121 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

Anderson: Shepard, I've been looking around, and I found someone who might be able to help you. Come in.
*Miranda walks in*
Anderson: Shepard, Doctor Lawson represents the Lazarus Foundation. Doctor?
Miranda: Thank you, General/Councilor. Commander, the Lazarus Foundation is a medical center for advancing Human rehabilitation treatments, particularly severe cases beyond modern medicine's ability to fix. Our goal is to give extremely wounded people who would never walk again a chance, and enable them to return to their normal lives and duties. Given that a number of these extreme injuries come from combat, we deal heavily with veterans and military personnel. People like you.
Shepard (through computer): How?
Miranda: Whatever it takes. The Lazarus Foundation employs advanced cloning, rehabilitation therapies, surguries, and synthetic implants as necessary. We aim to push the envelope of established medicine for the good of all mankind.
Shepard: Dangers?
Miranda: Unavoidable. These treatments are experimental and untried: many are theoretical until we put them into practice. We can make no promises that they will work, or that you will survive. All out patients accept this risk in exchange for the chance for recovery.
Shepard: How much?
Miranda: For you, nothing. Patients are treated free of charge, and only have to sign the liability waiver. Patient care, accommodations, and follow-up treatments are covered by the Foundation.
Shepard: How do you afford it?
Miranda: We solicit funding from a wide range of charities and foundations, as well as receive expertise from a number of medical corporations and universities. We accept only the best and brightest, and many universities compete for the chance to send their top students to our facilities.
Shepard: What's in it for you?
Miranda: Your recovery. And the recovery of any similarly wounded person after you. Once the envelope of modern medicine has been expanded, the technologies that would be used to save you can then be used to support similar cases down the road. That's a service for humanity in and of itself.
Miranda: Though if you meant financially, the Lazarus Foundation itself is a non-profit organization. A large part of our funding from medical corporations, however, comes in exchange for sharing our technologies with them. The improvements and technologies we pioneer become commercial assets within months of success.
Shepard: What’s the catch?
Miranda: Besides the risk of death? None. You will be asked to meet with the backer who brought you case to our attention. Whether you do or not, and anything else that comes from that meeting, will be up to you. Bringing you back to health is our goal, Shepard. Not financial entanglements or red tape.

Anderson: Well, Shepard? Are you willing to be a test bed if that’s what it takes to get back into the fight? This might be your only chance to regain your health. But if you don’t, no one will blame you: you’ve done far more than could be asked of anyone.
Shepard: There’s still more to do. I’m not going to sit by in a hospital bed while the Reapers are still out there. I’ll do it.
Anderson: I knew you would. Doctor Lawson, I think you can consider that his agreement.
Miranda: Excellent. I have the liability waivers right here, and…
Miranda: Welcome to Lazarus, Commander.

[Wulfram]

I don't see the point of the change, if it's still going to be skipped over in a quick intro and still going to be a silly railroad to get us working for Cerberus.

[CptData]

That works even better.

However, does Anderson know Cerberus is behind that Foundation?

Wulfram wrote...

I don't see the point of the change, if
it's still going to be skipped over in a quick intro and still going to
be a silly railroad to get us working for Cerberus.

At least this "railroad" does not include a death and resurrection scenario that produces more problems than anything else.

Modifié par CptData, 01 décembre 2011 - 03:42 .

[Wulfram]

CptData wrote...

At least this "railroad" does not include a death and resurrection scenario that produces more problems than anything else.

If Death and resurrection bother you, just see it as a coma.  Hell, that's what Shepard calls it on horizon.

[CptData]

Wulfram wrote...

CptData wrote...

At least this "railroad" does not include a death and resurrection scenario that produces more problems than anything else.

If Death and resurrection bother you, just see it as a coma.  Hell, that's what Shepard calls it on horizon.

I can't since Shepard clearly died and the corpse Liara recovered was not much more than a bloody mess of flesh and bones. No way Shepard was still alive.

[Wulfram]

CptData wrote...

I can't since Shepard clearly died and the corpse Liara recovered was not much more than a bloody mess of flesh and bones. No way Shepard was still alive.

Well, it requires less messing around with the story than changing it into Shepard just being maimed.

Plus, the comics are lame.  I've never had any problem ignoring them.

