209 réponses à ce sujet

[Kingthlayer]

The whole point of Mass Effect 2 was to make a big team to take on the Reaper threat. But I guess BioWare couldn't handle having all those as squad mates in Mass Effect 3 so it pretty much made Mass Effect 2 useless.

It was an odd decision considering how much hate they got for not having Kaidan, Ashley, Wrex and Liara play a big part in Mass Effect 2, that they would not include the Mass Effect 2 guys in Mass Effect 3 in more than a cameo appearance.

And then after everyone ****ed them out over it, to not include Omega as a hub city where you can get meet up with the ME2 guys, and add more content to the ME3 guys.

It just seems like BioWare has lost touch with the fans, they don't know what to do anymore.

[Giantdeathrobot]

Commander Shepard's Terminus Systems vacation. Starring a newly reformed (or is he??) terrorist with a massive bank account, a blue lesbian brain vampire, and an overly talkative giant space cuttlefish with an homoerotic crush on our hero.

I mean, what's not to like?

Seriously, ME2 was made utterly pointless. I mean, its DLCs have more story significance than the main game. Several of the characters introduced end up having roles barely better than camoes. Taking out the Base is all well and good but when the Reapers show up it kindaseems irrelevant. We should have found the Crucible plans, or at least information vital to its construction, on the Base.

[Yate]

Sets up characters and factions, ties up a few loose ends about the Reapers.

[gisle]

You, TS, take for granted that the Reapers are an imminent threat in the eyes of the galaxy, which it isn't in 2185. Something is abducting humans, that's what's happening, and they want it stopped. The Reapers caught everyone of guard in mid-2186.

Modifié par Gisle-Aune, 18 décembre 2012 - 07:40 .

[string3r]

Nothing.

[Tootles FTW]

At least it's replayable, regardless of it's meaningfulness within the series. Can't say the same for ME3.

[Red Panda]

(deleted for reasons)


Still, Mass Effect 2's choices, factions and characters matter little.

Modifié par OperatingWookie, 18 décembre 2012 - 09:21 .

[Guy On The Moon]

So is ME3 to blame for ME2's irrelevancy or is ME2 to blame for itself?

[danby]

d-boy15 wrote...

it's supposed to be the part that lead to dark energy plot, since it's was scrap so, was the ME2 plot.

Yep +1

[grey_wind]

Guy On The Moon wrote...

So is ME3 to blame for ME2's irrelevancy or is ME2 to blame for itself?

I'm not sure if this question is serious......

[RadicalDisconnect]

grey_wind wrote...

Guy On The Moon wrote...

So is ME3 to blame for ME2's irrelevancy or is ME2 to blame for itself?

I'm not sure if this question is serious......

I'll take this as a serious question. My answer is that it's both. ME2's story was idiotic and convoluted even before ME3 came. That's not to excuse ME3's poor handling of ME2 events, mind you, but regardless, ME2 just felt really disconnected from ME1 and introduced a bunch of new plot holes on its own.

I think Dean_the_Young summarized ME2 well.

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Shepard begins the game not having any leads on how to beat the Reapers, and ends the game not having any leads on how to beat the Reapers.

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 19 décembre 2012 - 12:02 .

[ZarZar726]

Although the plot wasn't critical (at all) to the rest of the series, it is still my favorite of all three games. It just felt like a much more personal story, with all of the chracter interaction. Creating great characters is, in my opinion, where Bioware shines. This is why ME2 is my favorite, even if the plot isn't necessarily critical to the rest of the trilogy.

[CronoDragoon]

ZarZar726 wrote...

Although the plot wasn't critical (at all) to the rest of the series, it is still my favorite of all three games. It just felt like a much more personal story, with all of the chracter interaction. Creating great characters is, in my opinion, where Bioware shines. This is why ME2 is my favorite, even if the plot isn't necessarily critical to the rest of the trilogy.

[Vigil_N7]

To those who say it was to build-up to the dark energy plot - there was ONE mission in the entire game that had any relation to dark energy, and even past that it was only mentioned in a couple of lines of dialogue.

Regardless of whether or not dark energy would've been the driving plot in ME3, it was barely touched upon in ME2 and would've offered no greater link between ME2-ME3 than say the origins of the collectors did.

Don't get me wrong I adore ME2, but its lack of focus on the overriding narrative makes it hard for multiple play throughs, there's only so much family drama I can bear.

[Shaleist]

The point of Mass Effect 2 was Mass Effect 2. Mass effect 3 can screw itself. Neither of them had a damn thing to do with each other or ME1 for that matter. At least ME2 was good, ME3 just continues to disappoint me *single player I mean*.


"To those who say it was to build-up to the dark energy plot - there was ONE mission in the entire game that had any relation to dark energy, and even past that it was only mentioned in a couple of lines of dialogue. "

Originally that human reaper was supposed to tie into the dark energy thing too. Although you bring up a good point... Parasini mentions the dark energy thing, Tali brings it up and that's all I can remember.

[Massa FX]

My opinion is...

