341 réponses à ce sujet

[TudorWolf]

Been saying this as well. ME2 had great characters, but the focus on them came at the cost of the reaper plot.

The plot of it is taking down the Collectors, who appear in a grand total of 3 missions in the entire thing. Other than that, it's all recruitment and loyalty missions, and only Mordin's recruitment has the collectors even peripherally involved.

ME2 turned out to be a colossal waste of time in universe. We know the reapers are coming, and we still have no real way to stop them. And come Arrival, they're here. Throughout all this everyone is perfectly calm about the fact. The hell? Shep even lets him/herself be locked up and wastes the last 6 months before the reapers start attacking doing... nothing.

I don't know how anyone couldn't see a deus ex machina/reaper off button coming with the state ME2 left the galaxy in.

[Slappy Ya Face]

It was presented well, and left me with a warm fuzzy feeling that made me want to play through it again.

[Kunari801]

Xemnas07 wrote...

Why Does everyone think ME2 was SO amazing?? 

Because, even if Shepard died on the Collector base, ME2 gave the player a sense of winning, a taste of victory.   PLUS, as players we KNEW there was more coming.   

With ME3 it's the end, live or die, this was the last tale for Shepard and crew.   That finality already makes ME3 sad but the ending just piles on to an already sad ending.  The EC did go a long way to make show the galaxy surviving, etc to take some of the bitter out of the launched-endings, but the damage was done. 

[squee365]

It actually had incredible detail in its environments unlike ME1 and ME3.
Take Grunt's recruitment mission on Korlus for example, its impossible to forget the floating ship wrecks orbiting the planet.

[schulz100]

I must say, I didn't feel nearly as ****ing awesome during ME3's endgame missions than I did in ME2's.
Granted, part of that might be due to the extremely catchy (and utterly awesome/amazing) music that played through ME2's final mission, but I also feel it to be a issue of tone:
ME2 is you going straight to the home of the bad guys and kicking them in the teeth with your fist.
ME3 is you heading back to your blown-to-hell planet and hoping this superweapon that got built works while people all around you die so that it can get set up properly.

[Xellith]

ME2 was very character centric. You were given a threat you could identify and neutralise.  The depth of the environment was spectacular.  None of this ( ) over characters and just keep clicking accept to move the dialogue along (well not for all characters.. kasumi had it for example).  People hated this.  Then they impliment it for more or less 90% of the conversations on the normandy that you can have with the crew.  Its stupid.

ME3 isnt very character centric. You are given a threat and are told that something that nobody knows what it can do will stop them... maybe.

In the end ME2's plot wasnt that great. Its just that the level of detail in conversations allowed it to be a very good experience.

When taking ME3 content into account - ME2 either needed a tonne more content (to allow ME3 content to make sense. Something like having the Collector base being the prothean crucible of which you can download the plans and get ready to use against the reapers. But no...)

Not to mention that all your major choices were covered in the ending to ME2.  With anything left over hopefully going to be resolved in ME3. 

Suicide mission was just epic win.  You even had the possibility of dying for crying out loud.  ME3 its simply "grats you win".

Modifié par Xellith, 18 juillet 2012 - 11:12 .

[WarGriffin]

TudorWolf wrote...

Been saying this as well. ME2 had great characters, but the focus on them came at the cost of the reaper plot.

The plot of it is taking down the Collectors, who appear in a grand total of 3 missions in the entire thing. Other than that, it's all recruitment and loyalty missions, and only Mordin's recruitment has the collectors even peripherally involved.

ME2 turned out to be a colossal waste of time in universe. We know the reapers are coming, and we still have no real way to stop them. And come Arrival, they're here. Throughout all this everyone is perfectly calm about the fact. The hell? Shep even lets him/herself be locked up and wastes the last 6 months before the reapers start attacking doing... nothing.

I don't know how anyone couldn't see a deus ex machina/reaper off button coming with the state ME2 left the galaxy in.

ME2 should have had DLC's dealing with the approaching REAPER threat instead of you playing TIM, Hackett and Liara's errand boy

Overlord really doesn't amount to much in the long run and LoSB and Arrival's impacts are pretty much over in the first 30 minutes -cause Liara being Shadow broker like the Asari being uplifted by the Protheans amonuts to nothing-


Honestly... Palaven, Sur'kesh Thessia -any of the major homeworlds- Kai and maybe make the Tuchanka/Genophage cure episode in Me2 -add to the list of illegal actions shepard's done-

Instead all the groundwork is rushed in ME3

[v TricKy v]

Grub Killer8016 wrote...

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

Also this
Im not bothered by a bit of clunky game mechanics.
It´s also the only game where you can be a racist ass/human supremacist and support Terra Nova and talk bad about the other races.

[Tempest_]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

My biggest beef with ME2 is that it really sacrificed plot for characters. Not necessarily a bad thing, but coming from ME1, I was really engrossed in the overall conflict against the reapers. Thus, I was a little disappointed that the plot is glossed over in many parts of the game.