Modifié par Wulfram, 01 décembre 2011 - 03:48 .

[Dean_the_Young]

CptData wrote...

That works even better.

However, does Anderson know Cerberus is behind that Foundation?

Nope.

Which is why it comes as a worrisome surprise to not only hear that Shepard is working with Cerberus, but then realizing it was after he helped hand Shepard over to Cerberus doctors for disection. The VS isn't the only one concerned you might have a control-chip buried within all those vital cybernetics that can't be removed.

At least this "railroad" does not include a death and resurrection scenario that produces more problems than anything else.

Also sets an initial counter-tone to the ME1 'Cerberus is all bad', with a 'Cerberus supports our veterans (with life-risking research).'

[Xeranx]

lightsnow13 wrote...

jreezy wrote...

As far as characters not being important to the story goes, that started with Mass Effect, not Mass Effect 2. Most of the characters in the first game are also irrelevant.

This. So true. I feel like all the characters from ME1 are overrated. I played through the game not really thinking anything special about them.

If anyone has played through FF games - they nail the characters down. FF9 - Vivi is a popular favorite. FF10 - a lot of people like Auron. These games have characters that I actually know. I know their personalities and their mannerisms. ME1..I don't know why exactly, but they just aren't special.

I think it didn't help that everyone had basically the same abilities. Garrus/Tali/Kaidan overlapped. Garrus/Ash/Wrex overlapped. Wrex/Liara/Kaidan overlapped. A lot of them didn't have any distinct skills that set them apart. I remember constantly thinking "who should I bring? Well..as long as I can decrypt it really doesn't matter." If the whole reasoning behind bringing along a certain squadmate is so they can open doors and what not...there's got to be something to fix. 

(this is just an example)

Considering the topic I feel your views fit.  However, there's more to some squadmates than just their combat abilities with regard to the overall story.  That they weren't utilized in such a way is unfortunate, but in the beginning there's a real expression that they could be useful.  Perhaps if it were completely made up to the player to choose your companions there would be some processing done as to why some of them were deemed important to the story beyond personality variety.

If you look at Tali, her contribution to the story can't necessarily be described as finished when you get the audio recordings because of your initial fight on Eden Prime.  If you talk to Ashley she tells you the Geth were built by the Quarians before you get to meet one.  So with Tali disabling one and retrieving evidence for the Alliance to use against Saren you already feel she's at least a little bit capable.  Add to that the aforementioned Quarians built the Geth and your initial confrontation, it makes sense that you'd bring her along or be forced to bring her with you.

Garrus is necessary, but not by much.  When you think about criminal investigations, the lead detective knows the ins and outs more so than you possibly could since you're new on the case.  So long as said lead detective demonstrates being of sound mind you feel justified in taking them with you rather than just picking their brain for clues.  It's absolutely reasonable to believe that Garrus can make connections between Saren and any various actions you come across in the story.  So he's not quite easily discounted.

Of course, that's all before taking them with you since we know the story doesn't unfold in such a way that their expertise comes into play for the story.

Liara is the same way, but her relevance to the story is more good lead than vital companion because you only have her word with regard to what her allegiance might be.  In a crime story, if she were to be taken along, she would be kept as far away from a co-conspirator as possible while being kept as close as possible to mention any details that may prove key to stopping whatever threat there may be.  Also, some method of blocking her biotics would be made to render her as much of an inert threat as possible.  The only time I would even consider giving Liara a weapon or unshackling her is if I'm sure to die and a slim chance is better than none.

Wrex has no reason to be on the ship until much later - IF we decide to take him later, that is.  We don't learn about Krogan clones until Virmire though we do see them before that event.  If this were a regular television series the STG would have gotten some info out about Virmire and there being Krogan clones before the message became indecipherable.  Only then is Wrex's potentiality of being a companion made relevant.  Then, of course, we'd need to see what a Krogan can do before we even accept taking Wrex along which is where Fist's takedown could come in handy.

