247 réponses à ce sujet

[JeffZero]

I hope not. It's a damn fine game.

[colouroflife]

ME1 was an introduction to this world, ME2 helped us to get to know and perceive this world better and it did its job very well. If we had stopped Reapers in ME2 then there wouldn't be a game like ME3. Filler or not, it made us understand the dynamics and relationships better in this world as it was supposed to do.

My only problem with ME2 was there were too many characters to care for.

So there is no reason for them to be ashamed of ME2. It was a just fine game.

[Teredan]

I'd say ME2 was the better game it just had better systems in place was far more friendlier to newcomers and all around had really few tedious parts. But on the other hand I feel like ME1 was the better experience, it just had that much stronger(well rather more focused) narrative in my opinion.

[Rasofe]

@Lemon SPOILER ME2 Yeah, I did this myself on one playthrough. Only 3 squaddies, both disloyal on the attack vs Reapers and loyal Miranda "holding the line". She dies even if loyal and the disloyal squadmates. Then you die.

[Dean_the_Young]

Ashamed? No. Recognizing that it had a number of fundamental weaknesses they don't intend to repeat? Yes.

It's highly unlikely Bioware will ever make another Suicide Mission scenario in the future, unless it's the end of a game (a deadly finale) or with characters they don't intend to return in plot-significant roles.

Bioware has certainly learned a lot of the criticism from the fans about the VS, and will probably work in the future to make sure similar analogs are better handled.

Bioware learned a bit about costume sexualization of characters, and giving people more armor styles to choose from.

Bioware learned about carryover consequences, and is certainly improving on balancing between moral choices.

Bioware has firmly internalized that we players greatly enjoy squadmate interaction, rather than every character existing in a vacume.

I don't think 'ashamed' is a good term, but ME2 is certainly a learning experience of things to improve with.

[Epic777]

Why would bioware be ashamed of one their most successful games?

[Draconis6666]

Oldbones2 wrote...

3.  ME 2 Squad sidelined and minimized.
- Not one of the ME 2 squad returns as a squadmate, or even as just a advisor on the Normandy.  Some of the Normandy crew are gone as well.  I've heard that Kelly may not return as your yeoman.  I never loved Kelly, but why replace a valid character with depth and background just to establish a new one.
+ Aside from pissing off certain fans, this begs the question of why?  Why would absolutely NONE of the characters return in a way that was truly noticable, much less essential?
.

Aside from the already mentioned examples of Garrus and Tali, Legion's contribution in ME 3 if he is alive is far from being un-noticeable or minimized, if it remains even partialy true to the script leaks. He may not be a Full squad member but his contribution to the overall is not minimal. The fact that the ME 2 specific squad members may not be full squad members does not mean that they will have meaningless contributions to the story. In fact them being not full squad members allows them to have greater impact on events, because they can act outside of your actions to influence things.

[izmirtheastarach]

Draconis6666 wrote...

Aside from the already mentioned examples of Garrus and Tali, Legion's contribution in ME 3 if he is alive is far from being un-noticeable or minimized, if it remains even partialy true to the script leaks. He may not be a Full squad member but his contribution to the overall is not minimal. The fact that the ME 2 specific squad members may not be full squad members does not mean that they will have meaningless contributions to the story. In fact them being not full squad members allows them to have greater impact on events, because they can act outside of your actions to influence things.

I would add Thane to that same level of contribution. And that's just for those that we know about already.

[RVallant]

Gtdef wrote...

The problem is that despite the whole collector situation, reapers arrive some months later. Practically the only thing that happens by the time shepard beats the collectors till me3 is that the alliance gets a few more ships to protect earth and it doesnt change a damn thing, according to what we know so far. So unless me3 is about cerberus evolving and becoming the primary figure in the game, then the events of me2 wont change much. The collectors and one more (probably unfisnished) reaper wouldnt change the outcome of the war anyway.

Imo the story is all messed up and I don't really care about it anymore. I just hope that they will introduce some cool elements to keep me occupied for 1 or 2 (if the gameplay is actually good) runs.

I agree.

I enjoy the game but I think it was a learning experience for Bioware. And those damn callibrations.

[Crackseed]

AgitatedLemon wrote...

