3 could be considered rushed by any measure. The tech (and the knowledge of how to use it), the setting, the core gameplay, and a fair amount of assets were already done before they even started on ME3. And, if you believe the marketing crap, the plot outline was done years ago. Come March, ME3 will have had plenty of time to be "done right".

[Mr. MannlyMan]

Dilandau3000 wrote...

What I really hope is that they're not rushing this out the door. I'd much rather have the game delayed another six months and have this handled properly.

This, which is what I told people when the game was delayed until March.

Bioware needs the time to pull this off, and they're introducing a brand-new co-op mode.

[onelifecrisis]

PrinceLionheart wrote...

Honestly, I got this feeling the second time I played through ME2. ME2 was really extended filler. I know a lot of the apologist will try to justify it by saying how the "characters were the story", but really when it comes down to it the only real advancement made in the plot was the Arrival DLC.

Yup.

Those "characters are the story" people might get a shock in ME3 when all their possibly-dead characters are sidelined.

[The Spamming Troll]

PrinceLionheart wrote...

Honestly, I got this feeling the second time I played through ME2. ME2 was really extended filler. I know a lot of the apologist will try to justify it by saying how the "characters were the story", but really when it comes down to it the only real advancement made in the plot was the Arrival DLC.

i wonder how many times ive seen the excuse to ME2s lack of story and consequences as "duh bro its only the second chapter!" as if thats enough of a reason for ME2 to exclude thoes things.

whats going to make ME2 seem even more worthless is ME3s presumably much better gameplay with power evolutions and modable weapons. people wont play ME2 becuase its sory sucks and its gameplay is much worse then ME3s. say what you ant about the gameplay but atleast ME1 has a story attached to it to go back to.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 30 novembre 2011 - 04:13 .

[Chromie]

The Spamming Troll wrote...but atleast ME1 has a story attached to it to go back to.

Not a very good one. Pretty much the same generic story they've always been doing at least Mass Effect 2 was different. Not saying it was a good story just different.

[Mr. MannlyMan]

onelifecrisis wrote...

PrinceLionheart wrote...

Honestly, I got this feeling the second time I played through ME2. ME2 was really extended filler. I know a lot of the apologist will try to justify it by saying how the "characters were the story", but really when it comes down to it the only real advancement made in the plot was the Arrival DLC.

Yup.

Those "characters are the story" people might get a shock in ME3 when all their possibly-dead characters are sidelined.

Mass Effect 2 did a lot to develop and set up the various conflicts that will be coming into play in ME3, but honestly, that won't save it from being viewed as the "middle child" of the trilogy when all is said and done.

[Terror_K]

jreezy wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

Yup.

Those "characters are the story" people might get a shock in ME3 when all their possibly-dead characters are sidelined.

They won't sideline Tali, Garrus or Mordin.

Yeah, but they'll probably cheapen them by having weak copy'n'paste substitutes delivering the same lines and doing the same basic thing rather than any proper consequences and real variations.

[Il Divo]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

whats going to make ME2 seem even more worthless is ME3s presumably much better gameplay with power evolutions and modable weapons. people wont play ME2 becuase its sory sucks and its gameplay is much worse then ME3s. say what you ant about the gameplay but atleast ME1 has a story attached to it to go back to.

Speak for yourself. I'll be replaying Mass Effect 2 for the Loyalty Missions, Companions, and interaction with TIM. That's more than I can say for Mass Effect 1.

[Neow]

PrinceLionheart wrote...

Honestly, I got this feeling the second time I played through ME2. ME2 was really extended filler. I know a lot of the apologist will try to justify it by saying how the "characters were the story", but really when it comes down to it the only real advancement made in the plot was the Arrival DLC.

Or Tali/Legion's loyalty missions which shines new light on the quarian/geth political situation. Mordin's which pave way to the cure of genophage, Grunt's which tipped the power balance of Tuchanka, Zaeed's which affect the leadership of Blue Suns.

The rest though, I don't really care about them, some may still have potential to develop in interesting way, but my imaginations tend to run a bit wild.

[PrinceLionheart]

Neow wrote...

Or Tali/Legion's loyalty missions which shines new light on the quarian/geth political situation. Mordin's which pave way to the cure of genophage, Grunt's which tipped the power balance of Tuchanka, Zaeed's which affect the leadership of Blue Suns.