Ashley has no relevance to the story beyond wanting payback.  As such, she's not prime as a companion.  After Jenkins is killed she works, but after saving the colony she's best left to resume protection of the colony should another attack occur later.  I mean, she survived a Geth ambush and could prove a useful asset to any remaining forces left on Eden Prime.  Maybe when it's decided that there's a suicide mission, which the race against time is essentially, then we can consider Ashley but not before.  I say this as an Ash fan. =)

So in the realm of who is, in fact, needed as companions: Kaidan, Garrus, and Tali.
Needed as sources of information or so long as they prove useful: Garrus and Liara.
Needed as possible backup or backup should they prove themselves: Ashley, Wrex, and Liara.

edit: Forgot to add that after learning Anderson's history with Saren, Garrus could process anything and everything Anderson has to say about him (Saren).  It does seem to sideline Shepard, but Shepard serves as a means to bring Saren down so he/she is still rendered important to the overall goal if we discounte the beacon information (which we can because we can't learn anything about it until later).

Modifié par Xeranx, 01 décembre 2011 - 03:58 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Wulfram wrote...

CptData wrote...

I can't since Shepard clearly died and the corpse Liara recovered was not much more than a bloody mess of flesh and bones. No way Shepard was still alive.

Well, it requires less messing around with the story than changing it into Shepard just being maimed.

The purpose of a hypothetical is that, for the considerations of discussing it, it is what the story would be.

The real question would be 'does this segment serve the rest of the story better or worse than the original it replaces?'

Plus, the comics are lame.  I've never had any problem ignoring them.

The more recent ones are almost tolerable.


The only real plot twist is the cut-off of the Shadow Broker trying to steal you subplot. But judging from how the Shadow Broker is being treated in ME3 spoilers, 'Liara the archeologist who finds the Klendagon Canon and Derilect Reaper' would provide her a role, while the Shadow Broker animosity doesn't exactly change much if it was dropped.

[CptData]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

CptData wrote...

That works even better.

However, does Anderson know Cerberus is behind that Foundation?

Nope.

Which is why it comes as a worrisome surprise to not only hear that Shepard is working with Cerberus, but then realizing it was after he helped hand Shepard over to Cerberus doctors for disection. The VS isn't the only one concerned you might have a control-chip buried within all those vital cybernetics that can't be removed.

Okay, does work for me.

At least this "railroad" does not include a death and resurrection scenario that produces more problems than anything else.

Also sets an initial counter-tone to the ME1 'Cerberus is all bad', with a 'Cerberus supports our veterans (with life-risking research).'

Yes and no. I think it only works if you also get rid of the entire story around Jack. While the rest of Cerberus doings can be justified somehow (even the stuff about the Rachni), human experimentation with children can not be justified.

[Dean_the_Young]

CptData wrote...

At least this "railroad" does not include a death and resurrection scenario that produces more problems than anything else.

Also sets an initial counter-tone to the ME1 'Cerberus is all bad', with a 'Cerberus supports our veterans (with life-risking research).'

Yes and no. I think it only works if you also get rid of the entire story around Jack. While the rest of Cerberus doings can be justified somehow (even the stuff about the Rachni), human experimentation with children can not be justified.

Hm? Besides that even Cerberus admits that Teltin got out of control and was a mistake, that's not what I'm talking about.

This is the value of a second impression. Our first impression(s) of Cerberus in ME1 was nearly entirely negative. Our second introduction being positive is what I'm talking about.

You're still entirely free to hate Cerberus for Teltin when you find out about Jack. I'm not attempted for an all-bad or all-good reputation.

[CptData]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

CptData wrote...

At least this "railroad" does not include a death and resurrection scenario that produces more problems than anything else.

Also sets an initial counter-tone to the ME1 'Cerberus is all bad', with a 'Cerberus supports our veterans (with life-risking research).'

Yes and no. I think it only works if you also get rid of the entire story around Jack. While the rest of Cerberus doings can be justified somehow (even the stuff about the Rachni), human experimentation with children can not be justified.

Hm? Besides that even Cerberus admits that Teltin got out of control and was a mistake, that's not what I'm talking about.

This is the value of a second impression. Our first impression(s) of Cerberus in ME1 was nearly entirely negative. Our second introduction being positive is what I'm talking about.

You're still entirely free to hate Cerberus for Teltin when you find out about Jack. I'm not attempted for an all-bad or all-good reputation.

Yes, but that leads to a problem. If you leave Jack's story in game, then you also should give Shepard the option to blame TIM and to leave Cerberus. Leaving Cerberus or staying with them should not be a paragon/renegade decision but a decision you can pick to "roleplay" your Shepard as you like.

