341 réponses à ce sujet

[Mcfly616]

ME2 was a great side-story

[blueumi]

Xemnas07 wrote...

sammysoso wrote...

ME2 was great when you were in it. I was well designed, had cool characters and moments. Great music and all...

But after playing and looking at the series as a whole, I'm mainly left asking "what was the point?" ME2 didn't really accomplish anything, and added in a bunch of characters that, while interesting, didn't really matter.

And ditching most of the ME1 squad...total weaksauce. Seriously, Ash got about 2 minutes of screen-time and an email. At least the rest of them were doing cool stuff and you could go see them whenever. Liara even got her own DLC! (which was a TON of fun btw)

Exactly, ME2 has ALL the asme falws that people claim ME3 has, and a useless plot, and people praise it.... theyre ignoring the ME2 had the EXACT same flaws and commited them on a larger scale.

it's uesless because mass effect 3 made it so and mass effect 1s plot as well
it's almost as if their need to get new people to play it that they didn't want it to feel like I don't know the end of a trilogy
so now it's like a single game disconected almost entirly from 1 and 2

[Xemnas07]

Xemnas07 wrote...

Roamingmachine wrote...

ME2 was a lesser game compared to the original Mass Effect. But ME2 is a veritable epitome of game writing compared to ME3.Also, deepened the setting with hubs like Omega&Illium, which ME3 completely failed.

youre ignoring all the things i pointed out in my forum

how could this be true, when the plot was meaningless and DID nothing for the overall story, and could have been a 5hr DLC and the dialogue and speeches were ok, only a few goosebumps here and there, while ME3 made me cry.

[oracle343gspark]

I consider Mass Effect 2 to be in the top 3 games ever.

[Xemnas07]

oracle343gspark wrote...

I consider Mass Effect 2 to be in the top 3 games ever.

imo, youre wrong, read all the flaws i point out. lol

[Random Geth]

Opinions. That's why. Also try reading some older topics. Or using google. Google is our friend.

[Mcfly616]

Yeah....def not as good as the first or the last....but it was a nice distraction from the main story I guess

[Xemnas07]

Mcfly616 wrote...

Yeah....def not as good as the first or the last....but it was a nice distraction from the main story I guess

agreed

[Random Geth]

Xemnas07 wrote...

oracle343gspark wrote...

I consider Mass Effect 2 to be in the top 3 games ever.

imo, youre wrong, read all the flaws i point out. lol

And he doesn't really need you to validate his opinion.  He considers it that, and it doesn't really matter how much those flaws affect *you*.  Just saying.

[Taboo]

I felt closer to the ME2 characters than any other set of characters in a video game before.

ME2 is the superior game.

[Xemnas07]

Arken wrote...


Choices: You're right. But again, the difference is Mass Effect 2 wasn't supposed to the ending. We accepted that choices didn't have an effect yet, because there was a literal promise that our choices would have a visual effect in Mass Effect 3. Casey Hudson even went on about all the variables that were transferring into 3.


Story: It's true that 3 concluded the major story arcs, but all of the important things were forgotten. Like Saren, the Collectors, the Human Reaper, etc. Mass Effect 3 is practically a standalone story, because pretty much none of the major plot points from the first two games matter.

i will agree that the baby reaper was forgotten, and the collector base, but again the plot of ME2 did NOTHING for the trilogy, and could have easily been a DLC to find out that the protheans were slaves. But we killed saren, whatd you wanna do about him? And as for the variables,excluding the endings, there are literally a TON of different ways for each mission to turn out, hell, mordin says something different when he sacirfices him self in the tower depending on how much you talked to him in ME2. So in my opinion, again excluding the endings, they delivered on this promise.

[Xemnas07]

Random Geth wrote...

Xemnas07 wrote...

oracle343gspark wrote...

