341 réponses à ce sujet

[Xemnas07]

o Ventus wrote...

Xemnas07 wrote...


sigh, ive been arguing this thread for 2 hours, not gonna post long reply. in short, ME2 had nothing to do with anything, continued nothing from me1, and is more of a large DLC than a continuation to the ME story. POint is, people are ignoring the fact that the faws they point out about ME3 are in ME2. while no, you didnt need to defeat the reapers in ME2, the very least they could have done was make you fight the actualy enemy in the game, colelctors, but they didnt even do that; you spend 9/10 of the game fight mercs on loyalty missions that had nothing to do with even the ME2 plot itself.

You didn't address a single one of my points.

Right.

just replied in full, read it before you speak

[Xemnas07]

wantedman dan wrote...

OP: EVERYBODY QUICK, forget about the abomination that was ME3 by remembering how terrible ME2 was!

no, my point is if youre going to criticize ME3 and ignore everything it did right, dot he same to ME2 when it has the exact same flaws.

[Taboo]

o Ventus wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

One thing I forgot to mention earlier, ME2 was building up to the now-scrapped dark energy plot.

So yes, in a sense, ME3 is what rendered ME2 effectively pointless.

I heard that was fake. It sprouted from the Something Awful forums.

Apparently Karpyshyn himself came and dispelled the rumors.

Source?

I've heard numerous times that Karpyshyn even pitched a rough outline for the dark energy plot before he transferred to SWTOR.

That's the issue. The only source is Humes Spork, a user here. You might ask him. I can't say anything definitively.

I think he has links.

It's sure as **** was smarter than what we have now.

Better though...I would have to see it executed.

[Xemnas07]

sistersafetypin wrote...

tl:dr Because it's better than ME3

opinion based. point of this forum is to look at the facts, which are ME2 has the exact same flaws as ME3, excluding the ending, sos top ignoring that fact simply cuz youre agnry with the endings.

[Taboo]

Xemnas07 wrote...

sistersafetypin wrote...

tl:dr Because it's better than ME3

opinion based. point of this forum is to look at the facts, which are ME2 has the exact same flaws as ME3, excluding the ending, sos top ignoring that fact simply cuz youre agnry with the endings.

What the hell are you even arguing about?

You criticize others for opinions and state yours as a fact.

???

[wantedman dan]

Xemnas07 wrote...

no, my point is if youre going to criticize ME3 and ignore everything it did right, dot he same to ME2 when it has the exact same flaws.

So basically, 

wantedman dan wrote...

OP: EVERYBODY QUICK, forget about the abomination that was ME3 by remembering how terrible ME2 was!

[4stringwizard]

I think ME2 was the most fun of the entire trilogy. Sure, the plot wasn't too great, but it I think created the most vibrant, in-your-face atmosphere of the trilogy. It had a lot of memorable moments, a lot of great scenes, great characters, and the suicide mission was superb (waaaay better than Priority: Earth). Not to mention I think ME2 did the best of making Shepard YOUR Shepard. You had the most control over the dialogue and the outcome of most scenes.

[Aaleel]

I had some problems with ME2.

One the collector storyline was whittled to nothing, was not expanded upon well. It just seemed like a diversion to break up the monotony of gathering and helping squadmates. Every once and a while TIM would say, stop what you're doing and do this mission.

Then getting the squadmates had nothing to do with the story. In ME1, Garrus was investigating Saren, Tali had the information that exposed Saren, Liara was Benezia's daughter, etc. In ME2 it started well with needing Mordin to develop a counter for the seeker swarms.

After that I was just like why do I need these people, what skills make them helpful on this. Why can't I pick, why can't I have Tali. TIM says he needs to do more research. Research on what, she helped kill a reaper what else is there to look into.

Jack getting on the ship saying we should take the Normandy and go be pirates to hell with the mission. I was just like WTH is this, who are these people. Game just didn't flow. Here's your list > I have a mission for you > Here's you next list > I have a mission for you.

[Xemnas07]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Xemnas07 wrote...

sistersafetypin wrote...

tl:dr Because it's better than ME3

opinion based. point of this forum is to look at the facts, which are ME2 has the exact same flaws as ME3, excluding the ending, sos top ignoring that fact simply cuz youre agnry with the endings.