Naqey wrote...

to get back on topic:
You cant deny that the mainplot in me2 is so thin, it could have easily been done in a bigger dlc or very small addon. 90% of the games revolves around recruiting a squad and then earning the trust of the squadmembers. The fact that all of those squadmembers (except for tali and garrus) don´t play any major role in me3, its just very bad game design / storywriting in my opinion (note the "in my opinion"!). I mean, mass effect was plant as a trilogy, and still the second part feels so much like a "filler". The whole concept of the suicide mission (as good as it might seem), ruined the chance of any of the me2 squadmembers playing a major role in me3. To me that proves some sort of laziness on Biowares part. It´s like "It´s in your hand to decide who lives and who dies, but, oh well, it doesnt really matter at all"
my point is, they knew they were going to make a trilogy, yet they made so many bad desicions concerning the middle part

The reason none of them play a big role in ME3 is because "They can die". Never mind that it's easier to have everyone survive, than have everyone die (Or even kill only 1 or 2 people). Needless to say, team dextro bypassed this whole "logic".

And it's really tough to make a 2nd part in a trilogy be 100% adherant to the main overarching story with a filling conclusion, because it would negate or downplay the 3rd entry.

The flaw with your logic here is that both Garrus and Tali can also die in ME2 and they are being treated as squadmates. I simply thing it became a matter of having to pick the best ways to handle it all. Ideally, I would have loved if Bioware could have figured out how to integrate a "customized" squad selection for the game based on your past game choices/preferences. That being said, what I've seen has me optimistic that even for the non-squaddies returning from ME2, there's still alot of good things to see and do

[CitizenSnips]

It suffers from middle child syndrome. It doesn't start the story, and it can't end it. There's only so much you can do with those constraints and many middle-of-the-trilogy stories end up seeming less important than the first or last installments.

[AgitatedLemon]

crackseed wrote...

The flaw with your logic here is that both Garrus and Tali can also die in ME2 and they are being treated as squadmates.

That's what I said. I wasn't contesting this. I despise Garrus and Tali getting squad seats, despite the fact that they can die.

[Oldbones2]

crackseed wrote...

AgitatedLemon wrote...

Naqey wrote...

to get back on topic:
You cant deny that the mainplot in me2 is so thin, it could have easily been done in a bigger dlc or very small addon. 90% of the games revolves around recruiting a squad and then earning the trust of the squadmembers. The fact that all of those squadmembers (except for tali and garrus) don´t play any major role in me3, its just very bad game design / storywriting in my opinion (note the "in my opinion"!). I mean, mass effect was plant as a trilogy, and still the second part feels so much like a "filler". The whole concept of the suicide mission (as good as it might seem), ruined the chance of any of the me2 squadmembers playing a major role in me3. To me that proves some sort of laziness on Biowares part. It´s like "It´s in your hand to decide who lives and who dies, but, oh well, it doesnt really matter at all"
my point is, they knew they were going to make a trilogy, yet they made so many bad desicions concerning the middle part

The reason none of them play a big role in ME3 is because "They can die". Never mind that it's easier to have everyone survive, than have everyone die (Or even kill only 1 or 2 people). Needless to say, team dextro bypassed this whole "logic".

And it's really tough to make a 2nd part in a trilogy be 100% adherant to the main overarching story with a filling conclusion, because it would negate or downplay the 3rd entry.

The flaw with your logic here is that both Garrus and Tali can also die in ME2 and they are being treated as squadmates. I simply thing it became a matter of having to pick the best ways to handle it all. Ideally, I would have loved if Bioware could have figured out how to integrate a "customized" squad selection for the game based on your past game choices/preferences. That being said, what I've seen has me optimistic that even for the non-squaddies returning from ME2, there's still alot of good things to see and do

Except that Garrus and Tali are the ONLY squatmates in ME 2 that were in ME 1.  They don't undergo any major character growth so they end up essentially the same as they were in ME 1 when they show up in ME 3.  This is my exact point, it's like ME 2 didn't even happen.

[izmirtheastarach]

Oldbones2 wrote...

Except that Garrus and Tali are the ONLY squatmates in ME 2 that were in ME 1.  They don't undergo any major character growth so they end up essentially the same as they were in ME 1 when they show up in ME 3.  This is my exact point, it's like ME 2 didn't even happen.