The rest though, I don't really care about them, some may still have potential to develop in interesting way, but my imaginations tend to run a bit wild.

Honestly, as much as I loved Mordin's side mission (it was actually my favorite of the bunch) it seems like the Krogan Princess storyline is going to make it redundant.

Mr. MannlyMan wrote...

Mass Effect 2 did a lot to develop and set up the various conflicts that will be coming into play in ME3, but honestly, that won't save it from being viewed as the "middle child" of the trilogy when all is said and done.

I don't want to come off as over-critical over ME2, but it really didn't. Yeah, a lot of the side stuff concerning the Korgan and the Quarian/Geth conflict was nice, but the entirety of the ME2 story has you end up being back to exactly where you left off at in ME1. It took the Arrival DLC for there to be real forward progression with the plot.

Not to say that ME2 was a bad game, just that storywise, it's looking more and more irrelevant.

Modifié par PrinceLionheart, 30 novembre 2011 - 05:06 .

[PrinceLionheart]

delete

Modifié par PrinceLionheart, 30 novembre 2011 - 05:04 .

[CerberusWarrior]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

PrinceLionheart wrote...

Honestly, I got this feeling the second time I played through ME2. ME2 was really extended filler. I know a lot of the apologist will try to justify it by saying how the "characters were the story", but really when it comes down to it the only real advancement made in the plot was the Arrival DLC.

i wonder how many times ive seen the excuse to ME2s lack of story and consequences as "duh bro its only the second chapter!" as if thats enough of a reason for ME2 to exclude thoes things.

whats going to make ME2 seem even more worthless is ME3s presumably much better gameplay with power evolutions and modable weapons. people wont play ME2 becuase its sory sucks and its gameplay is much worse then ME3s. say what you ant about the gameplay but atleast ME1 has a story attached to it to go back to.

   



Mass Effect 1's so called story is old and been done before about aliens invading and taking over the galaxy.  ME 2 is a better game from a game play point than ME 1 . ME 1's combat is completely sh*t and dumb . No ME 1 is not good at all

[onelifecrisis]

jreezy wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

PrinceLionheart wrote...

Honestly, I got this feeling the second time I played through ME2. ME2 was really extended filler. I know a lot of the apologist will try to justify it by saying how the "characters were the story", but really when it comes down to it the only real advancement made in the plot was the Arrival DLC.

Yup.

Those "characters are the story" people might get a shock in ME3 when all their possibly-dead characters are sidelined.

They won't sideline Tali, Garrus or Mordin.

Tali and Garrus are from ME1! Their frontline roles in ME3 can hardly be held up as evidence that ME2 wasn't filler.

[polyesterpeanut]

onelifecrisis wrote...

jreezy wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

PrinceLionheart wrote...

Honestly, I got this feeling the second time I played through ME2. ME2 was really extended filler. I know a lot of the apologist will try to justify it by saying how the "characters were the story", but really when it comes down to it the only real advancement made in the plot was the Arrival DLC.

Yup.

Those "characters are the story" people might get a shock in ME3 when all their possibly-dead characters are sidelined.

They won't sideline Tali, Garrus or Mordin.

Tali and Garrus are from ME1! Their frontline roles in ME3 can hardly be held up as evidence that ME2 wasn't filler.

fun fact tali wasn't suposted to be in me3 so that argument is bull****

[CerberusWarrior]

onelifecrisis wrote...

jreezy wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

PrinceLionheart wrote...

Honestly, I got this feeling the second time I played through ME2. ME2 was really extended filler. I know a lot of the apologist will try to justify it by saying how the "characters were the story", but really when it comes down to it the only real advancement made in the plot was the Arrival DLC.

Yup.

Those "characters are the story" people might get a shock in ME3 when all their possibly-dead characters are sidelined.

They won't sideline Tali, Garrus or Mordin.

Tali and Garrus are from ME1! Their frontline roles in ME3 can hardly be held up as evidence that ME2 wasn't filler.

   



The only filler in ME 2 was the story line which Bioware has clearly showed in 3 is for all intents and purpose a side quest since Cerberus is the bad guy in 3 which makes no sense from a logic stand point with the story of ME 2 .