What the hell are you even arguing about?

You criticize others for opinions and state yours as a fact.

???

read the whole original post,a nd youll get it, only one thing i put in there is opinion, and i put it in an EDIT and added IMO at the end of it.

[ackalaya3]

Before Mass Effect 3, I felt that the second game's major failing was it's disconnection from the main plot with the reapers. After the cataclysm that was the ending though, I think of that as a strength. Mass Effect 2 is an amazing game because it told stellar stories. By no stretch of the imagination were any of its plots smart or original, but they were extremely entertaining due to great characters and exceptional writing. Where the third game constantly beat players over the head with a clunky message that never needed to be said, Mass Effect 2 let morals and lessons arise naturally from its narrative. Above all though, what set Mass Effect 2 up as the best game in the series was simply the care that the developers put in to it.

[Xemnas07]

wantedman dan wrote...

Xemnas07 wrote...

no, my point is if youre going to criticize ME3 and ignore everything it did right, dot he same to ME2 when it has the exact same flaws.

So basically, 

wantedman dan wrote...

OP: EVERYBODY QUICK, forget about the abomination that was ME3 by remembering how terrible ME2 was!

lol bye troll

[o Ventus]

[quote]Xemnas07 wrote...

Youre kidding right? you expected them to have a squad of 20-25 peopl in the final game? Sorry, thats a little ridiculous,  the point of this argument was that ME1 cast was shelved, and no one complained about it, although most returned in ME3 ie. ash, liara, tali and garrus. But everyone complains when they shelve the ME2 cast. However, the ME2 cast had very decent cameos as in miranda, thane, grunt, mordin, while the ME1 cast had none in ME2, [/quote]

No. I actually never once said that all of them had to be squadmates. But it would have nice if the more plot-centric characters (Mordin, Legion, Miranda) were on the team, at least temporarily.

lol @ "decent cameos", especially for Miranda. You must not have never visited the Miranda thread.

[/quote]so youre saying that cuz a game that is supposed to be based solely on the game before it and the choices you made, isnt supposed to continue the story of the game before it? What? Even star wars, which are movies, not games tailored to your choices and how you play, follow the one before it in some way, continuing the story. ME2 did not do this, but instead went off on a side story that had nothing to do with anything and had nothing from me1 reflected in it. the main plot in ME2 could have easily been done in a DLC, not an entire, pointless game.[/quote]

No, I'm not saying this. This is twice now you've put sh*t in my mouth. ME3 is what rendered ME2 pointless. I've already explained why.

[quote]No they did not have to beat the reapers in the 2nd game, but was it necessary to dedicat an entire game to an enemy that could be wiped out with a crew of 12? No. Collectors have the deepest connection youre kidding. THeyre uselss, they were enslaved left over protheans that kinda collected crap from the galaxy, and now harvest humans for a human reaper. The geth were more of a threat, and the geth were used only as a means to intoduce you to the reapers, which was the entire point of ME1, what are the collectors for? they reveal almost nothing about the reapers but rather about the protheans, which again, has NO affect on ANYTHING in the trilogy. at most you think, "oh, poor guys" and thats it. again, could have been done in a dlc.[/quote]

The geth weren't constructing their own Reaper. The only reason they were even a threat was because of Saren.

[quote]ok cool, so abandon the main plot of ME2, which is already pointless, for char develope and loyalty missions? Dont get me wrong, i liked the missions, but when they take as much if not more time than the main plot, thats called FILLER, and is completely useless in the grand scheme of the trilogy.[/quote]

I don't know if I should insult your intelligence or keep on repeating myself.

ME2 WAS BUILDING UP TO THE DARK ENERGY PLOT.


[quote]the dive roll and diff maps mean you have to actually MOVE around, strategize, get out from cover, avoid, attack, instead of jut being able to sit behind a wall like in ME1 and 2 and shooting til its dead, moving up to the next wall and repeating. The fact that it looks awkward is moot and irrelevant as long as it works.[/quote]

Move around? I can sit in 1 small area as a Soldier, during one of the most action-inclined parts of the game (Priority: Earth, thanix missile segment) and be PERFECTLY FINE. I know this because I do it every time I play that horrid mission. Strategize? Spam power combinations. Actual strategy against AI enemies in a SHOOTER is rare, if never seen.