Having read every page of this thread, I still am not understanding why anyone should care about this. I enjoyed ME2. It was a great gaming experience, and I replayed it many times. That's all that really matters to me. It certainly could never be as important to the story as ME3.

[Oldbones2]

I enjoyed ME 2 too. It was a great game just like you said. That's why it, and things you did/people you worked with should be important. Maybe not as important as ME 3, cause its the ending. But they should have an equal impact as ME 1.

My point is that they don't.

[izmirtheastarach]

Oldbones2 wrote...

I enjoyed ME 2 too. It was a great game just like you said. That's why it, and things you did/people you worked with should be important. Maybe not as important as ME 3, cause its the ending. But they should have an equal impact as ME 1.

My point is that they don't.

How much spoiler info have you exposed yourself to?

[scotkrow]

Oldbones2 wrote...

crackseed wrote...

AgitatedLemon wrote...

Naqey wrote...

to get back on topic:
You cant deny that the mainplot in me2 is so thin, it could have easily been done in a bigger dlc or very small addon. 90% of the games revolves around recruiting a squad and then earning the trust of the squadmembers. The fact that all of those squadmembers (except for tali and garrus) don´t play any major role in me3, its just very bad game design / storywriting in my opinion (note the "in my opinion"!). I mean, mass effect was plant as a trilogy, and still the second part feels so much like a "filler". The whole concept of the suicide mission (as good as it might seem), ruined the chance of any of the me2 squadmembers playing a major role in me3. To me that proves some sort of laziness on Biowares part. It´s like "It´s in your hand to decide who lives and who dies, but, oh well, it doesnt really matter at all"
my point is, they knew they were going to make a trilogy, yet they made so many bad desicions concerning the middle part

The reason none of them play a big role in ME3 is because "They can die". Never mind that it's easier to have everyone survive, than have everyone die (Or even kill only 1 or 2 people). Needless to say, team dextro bypassed this whole "logic".

And it's really tough to make a 2nd part in a trilogy be 100% adherant to the main overarching story with a filling conclusion, because it would negate or downplay the 3rd entry.

The flaw with your logic here is that both Garrus and Tali can also die in ME2 and they are being treated as squadmates. I simply thing it became a matter of having to pick the best ways to handle it all. Ideally, I would have loved if Bioware could have figured out how to integrate a "customized" squad selection for the game based on your past game choices/preferences. That being said, what I've seen has me optimistic that even for the non-squaddies returning from ME2, there's still alot of good things to see and do

Except that Garrus and Tali are the ONLY squatmates in ME 2 that were in ME 1.  They don't undergo any major character growth so they end up essentially the same as they were in ME 1 when they show up in ME 3.  This is my exact point, it's like ME 2 didn't even happen.

What do you mean Tali and Garrus don't have any majot growth?  Depending on your play they change a lot,

Garrus goes from ME1, C-SEC, quits, joins you, goes out with you into the galaxy, hates read tape and you can teach him that action shouldn't always be the first option. ME2 he's a crazy avenger almost as bad as Sasuke Uchiha in the Naruto series. And you can turn him away from that path.  Garrus makes a lot of subtle changes mostly just in his views or right and wrong.

Tali starts in ME1 as the kid just out of her dads house, she's a bit insercure and unsure of what she needs to do, you can give her everything she needs, a good friend and something to bring back from her pilgramige.  You learn that she hates the geth just because it's the "quarian thing to do" not because she's ever thought about it.  ME2 she's a bit older, much more confident, and a lot more expeirenced, her time with you has taught her about the galaxy, and she misses your friendship.  Through the right actions she can learn to see things just a slightest bit more from the geths point of view, and she still doesn't like them, but she doesn't have a blind hate for them.  You also see her deep seeded issuse involving her father and his way of showing his love for her. 

I'll admit Tali has a lot more development that Garrus here, but unfortunately some guys do hold back more of themselves so as to not appear vulnerable.  And Garrus does just that, while Tali does it to a lesser extent her seeing her fathers body breaks her guard down, I'm sure if you got to see Garrus right after his squad was killed, rather than much later after, he'd be just as broken down.  These events will change them in ME3. just not all the time because that's too expensive, it will show in the mojor parts it needs to be shown in, Garrus no matter what is still a BAMF turian sniper, Tali is still  a capable Quarian who wants her home world back and both of them are still your friend/LI. 