I think I said it before: it could be an interesting idea to allow the player to decide post Horizon if s/he wants to stay with Cerberus or not. Jack's LM should trigger another opportunity to decide which path Shepard should follow. Also "Overlord" sounds like one of those opportunities. Last decision opportunity should be the SM itself.

My Shepard would stay with Cerberus after Horizon since "deal is deal", but he'll leave as soon as he learns of either "Overlord" or "Teltin".

[Xeranx]

Exia001 wrote...

I think, as has been stated before, that ME2 is the middle of a series and as such was needed since Shepard cannot hope to stop the Reapers with just the ME cast. The ME2 characters were needed because they all have areas of expertise which will, to a vary degree be required to take down the Reapers.

Just wanted to comment on this part because I don't find it correct or a bit misleading.  Had ME2 been about trying to stop the Reapers I believe it would have been a very different story (and should have).  There's nothing that jumps out at you that informs you that the cast that we collected has the means to stop the Reapers in the slightest.  We have NPCs that do that better in Shiala and Rana with regard to indoctrination.  Key elements that I feel are absolutely wasted.

In fact, it is my firm belief that being the middle of a trilogy doesn't relegate that particular story to being pure filler.  Why people have accepted this, I have no idea.  ME2 could have been a substantial middle part of the story with ME3 being exactly what it's supposed to be: the conclusion. 

ME2 could have expanded the universe, focused on the "dangling participle" that is finding any method to stopping the Reapers - and exploring any key elements that exist and fleshing them out - while making attempts to thwart the Collector threat.  Especially since when we find out that the Collector agenda is the Reaper agenda.  Then we know that our goals coincide with each other and any possible clues to stopping the Reaper threat may also rest in the defeat of the Collectors.  The fact that it wasn't done this way and that ME3 is going to serve both aspects (research and execution) bothers me.

[Dean_the_Young]

CptData wrote...

Yes, but that leads to a problem. If you leave Jack's story in game, then you also should give Shepard the option to blame TIM and to leave Cerberus. Leaving Cerberus or staying with them should not be a paragon/renegade decision but a decision you can pick to "roleplay" your Shepard as you like.

I'd be happy for a choice to abandon Cerberus... and also a resulting cutscene of Shepard being sidelined once again, under Alliance house arrest, and watching the news as Alliance colonies are disappearing, and then breaking news that Earth has gone silent.

Yes, a 'bad end.' Sort of like the Arrival bad end.

I think I said it before: it could be an interesting idea to allow the player to decide post Horizon if s/he wants to stay with Cerberus or not. Jack's LM should trigger another opportunity to decide which path Shepard should follow. Also "Overlord" sounds like one of those opportunities. Last decision opportunity should be the SM itself.

I disagree. Vehemently. Shepard's decision to work with Cerberus was never based around if you liked them or not. It was because Cerberus was, and remains, the only party in town in facing the Collectors. Shepard has always been a 'do what it takes', even when it takes holding your nose. Shepard has never been 'do whatever the player would like'.

Structured plotlines are a requirement, even in RPGs.

My Shepard would stay with Cerberus after Horizon since "deal is deal", but he'll leave as soon as he learns of either "Overlord" or "Teltin".

He won't, because Shepard isn't 'your' character who chooses what you want. Shepard is only self-definable within a scope: no one's Shepard, ever, will choose to join Saren and allow Sovereign to win. No one's Shepard, ever, will stand by and watch the Collectors abduct colonies, even if it means working with Cerberus. No one's Shepard, ever, will follow the Council's orders and not go to Ilos. It's not in Shepard's nature.

Shepard has always been a character with set preferences with individual pieces you could modify.

[CptData]

Xeranx: you've got a point. The "middle part" of a trilogy is not always just a "filler". Check "The Lord of the Rings" - it works. The middle part is essential like the first or the last part. The trilogy wouldn't have worked without it, since the middle part is about the Rohirrim - which are needed to aid Minas Tirith.

However, ME2 feels a bit like a filler. Most notably because you're spending most time in gathering squadmates. In my eyes you spent far too much time on recruiting and loyalty missions. While loyalty missions are usually "free to pick", you can't avoid the recruiting missions which are not part of the story as well.