[-Skorpious-]

I didn't like ME2 all that much, but ME2 received less flak because it was the middle chapter. As the last installment in the trilogy, ME3 had both to play catch-up with ME2's complete failure to advance the overall plot AND end the conclusion in a satisfying manner.

Anyways, I've said it many times, and I will say it again - the worst decision Bioware made with the Mass Effect series wasn't ME3's ending - it was including a useless suicide mission that introduced too many characters and variables for the story to accommodate.

Modifié par -Skorpious-, 19 juillet 2012 - 02:27 .

[Normandy_Captain]

Actually, I prefered the gameplay in ME2 than ME3. In ME2 you have a much larger battle area which gives you more to do in my opinion, as opposed to more confined areas in ME3. I also liked the little conversations you could have on the hub worlds and the small side quests. I believed the story was great since the story was about shepard getting his crew ready. the loyalty missions were alot of fun, and added more layers to the characters. Just my opinion.

[forthary]

ME2 was a great game, but I will agree it did have it's flaws. The main quests and stuff were fine, and I liked how you could do stuff after the suicide mission was over. I think the biggest weaknesses though were in the DLC, without a doubt. It seems that the quality of the DLC doesn't compare to the actual main game. The top 3 worst DLC's I can list from really bad to just lame is:

1. Project Firewalker
2. Arrival
3. Overlord

I'll start with Project Firewalker. Idk about the VI, it was kinda meh. The vehicle was HORRIBLE, sure it could jump real right in the air and stuff, but it was kinda buggy, the rockets don't compare to the mako's cannon, and overall, it felt like a lame linear vehicle game. Plus, anything you do here doesn't do JACK **** for ME3. It's useless! Absolutely useless! Idc what people say, ill take the Mako over the hammerhead anyday. I certainly would never play this again for how useless it is!

Now, Arrival has probably one of the worst plot twists EVER in both game and movie history. It is SO. FREAKING. CHEAP. It's unbelievable! Right when you rescue that **** on the batarian base, you go to the asteroid, find a reaper artifact then the **** turns on you! OLDEST. TRICK. IN. THE. BOOK. EVER! Just...why!? Why do the indoctrination like that! It's just lame. I never want to play this again. It's cool that harbinger shows up at the end, and its unique to see a conclusion, but...I just...I can't handle these kind of lame and cheesy plot twists.

Now, the last one, overlord. I felt this one actually isn't bad, but still lame. I think the lame factor comes from the combat and a few other things that make it lame. Once you factor out the lame combat and a few other lame things, it's actually not bad, and what you do here makes a impact.

ME2 had it's flaws, sure. The combat and stuff I believe was too simple, planet scanning was kinda lame (But actually better than what we have in ME3!), and there were a few other flaws with the new style they were attempting. Not to mention the quality of the DLC isn't as good as the actual game itself. But, it was still a great game, unlike ME3.

[krasnoarmeets]

The story in ME3 is basically identical regardless of who lived or died, which ever choices you made in previous games have no bearing on the story in Mass Effect 3. Case in point is whether or not you preserved or destroyed the collector base in ME2. Cerberus should have become a lot more powerful if you preserved it, but not if you destroyed it. This choice makes no difference whatsoever except for a few lines of dialogue. This is completely absurd and a perfect example of lazy writers.

I liked the idea behind the ME2 story, although Shepard dying and being 'rebuilt' was too much of a stretch, but it was just a big diversion from the main plot and seemed irrelevant to the story as a whole. Joining forces with Cerberus certainly didn't add to his credibility in any way (it was certainly something my Akuze Shep wouldn't have done) and yet the implications of this seem to have been minimal and we were railroaded into this just like with many of the things in ME3.

[Xemnas07]

o Ventus wrote...