[CerberusWarrior]

polyesterpeanut wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

jreezy wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

PrinceLionheart wrote...

Honestly, I got this feeling the second time I played through ME2. ME2 was really extended filler. I know a lot of the apologist will try to justify it by saying how the "characters were the story", but really when it comes down to it the only real advancement made in the plot was the Arrival DLC.

Yup.

Those "characters are the story" people might get a shock in ME3 when all their possibly-dead characters are sidelined.

They won't sideline Tali, Garrus or Mordin.

Tali and Garrus are from ME1! Their frontline roles in ME3 can hardly be held up as evidence that ME2 wasn't filler.

fun fact tali wasn't suposted to be in me3 so that argument is bull****

   


thats what happens when a developer becomes a butt kisser to certain character fan groups

[Jaron Oberyn]

At first they were like "we can go nuts with ME3! Playthroughs will be extremely different based on the previous decisions since its the end!" And then the leak came and revealed the game was more linear than ME2 and the ME2 squad gets small cameos. And now they're starting to say that they can't go nuts with ME3 anymore.

It's definitely possible to do it, but with a 1.5 year development cycle, probably not. Besides It seems as if they just want to finish off ME3 and take a break from the franchise, which I can understand. It gets boring when you're designing one specific style for a long period of time.

-Polite

[Quole]

CerberusWarrior wrote...

polyesterpeanut wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

jreezy wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

PrinceLionheart wrote...

Honestly, I got this feeling the second time I played through ME2. ME2 was really extended filler. I know a lot of the apologist will try to justify it by saying how the "characters were the story", but really when it comes down to it the only real advancement made in the plot was the Arrival DLC.

Yup.

Those "characters are the story" people might get a shock in ME3 when all their possibly-dead characters are sidelined.

They won't sideline Tali, Garrus or Mordin.

Tali and Garrus are from ME1! Their frontline roles in ME3 can hardly be held up as evidence that ME2 wasn't filler.

fun fact tali wasn't suposted to be in me3 so that argument is bull****

   


thats what happens when a developer becomes a butt kisser to certain character fan groups

Funny how you want them to be do the same with your fav character. Cry more please.

[onelifecrisis]

polyesterpeanut wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

jreezy wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

PrinceLionheart wrote...

Honestly, I got this feeling the second time I played through ME2. ME2 was really extended filler. I know a lot of the apologist will try to justify it by saying how the "characters were the story", but really when it comes down to it the only real advancement made in the plot was the Arrival DLC.

Yup.

Those "characters are the story" people might get a shock in ME3 when all their possibly-dead characters are sidelined.

They won't sideline Tali, Garrus or Mordin.

Tali and Garrus are from ME1! Their frontline roles in ME3 can hardly be held up as evidence that ME2 wasn't filler.

fun fact tali wasn't suposted to be in me3 so that argument is bull****

I know. How does that in any way invalidate what I said? Try logic, it doesn't hurt a bit.

[CerberusWarrior]

Quole wrote...

CerberusWarrior wrote...

polyesterpeanut wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

jreezy wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

PrinceLionheart wrote...

Honestly, I got this feeling the second time I played through ME2. ME2 was really extended filler. I know a lot of the apologist will try to justify it by saying how the "characters were the story", but really when it comes down to it the only real advancement made in the plot was the Arrival DLC.

Yup.

Those "characters are the story" people might get a shock in ME3 when all their possibly-dead characters are sidelined.

They won't sideline Tali, Garrus or Mordin.

Tali and Garrus are from ME1! Their frontline roles in ME3 can hardly be held up as evidence that ME2 wasn't filler.

fun fact tali wasn't suposted to be in me3 so that argument is bull****

   


thats what happens when a developer becomes a butt kisser to certain character fan groups

Funny how you want them to be do the same with your fav character. Cry more please.

   


yeah dam right if Bioware wants to do a bunch of ass kissing to the ME 1 / VS fans Its high time to do it for us ME 2 fans as well . 

[onelifecrisis]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

At first they were like "we can go nuts with ME3! Playthroughs will be extremely different based on the previous decisions since its the end!" And then the leak came and revealed the game was more linear than ME2 and the ME2 squad gets small cameos. And now they're starting to say that they can't go nuts with ME3 anymore.

I couldn't have put it better.