Wait till you play the game and then complain about ME2 not having an impact.

[WhiteKnyght]

scotkrow wrote...

Oldbones2 wrote...

crackseed wrote...

AgitatedLemon wrote...

Naqey wrote...

to get back on topic:
You cant deny that the mainplot in me2 is so thin, it could have easily been done in a bigger dlc or very small addon. 90% of the games revolves around recruiting a squad and then earning the trust of the squadmembers. The fact that all of those squadmembers (except for tali and garrus) don´t play any major role in me3, its just very bad game design / storywriting in my opinion (note the "in my opinion"!). I mean, mass effect was plant as a trilogy, and still the second part feels so much like a "filler". The whole concept of the suicide mission (as good as it might seem), ruined the chance of any of the me2 squadmembers playing a major role in me3. To me that proves some sort of laziness on Biowares part. It´s like "It´s in your hand to decide who lives and who dies, but, oh well, it doesnt really matter at all"
my point is, they knew they were going to make a trilogy, yet they made so many bad desicions concerning the middle part

The reason none of them play a big role in ME3 is because "They can die". Never mind that it's easier to have everyone survive, than have everyone die (Or even kill only 1 or 2 people). Needless to say, team dextro bypassed this whole "logic".

And it's really tough to make a 2nd part in a trilogy be 100% adherant to the main overarching story with a filling conclusion, because it would negate or downplay the 3rd entry.

The flaw with your logic here is that both Garrus and Tali can also die in ME2 and they are being treated as squadmates. I simply thing it became a matter of having to pick the best ways to handle it all. Ideally, I would have loved if Bioware could have figured out how to integrate a "customized" squad selection for the game based on your past game choices/preferences. That being said, what I've seen has me optimistic that even for the non-squaddies returning from ME2, there's still alot of good things to see and do

Except that Garrus and Tali are the ONLY squatmates in ME 2 that were in ME 1.  They don't undergo any major character growth so they end up essentially the same as they were in ME 1 when they show up in ME 3.  This is my exact point, it's like ME 2 didn't even happen.

What do you mean Tali and Garrus don't have any majot growth?  Depending on your play they change a lot,

Garrus goes from ME1, C-SEC, quits, joins you, goes out with you into the galaxy, hates read tape and you can teach him that action shouldn't always be the first option. ME2 he's a crazy avenger almost as bad as Sasuke Uchiha in the Naruto series. And you can turn him away from that path.  Garrus makes a lot of subtle changes mostly just in his views or right and wrong.

Tali starts in ME1 as the kid just out of her dads house, she's a bit insercure and unsure of what she needs to do, you can give her everything she needs, a good friend and something to bring back from her pilgramige.  You learn that she hates the geth just because it's the "quarian thing to do" not because she's ever thought about it.  ME2 she's a bit older, much more confident, and a lot more expeirenced, her time with you has taught her about the galaxy, and she misses your friendship.  Through the right actions she can learn to see things just a slightest bit more from the geths point of view, and she still doesn't like them, but she doesn't have a blind hate for them.  You also see her deep seeded issuse involving her father and his way of showing his love for her. 

I'll admit Tali has a lot more development that Garrus here, but unfortunately some guys do hold back more of themselves so as to not appear vulnerable.  And Garrus does just that, while Tali does it to a lesser extent her seeing her fathers body breaks her guard down, I'm sure if you got to see Garrus right after his squad was killed, rather than much later after, he'd be just as broken down.  These events will change them in ME3. just not all the time because that's too expensive, it will show in the mojor parts it needs to be shown in, Garrus no matter what is still a BAMF turian sniper, Tali is still  a capable Quarian who wants her home world back and both of them are still your friend/LI. 

Wait till you play the game and then complain about ME2 not having an impact.

No way Garrus is as bad as Sasuke.

I would compare Garrus more to Niko Bellic from GTA4 in the whole vengeance area. Sidonis is even a bit like Darko Brevic. Consumed by guilt over his actions and a husk whose worse than dead.