I agree with this, but I do think ME2 is by far the best of the series and is
among my favourite games ever. I truly believe that with the exception of plot
focus, the game improved on the original in almost every way.

I'd hoped that the deep levels of characterisation and lack of plot focus in
ME2 would lead to a much more developed plot  involving at least some of
those characters in ME3 therefore making ME2 what it should have been.

That being a game in which its primary function was to lay
the foundations for ME3. After all that is the purpose of a middle chapter and
I think ME2 did a great job there.

Sadly that didn't happen since none of squadmates introduced in ME2 were used
again in a squadmate capacity. Heck, I think people could have lived with them
occupying a position similar to Legion or Wrex on the Normandy through the completion of a story
arc.

To see them sidelined like that, just seemed like a waste of all the solid character development in ME2. It's probably my biggest issue with the game.




 

Modifié par Quote the Raven, 18 juillet 2012 - 11:15 .

[Taboo]

In news that I'm sure will shock everyone...

ME2 had you eliminate a major Reaper ally, save millions of lives, stall the Reaper Invasion and prevent the construction of a flag ship.

I'd say that's pretty freaking relevant to the plot.

[F4H bandicoot]

Because it just is.
ME1 has the best story, but me2 has the best characters, awesome hub worlds, fixed a lot of ME1 problems but retained the core feel and ideas behind the first game.
It also has some great voice acting and has the best characters imo.
We also get a truly awesome soundtrack, and a great final mission.

[Xemnas07]

oracle343gspark wrote...

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. 

never said anythng about char devel. there were more dialogue CHOICEs, but the quality of the dialogue was better in ME3, although i will say that is my opinion. No prior decisions did nothing in ME2, nothing from ME1 was reflected in ME2, and the only decisions that really mattered in ME2 were the loyalty missions, and they only affected the Suicide mission. so.....

[Xemnas07]

Taboo-XX wrote...

In news that I'm sure will shock everyone...

ME2 had you eliminate a major Reaper ally, save millions of lives, stall the Reaper Invasion and prevent the construction of a flag ship.

I'd say that's pretty freaking relevant to the plot.

the colelctors were pointless, if just shpe and his crew could take em out, then they werent that big of a threat. could have easily been a DLC after ME1 or ME2, and the reaper invasion prevention was DLC< not part of the main plot of ME2.

[The Spamming Troll]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

Trust me, a non-import ME3 playthrough was just .

remember when that one mod stickied a topic suggesting for us to play a non import class before we try our own shepards?

what a foolish suggestion.

[Taboo]

Xemnas07 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

In news that I'm sure will shock everyone...

ME2 had you eliminate a major Reaper ally, save millions of lives, stall the Reaper Invasion and prevent the construction of a flag ship.

I'd say that's pretty freaking relevant to the plot.

the colelctors were pointless, if just shpe and his crew could take em out, then they werent that big of a threat. could have easily been a DLC after ME1 or ME2, and the reaper invasion prevention was DLC< not part of the main plot of ME2.

They were kidnapping hundreds of thousands of people. What's so difficult to understand about this?

The Reapers were preparing to invade and were using servants to get ready.

This isn't difficult to understand.

[Kunari801]

F4H bandicoot wrote...

Because it just is.
ME1 has the best story, but me2 has the best characters, awesome hub worlds, fixed a lot of ME1 problems but retained the core feel and ideas behind the first game.
It also has some great voice acting and has the best characters imo.
We also get a truly awesome soundtrack, and a great final mission.

Well said.   ME2 was better than ME3 becuase ME2 (like ME1) let the player WIN THE GAME.  

[Taboo]

I won the game.

My Shepard's conscious may not have but that's art for you.

[RadicalDisconnect]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

Trust me, a non-import ME3 playthrough was just .

remember when that one mod stickied a topic suggesting for us to play a non import class before we try our own shepards?

what a foolish suggestion.

Wait, where? That stripped down trash is next to unbearable. <_<

Although I do like the voice acting of the new Council better.

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 18 juillet 2012 - 11:21 .

[Xemnas07]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Xemnas07 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

In news that I'm sure will shock everyone...

ME2 had you eliminate a major Reaper ally, save millions of lives, stall the Reaper Invasion and prevent the construction of a flag ship.

I'd say that's pretty freaking relevant to the plot.

the colelctors were pointless, if just shpe and his crew could take em out, then they werent that big of a threat. could have easily been a DLC after ME1 or ME2, and the reaper invasion prevention was DLC< not part of the main plot of ME2.

They were kidnapping hundreds of thousands of people. What's so difficult to understand about this?

The Reapers were preparing to invade and were using servants to get ready.

This isn't difficult to understand.

the werent using collectors to prepare, they are always prepared, its what they do, they were just using the collectors to make a human reaper, which is cool and all, but again, could have been done in a 5 hr or so DLC.