I did the math: we do have six main story missions: two of them before Shepard gets his Normandy, Horizon, damaged Collector cruiser, IFF, Suicide Mission. That's it.

Jacob and Miranda don't have a recruitment mission, they just have a loyalty mission each. That also applies on Legion: his "recruitment mission" is "Reaper IFF mission", so we have 3 missions for them.
Then we have Tali, Garrus, Mordin, Grunt, Jack, Samara (Morinth), Thane, all of them have a recruitment and a loyalty mission: 7 x 2 = 14 missions.
If you got Kasumi's and Zaeed's DLC, you'll see two more loyalty missions.

Sums up to: 3 + 7 x 2 + 2 = 19 missions for gathering your squad and loyalizing them.

19 "side missions" vs 6 "story missions". If we add any DLC missions to the entire story (Firewalker, Overlord, Arrival, LotSB) we have 29 missions. To be fair I consider Arrival and LotSB as "story relevant missions".
Means: 6+2 out of 25+4 missions are story relevant, that's approx 27.6% of the entire game. That's not much.

Maybe that's one of the reasons why ME2 feels like a filler. Not enough focus on the main plot.

[Dean_the_Young]

Very true, CptData.

A lot of that could have been helped, however, had the character missions been tied to the Collector plot. If Garrus, instead of pissing off merc groups, had pissed off Collectors by screwing up human-trade deals. If Thane was killing Nasana not for being an evil broad, but because she was collaborating with the Collectors. If the Heretic Geth were distinctly linked with the Collectors in the Tali missions, showing their status as fellow Reaper allies: perhapse Collectors on Haestrom, or Rael had traded Quarians for Collector tech.

Tie more in from there. The Collectors wanted to collect Grunt as a genetic specimen. 'Captain Taylor', instead of being lost, looked to be heading into a Collector trap... until we realize he was trading humans to the Collectors. Samara, in tracking Morinth, finds that the Collectors are also interested in the Ardat Yakshi.

[RyuGuitarFreak]

Problems with ME2 are a beaten horse, wonder how they could make it different and better doesn't mean anything now. But I read it, or a part because it's basically the same thing seen 81359018590502 times on ME2 threads.

I agree that the large roster doesn't have a major function in the story but I just don't care. The game was a hell lot of fun with it and I just hope the characters were made justice in ME3.

Now, ME2's plot is fundamentally flawed because Shepard never cared "enough" about people after 2 years, Lazarus Project, VS on Horizon and Morinth? Can't agree with that. I agree that they're flaws but (except Morinth, which I didn't even get as a squadmate, ever), but in the end I wouldn't didn't mind BW's writing on that.

[CptData]

About Cerberus: think the story works with and without Cerberus, but needs to be differently enough to ... make a difference.

Lets say if Shepard decides to leave Cerberus after Horizon, Jacob and Miranda would leave him to stay with Cerberus. They're loyal to that organization, you'll loose two of your squadmates. The story itself changes a bit: instead of getting guided by TIM you need to use new sources - for example the SB or Anderson who secretly could help you. The Normandy is yours by the way!

However, if you leave Cerberus later (especially post SM), Miranda will stay with you and so does Jacob. Jacob might stay with you earlier if you leave post!Overlord or post!Teltin because he has a conscience and he doesn't agree with all the stuff caused by Cerberus.

I believe you wrote a lot of stuff in my reboot!ME thread, Dean, and the stuff I am talking about is from my current script of "reboot!ME2" ... I figured out a way how to make a story that works for Cerberus and Alliance "career".

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Very true, CptData.

A lot
of that could have been helped, however, had the character missions been
tied to the Collector plot. If Garrus, instead of pissing off merc
groups, had pissed off Collectors by screwing up human-trade deals. If
Thane was killing Nasana not for being an evil broad, but because she
was collaborating with the Collectors. If the Heretic Geth were
distinctly linked with the Collectors in the Tali missions, showing
their status as fellow Reaper allies: perhapse Collectors on Haestrom,
or Rael had traded Quarians for Collector tech.

Tie more in from
there. The Collectors wanted to collect Grunt as a genetic specimen.
'Captain Taylor', instead of being lost, looked to be heading into a
Collector trap... until we realize he was trading humans to the
Collectors. Samara, in tracking Morinth, finds that the Collectors are
also interested in the Ardat Yakshi.