Sasuke can only think about revenge and is utterly unreasonable. Garrus is quite opposite.

[kleindropper]

There are potentially huge race-based story points in ME2 that will have an effect on the Galaxy's response to the Reapers. The Turian/Salarian/Krogan relations as well as the Geth/Quarian issues (I'm guessing) will play a bigger role than the destruction of the Collectors.

[scotkrow]

The Grey Nayr wrote...



No way Garrus is as bad as Sasuke.

I would compare Garrus more to Niko Bellic from GTA4 in the whole vengeance area. Sidonis is even a bit like Darko Brevic. Consumed by guilt over his actions and a husk whose worse than dead.

Sasuke can only think about revenge and is utterly unreasonable. Garrus is quite opposite.

Okay yes, totally agree there.  I was just at work and my brain always
gets fuzzy and I don't think spot on, Niko is a much better example of
Garrus, thank you!  [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/grin.png[/smilie]

Modifié par scotkrow, 28 février 2012 - 05:01 .

[casedawgz]

Oldbones2 wrote...

Okay, let me rephrase my original statement.

If ME 2 hadn't happened. Would ME 3 have any major differences?

- Some, maybe all of the human colonies in the Terminus systems would be gone, maybe a few in the Attican traverse as well.
- We would STILL have Garrus and Tali and the new ME 3 squad who were all in ME 1 and loyal, plus the new guys.
- We'd still work for the Alliance.
- Cerberus would still be an antagonist.
- Wrex would still make his cameo or not depending on Virmire.

Things that change;

+ Cerberus base becomes a war asset. We've got lots of those AND you can stop up the gaps with MP.
+ Characters that aren't Garrus and Tali and were in the squad from ME 1 are in the game in cameo appearances. However these are completely replaceable and anyone who didn't play ME 2 won't miss out.
+ ME 2 exclusive weapons such as the Mattock... oh wait that's freely available to EVERYONE in ME 3.
+ Small side mission changes.
+ It's possible to 'cheat' on your ME 1 romance. Yet I and others have noticed that the ME 2 romances have a distinct fling feel.

I'm going to play ME 3. I'm going to love it. I don't expect Bioware to 'fix' things two weeks before the game is released.
I didn't write this thread because I hate ME 2 or Bioware. I love them both like family, which is why it is so hard to see my time and money thrown away for no reason. I just want to know why is it that ME 2 has no consequence to the greater story?

How in the world did the Tali romance or the Paragon Jack romance feel like flings?

[Helspont]

kleindropper wrote...

There are potentially huge race-based story points in ME2 that will have an effect on the Galaxy's response to the Reapers. The Turian/Salarian/Krogan relations as well as the Geth/Quarian issues (I'm guessing) will play a bigger role than the destruction of the Collectors.

This sums it up nicely.

ME2 really just prepares the galaxy for ME3 in many big ways.

While people complain there were only 3 story missions, and the rest were all about you squadmates, I think that the stuff you deal with with your squad is pretty major.

Cerberus stepping in seems to serve as a huge stepping stone for the whole lore, really. Same could be said for the Genophage, the Geth and Heretics, and so on.

Also, does anyone remember when ME2 came out and people ****ed about not everyone being on your squad from ME1? Well now in ME3, everyone from ME1 is back, and we all want characters from ME2:P

Also, Shep only worked with Cerberus because he thought the Reapers might be working with the Collectors. Turns out they were. But keep in mind that Shep never really knew much about there partnership. I mean, before going through the relay, he might've been expecting to see a Reaper just waiting for him at the base. He didn't know HOW involved the two were.

Anyway, he finds out they are making a human Reaper. EDI says it could be their way of "reproducing" and they do it for every suitable species in the galaxy, every single time they have attacked. They give the galaxy 50,000 years to grow, to develop, so they can come and kill us so that they can continue to prosper.

This time, it's humans they want.

Now that's just ONE possible theory of the many brought up in ME2.

I don't see how anyone can think that ME2 wasn't a big part of the trilogy. It asked more questions then it answered, but again, it's the second part of a trilogy. That's what they do in part 2. In part 1, they start. They establish. In part 2, they ask the bigger questions, things we couldn't get from part 1. In part 3, they resolve.