[Taboo]

Xemnas07 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Xemnas07 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

In news that I'm sure will shock everyone...

ME2 had you eliminate a major Reaper ally, save millions of lives, stall the Reaper Invasion and prevent the construction of a flag ship.

I'd say that's pretty freaking relevant to the plot.

the colelctors were pointless, if just shpe and his crew could take em out, then they werent that big of a threat. could have easily been a DLC after ME1 or ME2, and the reaper invasion prevention was DLC< not part of the main plot of ME2.

They were kidnapping hundreds of thousands of people. What's so difficult to understand about this?

The Reapers were preparing to invade and were using servants to get ready.

This isn't difficult to understand.

the werent using collectors to prepare, they are always prepared, its what they do, they were just using the collectors to make a human reaper, which is cool and all, but again, could have been done in a 5 hr or so DLC.

They make one ship per cycle. One. They wanted humans to form the Reapers and were using the colonists to preapre it.

Unless you want to believe they were going to store it in their base until the time was right.

"Suprise mother****ers! We made a Reaper out of you!"

[Kunari801]

Taboo-XX wrote...

I won the game.

My Shepard's conscious may not have but that's art for you.

The EC does make the endings better, but it still a more Nihilistic ending than in ME1 or ME2.  The Illos & Citadel in ME1 and the SM in ME2 were epic misions, where Priority:Earth was so/so.   

[The Spamming Troll]

Taboo-XX wrote...

In news that I'm sure will shock everyone...

ME2 had you eliminate a major Reaper ally, save millions of lives, stall the Reaper Invasion and prevent the construction of a flag ship.

I'd say that's pretty freaking relevant to the plot.

no, not really.

the collectors meant nothing to ME1, or ME3. how is introducing an enemy, only to eliminate them at games end relevant to what comes before or after?

do people who didnt play ME2 have any idea who or what harbinger even is in ME3???

i mean where are the consequences? letting the council die in ME1, means theres still a council in ME3. killing legion means theres a reprogrammed legion in ME3. save the rachni, who cares? blah blah blah. its stupid i quit.

also, enemy protections are stupid.

[The Spamming Troll]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

Trust me, a non-import ME3 playthrough was just .

remember when that one mod stickied a topic suggesting for us to play a non import class before we try our own shepards?

what a foolish suggestion.

Wait, where? That stripped down trash is next to unbearable. <_<

Although I do like the voice acting of the new Council better.

yea, you can find the topic im sure with a search. they were like......

derp derp guys,

you should derp your shepard because of derp derpery.

merrrrp.

[Arken]

Taboo-XX wrote...

In news that I'm sure will shock everyone...

ME2 had you eliminate a major Reaper ally, save millions of lives, stall the Reaper Invasion and prevent the construction of a flag ship.

I'd say that's pretty freaking relevant to the plot.

Major Reaper ally? A team of twelve people managed to destroy the Collectors. How much of a threat would they have been against all of Earth's defenses.

Save millions of lives? That's a little bit of an exaggeration. TIM even says the situation isn't serious enough for anyone to think the disappearances unusual. Pirates and mercs do the same level of damage as the Collectors.

Stall the Reaper invasion? In the DLC, yes. In the DLC that was clearly an afterthought.

Prevent the construction of a flagship? How long would it have even been until that ship was finished. Would it have really been a threat in only six months? It didn't even look like they were halfway done with just making the core.

Why did Shepard need to die to move the plot forward? All that succeeds in doing is wasting two years of time.

Why do the Council no longer recognize the existence of the Reapers? This makes sense with a new Council is Shepard let the old die, but the old Council clearly recognized how serious the threat was. They didn't even attempt to deny the existence of the Reapers in the ending of Mass Effect 1. Shepard says he's going to go fight the Reapers, and then Anderson talks about how Shepard is right. The Council never says, "Well we don't know for sure if that was a Reaper." It was pretty clear they believed Shepard now.

How is Shepard any more prepared to face the Reapers at the end of 2 than s/he was at the end of 1? didn't Shepard explicitly state his/her goal was finding a way to stop the Reapers? Doesn't that imply the plot of 2 was going to revolve around learning about ways they can fight the Reapers?

Instead Shepard takes on a small threat, builds a team that will only be with Shepard for that one adventure, and kills a fetus Reaper that didn't even look like it was close to being halfway done.

What was the point of Mass Effect 2?

Better question. Why did the writers decide to spend on an entire game essentially doing nothing instead of giving Shepard the solution to the Reaper problem?

It could have gone:

Mass Effect 1: Learn about the Reapers

Mass Effect 2: Learn their weakness

Mass Effect 3: Fight galactic wide war as they use their secret weapon to get rid of the Reapers.

Instead the Crucible is introduced during the Mars mission. And instead of being some type of weapon the Council created from a dead Reaper Shepard provided them in 2, it's some archive Liara found on Mars that had apparently just been sitting there for thirty years to only be found at the most convenient time.