I like your ideas - nicely done.

Modifié par CptData, 01 décembre 2011 - 05:06 .

[Gemini1179]

@OP I didn't read through the five pages of replies, but I did read your original post.

You're basically right about the squadmates. Although, I would disagree that Jacob is essential in any way shape or form. He could be killed off at any time and it would not affect the story in the least. You also spend a lot of time on Morinth for some reason, a character you spend more time saying has little value and impact than she has screen time. This is all true and I've never chosen her over Samara because it doesn't really make any sense. Even a Renegade Shepard can't be that stupid, but to each his/her own. She's actually a great tragic character if left unable to recruit IMO.

As for your plot holes, technically I don't think they are plot holes, more like not-fleshed out story or simply bad writing.

Socially awkward Shepard- This I agree with. Shepard is written so poorly as an actual person it's astounding. Your choices of dialogue on Horizon are nothing short of idiotic. Anderson stonewalls you, the Council calls you an idiot and a traitor and NOT ONCE does Shepard ever defend him/herself. It's unbelieveable, you just kind of 'take it' and hang you head and walk back to Cerberus licking your wounds the whole game, it's frustrating.

Death of Shepard: Not in the least do I see any merit to your argument here. They have "Element Zero" which allows you to change the mass of an object. I can believe the hand-wave that they were able to reconstruct Shepard. The MAJOR issues with the death are these: Shepard never deals with it psychologically, there is no PTSD, not talking it out with Kelly, Garrus, Tali, VS, Anderson, etc; no either crying alone or drinking heavily and there is never again any mention of the Cypher.

The whole "She's a hero, a bloody icon, they'll follow her." crap was totally unnecessary. You don't bring someone back to life simply because they're a 'hero'. Hero's are often more effective as symbols when dead anyway. Had it been more like "Shepard is the only one left with the Cypher- the only way to understand the Prothean technology and we will need.... etc, etc, etc." THAT is a reason why I'd bring Shepard back.

Horizon is a train wreck. No two ways about it. Even if they are your LI, you can't tell me you're still pining after them after that debacle. I wanted to kill each of them.

Morinth, in the end, is essentially an easter egg. Yet for some reason, on the CE extras, her VA gets more time than almost any of the other VA's on the disk.

First thing I noticed playing the game that was a missing feature from ME1 was when I was on Freedom's Progress pimped out in my Blood Dragon Armour (thinking I was so cool having the DLC armour before I got any other armour in the game) and lo-and-behold, Tali recognized me through my mask. I literally said "Whaaa?" and did a facepalm. HELMET TOGGLE or have the option like in DA2 to hide the helmet either permanently or just in conversations.

Anyway, this all really only scratches the surface of the game and I find that regardless of it all, I mostly enjoyed the game because even though a lot of it was technically 'unnecessary', every mission was unique, there were no 'reused' locations and the character interactions and combat were very good. Oh, and I could still proceed through the game at a pace I choose- for the most part.

[The Spamming Troll]

Someone With Mass wrote...

naledgeborn wrote...

After playing the Halo games for the last week when I was OT I realized that Mass Effect's biggest fail in regards to story is an apparent lack of consistency and direction. The writers are pretty much improvising. Not saying Halo is a piece of art or anything, but at least they're tellling the same story throughout.

Last time I checked, Mass Effect has been pretty consistent with the story of the inevitable Reaper invasion.

While Halo is constantly going back to clarify certain events in the series.

meh. weve seen 1 reaper over two games. i pray to god ME3 finally utilizes that reapers invasion idea.

and we dont even know if the reapers are real, bro. ME3 might be a game about the turian counselors rise to glory through dismissing false claims.

[Someone With Mass]

Last time I checked, we have seen about 290 Reapers.

[Death13]

True, Mass Efeect 2 has flaws, but what game doesn't. Secondly, Bioware isn't going to make a game where, if a character died in ME2, ME3 would be ruined. They would have alternate scenerios. To Spaming Troll, have you not seen the origional trailer or read anything describing Gameinformer's coverage of ME3. There will be reapers and converted species to fight. And finally, STOP nitpicking. If all you have to do is point out minor flaws in a pretty good game, then you need a new hobby.