I consider Mass Effect 2 to be in the top 3 games ever.

imo, youre wrong, read all the flaws i point out. lol

And he doesn't really need you to validate his opinion.  He considers it that, and it doesn't really matter how much those flaws affect *you*.  Just saying.

not saying he should have my opinion, im saying that these flaws are indeed facts, and people complain about these flaws in ME3 when in fact, they exist on a much larger scale in ME2

[GenericEnemy]

Taboo-XX wrote...

I felt closer to the ME2 characters than any other set of characters in a video game before.

ME2 is the superior game.

Honestly, the only character ME2 introduced that I felt remotely attached to was Mordin.

[chemiclord]

Xemnas07 wrote...

Exactly, ME2 has ALL the asme falws that people claim ME3 has, and a useless plot, and people praise it.... theyre ignoring the ME2 had the EXACT same flaws and commited them on a larger scale.

I think it boils down to expectations.

It's easier to dismiss open questions, characters left hanging, etc... when it's the middle of the series.  It's easier to say, "Oh, there's a whole 'nother game coming after this, so I'm not worried."

Your audience, however EXPECTS plot lines tied up, resolution of the story and character arcs, and at least SOME degree of closure in the final chapter.

You ARE right, Mass Effect 3 pretty much followed the mold of the previous games to the letter... but expectations were different, which is why fans STILL aren't particularly bothered with ME2, and they ARE with ME3... even if logically, they'll admit ME3 was the better executed game if each was taken completely on their own merits.

[SSPBOURNE]

A lot of choices in ME1 effect ME3.
First off, theres Kaidan or Ashley. But that's obvious.
Choice of councilor doesn't matter.
Saving the council or sacrificing them barely matters. You only get different dialouge.
Saving or killing Wrex matters a lot. If you save Wrex and don't cure the genophage, he finds out and you have to kill him. Wreav does not.
If you kill the Rachni queen in ME1 and save the one in ME3, it betrays you. If you save the same one twice, it helps you.
If Kirrahe lives in ME1, Thane doesn't get killed by Kai Leng.

Modifié par SSPBOURNE, 18 juillet 2012 - 10:43 .

[Ozida]

Hi there,

Those are all valid points raised in OP, but I have some arguments that still make ME2 better than ME3. for me

[quote]

1. One of the BIGGEST complaints I've seen is how the ME2 cast was shelved in ME3.... Umm, did ANYONE play ME2, where the ENTIRE ME1 cast (except for Tali, she's in every game) was shelved and didn’t even have decent cameo's like Thane, Grunt, Mordin, and Miranda did in ME3. Unless you bought LotSB DLC, and only Liara showed up then.

[/quote]

We were told they will not appear in ME2 from the beginning. All characters still appeared in ME2 though and new characters were well though through and had interesting stories. Allers, Traynor, Vega and Cortez just cannot compete with, for example, Mordin’s storyline. Cortez was one of the most engaging out of all new characters, but even he could be removed with no harm to the story made. Besides, all ME2 new characters got very interesting side missions, so it was fun! And lastly, everyone were kind of expecting BW to bring all squadmates back in ME3, so it was OK.

[quote]

2. Another huge complaint was that your choices from ME2 (Collector base choice, rachni, etc.) had little to no impact in ME3...... What? NOT ONE SINGLE choice from ME1 was reflected with great significant impact on ME2, the only choices that were really apparent was your choice of councilor and whether you saved the council or saved the humans, and those had VERY little impact on the game as a whole.

[/quote]

That is true, but once again, all expectations were put for ME3 to tied it all together. We still got to meet older characters in ME2 one way or another. For example, Rachni queen send her “Hellos” through asari girl; Wrex was replaced with his brother if you killed him on Virmire, etc. They may not seem as major things, but at least they had some effect on the story.

[quote]

3. Yet another complaint was that ME3 voided everything from ME1, are you kidding? the ENTIRE main plot of ME2 had NOTHING to do with what happened in ME1, and the story archs are kinda side-lined (such as Wrex being Clan Urdnot's leader) and were only gave a mention in a convo with said character. The only thing ME2 added to the story as a whole was that the Protheans were turned into slaves.... okay? Cool. Couldn’t put that into a DLC?