No. I actually never once said that all of them had to be squadmates. But it would have nice if the more plot-centric characters (Mordin, Legion, Miranda) were on the team, at least temporarily.

lol @ "decent cameos", especially for Miranda. You must not have never visited the Miranda thread.

i agree with the temp squadmate thing, however, i felt satisfied with their cameos, so it wasnt a major problem for me, but this has become a moot argument, as it is based on our opinions and the opinions of others.

No, I'm not saying this. This is twice now you've put sh*t in my mouth. ME3 is what rendered ME2 pointless. I've already explained why.

I disagree. Halfway through ME2 i felt it didnt belong, and had nothing to do with ME1. im saying ME2 is pointless because it continued and reflected NOTHING from ME1, but rather went off on its own side mission that once again, could have been done in a DLC

The geth weren't constructing their own Reaper. The only reason they were even a threat was because of Saren.

THe geth were a threat because of Sovereign, not saren, which is a connection tot he reapers. Neither were the collectors, the reapers were using them to make a reaper. THey were mindless slaves, ie pointless seeing as we already know the reapers have slaves ie saren, husks, geth. The reapers were gonna do this anyway once they invaded and chose humans as the species cuz of shepard and how special humans are considered to be. A point that can be guessed after mordins loyalty mission and putting it together witht the fact that the collectors are targeting humanity.

I don't know if I should insult your intelligence or keep on repeating myself.

ME2 WAS BUILDING UP TO THE DARK ENERGY PLOT.

okay, and ive done forums about that abandoned idea, but the point is this, THE ONLY thing in ME2 that deals with dark energy plot is Tali's recruit and loyalty missions, which are SIDE missions within the MAIN plot of ME2. and the MAIN plot is a USELESS PLOT that does not have anything to do with ME1 and continues nothing from ME1.

Move around? I can sit in 1 small area as a Soldier, during one of the most action-inclined parts of the game (Priority: Earth, thanix missile segment) and be PERFECTLY FINE. I know this because I do it every time I play that horrid mission. Strategize? Spam power combinations. Actual strategy against AI enemies in a SHOOTER is rare, if never seen.

Did you play on insanity difficulty? if you did and still did thison earth with all the banshees flying around, then you my friend, are either a hacker, or just really lucky that things like banshees and brutes didnt come after you.

Modifié par Xemnas07, 19 juillet 2012 - 02:39 .

[krasnoarmeets]

o Ventus wrote...

I don't know if I should insult your intelligence or keep on repeating myself.

ME2 WAS BUILDING UP TO THE DARK ENERGY PLOT.

The only mention of dark energy that I recall in ME2 was Haestrom and I don't see how that's a build up to the crucible.
Explain, please?

[Xemnas07]

krasnoarmeets wrote...

The story in ME3 is basically identical regardless of who lived or died, which ever choices you made in previous games have no bearing on the story in Mass Effect 3. Case in point is whether or not you preserved or destroyed the collector base in ME2. Cerberus should have become a lot more powerful if you preserved it, but not if you destroyed it. This choice makes no difference whatsoever except for a few lines of dialogue. This is completely absurd and a perfect example of lazy writers.

I liked the idea behind the ME2 story, although Shepard dying and being 'rebuilt' was too much of a stretch, but it was just a big diversion from the main plot and seemed irrelevant to the story as a whole. Joining forces with Cerberus certainly didn't add to his credibility in any way (it was certainly something my Akuze Shep wouldn't have done) and yet the implications of this seem to have been minimal and we were railroaded into this just like with many of the things in ME3.

disagree. id mording dies, you get a guy WIlks or whatever he was, who says and does completely different things. Ive already agreed that the dropped collector base arch is a shame, and lazy. Urdont Wreave is completely different than Wrex and gives the krogan a different outlook than wrex, and all the scenes invlovling wreave are different from wrex.

[o Ventus]

Xemnas07 wrote...

I disagree. Halfway through ME2 i felt it didnt belong, and had nothing to do with ME1. im saying ME2 is pointless because it continued and reflected NOTHING from ME1, but rather went off on its own side mission that once again, could have been done in a DLC

Because it was building upto a different plot continuation. What part of this isn't reaching you?

