10 réponses à ce sujet

[Fhaileas]

ME2 and ME3 just don't feel like a part of the ME1 continuity.

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

ME2 - I think I can see why you name it here though I disagree completely;

ME3 - What is this space magic you mention? I don't think it exists It didn't come out yet

Modifié par Staff Lt Alenko, 22 septembre 2012 - 11:18 .

[Shadow Fox]

Uh what?

[Neoleviathan]

If your asking if its ok to ignore the sequels in fanfic? Sure, don't be afraid to. I understand the feeling, the sequels went their own way & it can be hard to write along with that direction.

[JackN7]

ME2 was a good game but story wise I wish they could start again from ME1.

[PsiFive]

Calling it fanfic is pretty damning but I can't argue that the story took a big tangential lurch in ME2 as the Cerberus love in took centre stage and the finale involved a Reaper baby of all things, although it could easily have lurched right back again for ME3 as separate pieces of EDI dialogue give the writers an opportunity to get back to the mysterious and incomprehensible Reapers that Sovereign spoke of. I think it's a pity they didn't use it and that as a result ME3 felt even more divergent from ME1. I don't know that I'd ever have thought of it as being like fanfic but I've said before it feels like the work of people who are more in love with Cerberus, cannon fodder villains of an optional ME1 subplot, than with with Sovereign's Reapers. The Reapers really couldn't be done away with entirely but they were certainly dumbed down from the "We are beyond the understanding of your puny organic minds" Reapers of ME1 to "Herp derp, we're killing you to save you from synthetics" Reapers of ME3.

[Fhaileas]

Staff Lt Alenko wrote...
ME2 - I think I can see why you name it here though I disagree completely;
ME3 - What is this space magic you mention? I don't think it exists It didn't come out yet

Hehe! I love your response to ME3, and I respect your stance on ME2 although I disagree vehemently (as if it needed to be said ). The second game had an utterly silly (if not retarded) premise from the start, and the supposed "integration" with choices from the first game was verged either on the absurd, the non-existent or the superficial. In fact the whole continuity of the story is screwed up.

Anyone who picks apart story and lore could easily see that Mass Effect 2 introduces many retcons and inconsistencies throughout not just the story, but even the game mechanics themselves (reloading weapons?). And while any sci-fi or fantasy storyline requires you to suspend your disbelief and let a few inexplicable things and plotholes slip by, Mass Effect 2 was riddled with so many that it simply became impossible to ignore. While the first game felt like the story writers painstakenly took their time so their lore made sense, Mass Effect 2 felt like a different set of writers got their hands on the lore and lazily created or outright changed things along the way. It just felt like an excuse to introduce new people to the story without any regard whatsoever for the overall story arc.
 

Neoleviathan wrote...
If your asking if its ok to ignore the sequels in fanfic? Sure, don't be afraid to. I understand the feeling, the sequels went their own way & it can be hard to write along with that direction.

I appreciate your answer, however my allusion to ME2 and ME3 as fanfiction is actually a commentary on the dissonance of their narrative continuity vis-a-vis ME1. From the latter part of your reply, I gather that you feel the same way as well.

The Stoned Volus wrote...
ME2 was a good game but story wise I wish they could start again from ME1.

If only...! :sigh: What could have potentially been a cool galaxy hopping space opera with Lovecraftian super-evil was ruined by a change in focus, a change of writers and a change of heart. ME1 felt like a labor of love and passion. ME2&3 iteslf felt like Bioware shamelessly whoring its artistic and creative inegrity away to the gluttonous mass of corporate greed.

I have a fantasy that I might one day be able to purchase the ME license and create a true sequel worthy of ME1's legacy . :snicker: Yeah, like there is even the remotest possibility of that happening. However, like I have stated, ME2 and ME3 are so disconnected and disparate from ME1 that it's rather easy for me deem the former as not being a part of ME1's continuity.

PsiFive wrote...
Calling it fanfic is pretty damning but I can't argue that the story took a big tangential lurch in ME2 as the Cerberus love in took centre stage and the finale involved a Reaper baby of all things, although it could easily have lurched right back again for ME3 as separate pieces of EDI dialogue give the writers an opportunity to get back to the mysterious and incomprehensible Reapers that Sovereign spoke of. I think it's a pity they didn't use it and that as a result ME3 felt even more divergent from ME1. I don't know that I'd ever have thought of it as being like fanfic but I've said before it feels like the work of people who are more in love with Cerberus, cannon fodder villains of an optional ME1 subplot, than with with Sovereign's Reapers. The Reapers really couldn't be done away with entirely but they were certainly dumbed down from the "We are beyond the understanding of your puny organic minds" Reapers of ME1 to "Herp derp, we're killing you to save you from synthetics" Reapers of ME3.