[/quote]

ME2 plot created a new interest for Reapers. What did Collectors truly want? Why humans? What's with that pro-human Reaper they were building?.. Reapers were mysterious and while we fought against Collectors, we somehow kept them in mind all the time. I don’t know how it was achieved, OK? Maybe through some well-done writing? But that’s just a guess…

[quote]

4. People complain that the RPG factor was dumbed down in ME3 and forgotten..... again, HUH? in ME2, there was almost NO rpg factor, Besides having more Dialogue choices in convos than ME3 (which people complained ruined the flow of a dramatic scene) everything else was even less RPG than ME3. For example, that leveling system was a lot more simple and less complex, less choices, less points, less levels, etc. There was less armor choice and a LOT less weapon choice with NO mods whatsoever. The only real RPG factor was the upgrades, and those were hell to get as you had to scan countless planets for minerals.

[/quote]

Dialogues choices are actually what makes RPG more of RPG, not a shooter. Weapons and armor, in my  opinion, fall under shooter game. Besides, the weapon upgrades in ME3 wasn't that great either. ME2
also introduced new Renegade/ Paragon options first which was cool. And obviously there were much less auto dialogues.

[

quote]

5. The combat system was good, but got kinda boring; take cover, shoot til it's dead, move up, repeat. They improved the combat system GREATLY with better maps and a dive roll. ADDING A DIVE ROLL DOES NOT MAKE IT A GENERIC SHOOTER!! THERE IS A REASON IT IS A SUCCESSFUL GAMEPLAY MECHANIC!! The roll simply makes for better and more exhilirating combat.

[/quote]

Once again, as a player I cared about RPG factors more than combat system. I don’t know, maybe it’s because I am PC user, but combat system never bothered me even in ME1, not even talking about ME2. So I pass this compain to other users.

[quote]

6. The last complaint is that ME3 was too short; about 25 hrs on insanity and completionist playthrough. ME2 was 30 hours as the same, and HALF the game dealt with loyalty missions which had NOTHING to do with the main story. Sure the loyalty of your team affected the outcome of the suicide mission, but that's ALL it did for ME2. Don't get me wrong, I liked the loyalty mission aspect, but when HALF the game (15hrs, maybe less) is based on them, that just sidelines the main plot, which again, had NOTHING to do with ANYTHING from ME1 and added NOTHING to the overall plot of the trilogy. Oh, and ME2 was not about fighting Reapers (people complain that ME3 was about fighting Cerberus, not reapers) it was about fighting the collectors, and besides Husks and the occasional Harby possession, there was no fighting of the Reapers.

[/quote]

It felt short. Side missions are still important factor of RPG. If we take them out we are left with a very straight forward story and that doesn't help to grow your character as well as to learn more about your squadmates. ME3 had practically no side missions (I do not consider “scan-&-run” to be a true side mission), and I think it added to "feeling short" factor. Sure, the goal was to stop Reapers, but doing only that throughout all 25 hours is kind of boring.

On the point about fighting Collectors vs. fighting Reapers, once again, there is not much more to say, but som good writing was put behind it. At least, I didn’t feel any disconnection between ME1 and ME2, but ME3 felt just like one huge DLC about stopping Cerberus, not Reapers.


Now, the main idea is that I am not trying to prove you wrong, but just stating my opinion. ME2 had some high-class taste to it. Omega was already enough to make this game great with its music and atmosphere. We saw Tuchanka for the first time, and it was exciting. Dialogues were real, and I felt really sorry for Collectors/ Protheans when I found out about their fate. TIM was really twisted and you loved-hated him, so he wasn’t just some crazy old man.

I know my arguments sound weak and doesn’t prove much, but somehow ME2 just feels as a lot better game.

P.S. And I can never forgive the stupid journal thing in ME3. It was the most ridicules, unnecessary change in the whole ME gameplay! A grat stepdown that still annoys me.