Neither were the collectors, the reapers were using them to make a reaper. THey were mindless slaves, ie pointless. The reapers were gonna do this anyway once they invaded and chose humans as the species cuz of shepard and how special humans are considered to be. A point that can be guessed after mordins loyalty mission and putting it together witht the fact that the collectors are targeting humanity.

Strawman argument. By this same logic, you could say that it wasn't really the geth waging war on people, it was the Reapers doing it via proxy.

okay, and ive done forums about that abandoned idea, but the point is this, THE ONLY thing in ME2 that deals with dark energy plot is Tali's recruit and loyalty missions, which are SIDE missions within the MAIN plot of ME2. and the MAIN plot is a USELESS PLOT that does not have anything to do with ME1 and continues nothing from ME1.

No, it isn't the only reference. It's the one most people easily remember, but far from the only one. Off the top of my head I can also recall Gianna Parasini mentioning it and Veetor mentioning it. Hell, Gianna was supposed to be involved in the dark energy plot, IIRC, but she doesn't even appear in ME3.

Did you play on insanity difficulty? if you did and still did thison earth with all the banshees flying around, then you my friend, are either a hacker, or just really lucky that things like banshees and brutes didnt come after you.

Good lord, you sure do love misconstruing what I say, don't you? If you're playing on the highest possible difficulty, no dick you're going to need to be mobile. When I played on Insanity, I moved around, sure, but literally any difficulty below that you can sit in one of the corner stores and be perfectly fine depending on how you play.

[o Ventus]

krasnoarmeets wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

I don't know if I should insult your intelligence or keep on repeating myself.

ME2 WAS BUILDING UP TO THE DARK ENERGY PLOT.

The only mention of dark energy that I recall in ME2 was Haestrom and I don't see how that's a build up to the crucible.
Explain, please?

The Crucible wasn't involved in the DE plot.

I don't think it was, anyway.

Modifié par o Ventus, 19 juillet 2012 - 02:38 .

[Shaigunjoe]

I don't think ME2 was amazing, that's when the whole story kind of fail apart for me. ME1 was the best.

[Xemnas07]

o Ventus wrote...


Because it was building upto a different plot continuation. What part of this isn't reaching you?

EXACTLY!! youre helping my case. ME2 DID not continue anything FROM ME1!!! if the game was supposed to build to the DE plot, why didnt ME1 build to it? even if we take out the DE plot from ME2, it still has NOTHING to do with ME1 IT went off on it's own little side mission and like i said, there is very little mention of the DE plot in ME2.

Strawman argument. By this same logic, you could say that it wasn't really the geth waging war on people, it was the Reapers doing it via proxy.

what i mean is that the collectors were a useless plot device cuz 1) the reapers were gonna make a human reaper anyway and 2) we already knew that the reapers made slaves out of the species ie husks, geth. so why dedicate an entire game to establishing that the protheans are slaves? coulda been done in a DLC.

No, it isn't the only reference. It's the one most people easily remember, but far from the only one. Off the top of my head I can also recall Gianna Parasini mentioning it and Veetor mentioning it. Hell, Gianna was supposed to be involved in the dark energy plot, IIRC, but she doesn't even appear in ME3.

yes and many if not ALL of these chars invloved in it are found and talked too in Tali's loyalty mission, a SIDE mission, so again, the MAIN plot of ME2 is NOT building up to DE. Im not arguing that DE was never intention, im just saying that if it was ME2 does LITTLE to establish this, so youre pooint about ME2 building to DE plot is moot, as it fails to do so, and is once again, USELESS

Good lord, you sure do love misconstruing what I say, don't you? If you're playing on the highest possible difficulty, no dick you're going to need to be mobile. When I played on Insanity, I moved around, sure, but literally any difficulty below that you can sit in one of the corner stores and be perfectly fine depending on how you play.

 
no im not trying to twist what you say, POint is that of COURSE the game is gonna be easy and you can sit behind a wall the whole time if you put it on an easy difficulty. to get the full experience from the combat, you MUST play on insanity, otherwise, all games would have boring combat.

Modifié par Xemnas07, 19 juillet 2012 - 02:49 .

[Xemnas07]

Scepsis wrote...

Everybody b*tched about ME2 when it first came out and now they love it.

Goddamn hypocrites.

<_<

+10