Bravo! Very well said indeed!  

ME1's setup was very good and allowed for the possibility of some really interesting developments later on in the series (i.e, if a competent storyteller with a satisfying story to tell had dreamed up the trilogy instead, s/he couldn't have done much better with the beginnings of the Reaper plot than BioWare did in ME1). I found Sovereign's dialogue enigmatic and his motives inscrutable in a way that created tension and provoked questions -- an excellent opening to what could have been a really interesting three-part tale. Under that lens, ME1 was great and opened up the possibility of future greatness for the series. ME2 (and ME3), on the other hand...
 

Modifié par Fhaileas, 26 septembre 2012 - 02:23 .

[Ferretinabun]

I have to say, much as I agree that the plot totally snapped out of focus and the whole genre switched from RPG to action shoot-em the moment the first game was done, ME2 certainly stood head and shoulder above it's predecessor in many other respects.

I'm replaying ME1 atm, and I'd forgotten the sheer monotony of the recycled maps on the side quests, the painful grind of the mako and the endless hours of dead time spent in elevators, or listening to that damn "Decontamination in progress..." In ME2, the pace was much tighter, the locations were beautiful and unique, the main-plot-to-side-quest mission ratio was tilted far more sharply towards the former, and the controls were much more intuitive (on the PC, at least). If plot is what makes a game for you, then yes I agree that ME1 takes the prize, but for sheer gameplay I'd say it's decidedly in the shadow of its sequels.

The lesson? No game is perfect.

[Fhaileas]

Wow! I would say its definitely the opposite, and while ME1 certainly has flaws of its own, all those "aspects" you mention that makes ME2 "better" in your eyes comes across as hyperbole at best and disingenuous at worst.

Anyhow, From a purely gameplay perspective, the second removed the ability to adjust your scope and to crouch. Sticky cover, especially with no stance adjustment, does not work for sniping. The second's ammo system also means you run out of ammo constantly (at least with rifles, which carry very little ammo) so as much as you make your shots count you're still going to have to be switching to the pistol more. In fact, the second game seems to want you to be switching weapons way too much, almost treating them like powers. When I switched in the first game, it was because of tactical considerations, weapon switching in the second is usually an ammo consideration more.

Also, at least on the harder difficulties, the second throws way too many enemies and way too many barriers, shields, etc. at you. It starts to feel like a boring bullethell game. The levels in the first game may have been copypasta but the battles were of a more reasonable, both in terms of tediousness and believability, length than the second. I remember the second would have enemies spawning out of areas as well where there was actually no place for them to have come in from just to keep throwing more bodies at you. Finally, relying on biotics seemed more fun in the first game as well. You got both more powers to play with and didn't have the inane universal cooldown feature the second has. Playing a space wizard biotic in the second is not nearly so satisfying as spamming biotics in the first (even though the damn bosses can still spam with no cooldown restrictions in the second).

Modifié par Fhaileas, 27 septembre 2012 - 01:28 .

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

Fhaileas wrote...

Staff Lt Alenko wrote...
ME2 - I think I can see why you name it here though I disagree completely;
ME3 - What is this space magic you mention? I don't think it exists It didn't come out yet

Hehe! I love your response to ME3, and I respect your stance on ME2 although I disagree vehemently (as if it needed to be said ). The second game had an utterly silly (if not retarded) premise from the start, and the supposed "integration" with choices from the first game was verged either on the absurd, the non-existent or the superficial. In fact the whole continuity of the story is screwed up.

Anyone who picks apart story and lore could easily see that Mass Effect 2 introduces many retcons and inconsistencies throughout not just the story, but even the game mechanics themselves (reloading weapons?). And while any sci-fi or fantasy storyline requires you to suspend your disbelief and let a few inexplicable things and plotholes slip by, Mass Effect 2 was riddled with so many that it simply became impossible to ignore. While the first game felt like the story writers painstakenly took their time so their lore made sense, Mass Effect 2 felt like a different set of writers got their hands on the lore and lazily created or outright changed things along the way. It just felt like an excuse to introduce new people to the story without any regard whatsoever for the overall story arc.
 
(...)