Modifié par Ozida, 18 juillet 2012 - 10:45 .

[v TricKy v]

After playing all three again I most say that ME2 is the weakest of them. Im editing my saves so I dont have to play it again to be honest. Because in the overall view the plot from ME2 is completely pointless and unfocused because of all the loyalty quests.

[oracle343gspark]

Xemnas07 wrote...

Random Geth wrote...

Xemnas07 wrote...

oracle343gspark wrote...

I consider Mass Effect 2 to be in the top 3 games ever.

imo, youre wrong, read all the flaws i point out. lol

And he doesn't really need you to validate his opinion.  He considers it that, and it doesn't really matter how much those flaws affect *you*.  Just saying.

not saying he should have my opinion, im saying that these flaws are indeed facts, and people complain about these flaws in ME3 when in fact, they exist on a much larger scale in ME2

Please don't act like everything you listed was fact. I believe the dialogue in mass effect 2 was superior to bthe other games. Character development was superior. Prior decisions had effects unlike mass effect 1. Mass effect 2 had the biggest jump in graphics and combat. The only thing weaker was linear levels and lack of loot. 

[WarGriffin]

ME2's main plot was fairly weak and in the grand scheme of things yeah it didn't contribute much. even though you'd think Taking out the Reapers' main army of mooks would amount to something and possibly keeping the base would have some profound effect -It's the Rachni all over again-

But most people don't enjoy ME2 for the Main Plot -beat the Collectors... who end up being easily replaced- however ME2 is very much character focused and allowed players to really flesh out thier Shepard -who then pretty much gets a set personality in 3 oh you do get Paragon/Renegade options but... well Shepard laughing evily after gunning down mordin, damning the Krogan and killing Wrex wouldn't have been out of place with how far over the top the real Renegade choices are-

You can more morally effect your crew, Help Thane wish to live again -either for his son or for you- or Respect his choice to embrace death -the Me3 writers just picked the latter on default-

You can try to help Jack with her issues or have her embrace those feelings making her you biotic death Goddess

hell you can even make the one of first borderline evil choices in ME by Helping Morinth kill Samara

Cerberus goes from Mad Science evil to Evil with a cause and some standards -Even though ME3 tries really hard to make you Think Miranda never did anything nasty while working for Cerberus, She's just a poor confused girl!- and TIM makes an effective ANTI-Villian to a Renegade Shepard's AntiHero or Paragon's Hero. -Guess that went out the window so the Reapers of all people could look like Villians with a cause instead-

ME2's strength is honestly all the side stuff... thoguh I think alot of people like the suicide mission.

[oracle343gspark]

If that's how you judge a story, I guess the Empire Strikes Back sucked.

[MegaSovereign]

I love both games.

I liked ME3 just a bit more though. I didn't really care about the Collectors.

[Grub Killer8016]

I don't know, but ME1 will always be the best.

[rowan93]

You know, when playing ME2 there was some stuff I didn't like, lack of weapons for one, and small choice reflection, a bad citadel, but I remember thinking 'hey, they improved so much I can ignore it, and ME3 will improve even more!'

But because of the backlash I can't help think that no2 was flawed too.

Then again each game has its flaws so I don't dwell on it.

[Mcfly616]

Taboo-XX wrote...

I felt closer to the ME2 characters than any other set of characters in a video game before.

. I could say the same about any of the Mass Effect games......I wouldn't say that characters would put a game over the top when it comes to debating how great they are....certainly its important, but its also irrelevant in this particular discussion because we're comparing it to the other two games in the same series.... as I said, the characters thing can be stated about any of the 3 games depending on who you ask....


For me....the Original characters had that impact on me... So I've always been a little biased towards them...the only characters from the sequals to come close to that impact are Samara, Jack and Javik....


I do like all the characters in their own way, but everybody has their favorites

[Mcfly616]

Grub Killer8016 wrote...

I don't know, but ME1 will always be the best.

This ^^^