You are - generally - right I think you exaggerate (slighly) when it comes to ME2 though. Allow me to elaborate

I wouldn't say ME2 is riddled with plot holes and inexplicable things. They are there, sure, but there are also plot holes in ME1. (For example, why is Joker suddenly with the Arcturus Fleet in the endgame when, last that we know, he was back over Ilos?  ) The thing is, you don't really notice or mind plot holes or minor inconsistencies when the overall experience is good. And the experience of ME2, for me at least, was fantastic. I don't want to start melting over the entire game and how great it is for me, so I'll just point out the satisfaction from finishing it - with No One Left Behind - was easily my best experience in video gaming ever.

When you say ME2 is an excuse for introducing new characters - you're absolutely right. And aren't they great? Mordin, Legion, Samara, Thane, and also Harbinger, Illusive Man, among others, they are all amazing. And they - Shepard's team their enemies - are what the entire game is about. ME2 is basically League of the Extraordinary Gentlemen (or, if you like, Ocean's Shepard's Eleven) IN SPACE. It doesn't do all that much with continueing the story of the first game, that much is undeniable, but boy is it magnificent! I'll get back to this in a moment.

The premise and some story elements of ME2, as you said, are definitely pretty silly in some ways. Chief among them is definitely Shepard's death and subsequent resurection by Cerberus and the following railroading (making Shepard work with Cerberus no matter what, even after what we've seen in the first game). This is especially jarring if your Shepard has a Sole Survivor background (mine is a Spacer and I am this particular type of ME player who only has one Shepard and one "best" storyline, so this is a bit easier for me).

All this is undeniably problematic. However, look at it this way: Every story, even one that's heavy on player choice, unequivocally needs at least some amount of railroading in order to progress. The Illusive Man was chosen as The Mysterious Employer for Shepard in his task to recruit a Ragtag Bunch of Misfits and in order to make this work some story elements had to be introduced. Hence the Lazarus Project and the situation "the Alliance isn't doing anything about these abductions, Shepard, you may not like us but if you want to save yumanity you'll have to work for us". It is a bit forced but the tradeoff - the story, or should I say the experience - of preparing for and then carrying out the Suicide Mission is truly, truly amazing.

Then, there's the matter of introducing thermal clips, which is ultimately a retcon diguised as an advancement made in the game lore. We learn that in order to maximize fire laid down range, thermal clips were introduced in order to allow guns to cool down more rapidly etc., we all know the drill. The "improvement" is doubtful at from the perspective within the story and not very subtle from the perspective of the player who experiences the story.

The key, however, is - again - the tradeoff - what we get for all this, which is more dynamic, faster-paced gameplay. Don't get me wrong - I love ME1's gameplay, I think it's absolutely fantastic, and the reason for that is that it's adequatly paced to match the rest of the game, with its open structure and focus on exploration. The gameplay in ME2, which I love as well, also fits the rest of the game, simply because the structure of the game is different than in the previous one. It's faster, yes, and more challenging on higher difficulties, but that's a good thing. (It's great fun changing difficulties on different missions - f.e. Veteran as standard, Hardcore on the Derelict Reaper, Normal on Jacob's LM, and Insanity on the Suicide Mission. Enhances the game experience). ME2 is also great for role-playing the fights - moving your team in position before engaging, throwing flashbangs before entering a room, stuff like that. It also, in my opinion, retains the distinctive ME feel, which is priceless.

As far as faults are concerned, there certainly were other ones, as well (the baby Reaper comes to mind) - but after all, the overall experience of ME2 is so good that I readily forgive them. Oh, and Fhaileas - hit me with all ME2's faults that you see and I didn't address, maybe there's a glaring one somewhere that I missed

Of course, there's no way to end the ME continuity on ME2, since it doesn't resolve anything, really. This is why what is needed is...  a sequel. A proper sequel, which would conclude the story from ME1 with the use of story arcs and characters from ME2. This proper ME3 needs to retain the mysterious, menacing nature of the Reapers, work with both previous games at the same time, tie their respective stories together in an elegant way, level out the bumps in the story that are present where ME1 and ME2 meet and, in short, provide a worthy conclusion for one of the most epic Space Operas ever created. Only then will the ME Trilogy be complete.

And something tells me it's going to involve... James Sanders. And captain Ysin'Mal. And Lorik Qu'inn might be there somewhere. And Haestrom. And a Dyson Sphere. And maybe even Volus millionaire Kumun Shol could appear.

Modifié par Staff Lt Alenko, 29 septembre 2012 - 09:36 .