#1 reason for ME2: Stop the Collectors from harvesting humans. The Reapers were behind schedule for their invasion/harvesting party, so they used the Collectors to get a jump start in making a new Reaper form. A human Reaper. (Thanks to Shepard being an anomaly and a threat to Reaper objectives, humans became the new "it child" of the cycle.)

Again, the main plot of ME2 is: Stop the Collectors -- who are controlled by the Reapers... So... it's really --> Stop the Reapers by stopping the Collectors.

[fr33stylez]

Massa FX wrote...

My opinion is...

#1 reason for ME2: Stop the Collectors from harvesting humans. The Reapers were behind schedule for their invasion/harvesting party, so they used the Collectors to get a jump start in making a new Reaper form. A human Reaper. (Thanks to Shepard being an anomaly and a threat to Reaper objectives, humans became the new "it child" of the cycle.)

Again, the main plot of ME2 is: Stop the Collectors -- who are controlled by the Reapers... So... it's really --> Stop the Reapers by stopping the Collectors.

This cannot be the reason.

The Reapers were already 'behind schedule' for harvesting by about 1000 years, as Sovereign was investigating why the keepers didn't respond and eventually on how to invade by using Saren. There's no reason why they would need a jump start on making one Reaper suddenly in the past 2 years after delaying the cycle for 1000 years.

Even then, there's no good reason why the Reapers would waste time using one comparatively weak race (Collectors) and hit-and-run kidnappings over 2 years as opposed to just doing it themselves. I mean, the Collectors weren't even halfway done making the Reaper - were they doing to throw the baby Reaper through the Omega-4 relay in order to complete it when the actual Reaper armada arrived? It's nonsense, to be honest.

Modifié par fr33stylez, 19 décembre 2012 - 02:36 .

[shepskisaac]

fr33stylez wrote...

Sets the Reapers back how? The Reapers were flying to the galaxy on the same timeline regardless of the Human-Reaper, the Collectors or the Collector Base. The Collectors and their task was essentially irrelevant to the pending Reaper invasion. They wouldn't have even completed the Reaper in time and no one to date knows what they wer going to do with it.

Seems like you didn't pay attention to the plot. The Reapers don't built Human Reaper to "do" something with it, there's no great evil masterplan "Ohh he's gonna replace Sovereign and open the CItadel Relay for us hehe!". Making new Capitol Ship (the most important one) from the best selected race is their primary objective, they're suppoused to store old life in Reaper form first before destroying the rest. Then they will store other races in Destroyer forms. Then they can kill everyone they didn't use to make new Reapers. Or turn them into Collector-like servants if some/all races prove to be not suitable for creating a Reaper (like Protheans did, that Reaper failed). That's why Collectors were testing DNA of various species and why Harby had them start the construction of the Human Reaper. They don't have to finish it on time, they will or Reapers will when they arrive. But by starting early they have a headstart and can test if the Reaper will work at all (unlike the Prothean Reaper). In ME3, they have to start everything from scratch. They don't have even the skeleton of Human Reaper ready and no place to build it until they retake the Citadel. They would complete the construction of the Human Reaper much sooner if it wasn't for the Collectors' failure. And with the completed Human Reaper, they could proceede to mass annihilation without having to save populations for production, as they do in ME3.

fr33stylez wrote...

The only event the 'bought time' in ME2 was the Arrival DLC, which ended up to be irrelevant since ME3 fast forwards 6 months anyways.

They had to fly to the next Relay instead of using Alpha Relay to jump instantly to the rest of the galaxy and start the invasion immediately. It took them a couple of months, that's what Arrival bought us. During this time, Liara pulled together stuff old Shadow Broker uncovered and eventually tracked down Crucible plans on Mars. Without those additional months, it would be over, just like it happens in Game Over cutscene if the Arrival countdown goes to zero and Reaper manage to use Alpha Relay.

fr33stylez wrote...

The Reapers were already 'behind schedule' for harvesting by about 1000 years

No, that's what people thought until we learnt that it was Leviathans who took control over Rachni

Fixers0 wrote...

The point of Mass Effect 1 is not to buy time.

Yes it is. Destroying Sovereign prevents them from pouring thorugh relay so they have to take the long-road instead. But Destroying Sovereign and shuttign down the relay doesn't kill the Reapers.

Modifié par IsaacShep, 19 décembre 2012 - 03:14 .

[ADLegend21]

Guy On The Moon wrote...

 The only kind of valuable useful information you get from Mass Effect 2 pertaining to the rest of the series is that the Collecters are modified Protheans and the collectors are abducting humans to build a "humanoid" reaper.  Nothing to do with overall stopping the Reapers or slowing them down.  I feel like the game is a huge side quest pertaining to the overall plot of the series.  Which is why I never got why they wanted to bring ME2 to other platforms so much but leave out ME1 until later.  You can honestly take ME2 out of the series and go straight from ME1 to ME3, maybe play Arrival DLC but that's about it.

Am I missing something?

Exploring the rest fo the galaxy. In 1 you stick to mostly council space, so in Me2 you're spending he game mostly in the terminnus systems. Expands on locations, cultures, and characters as well as fleshing out Cerberus and the rest of te galaxy before the war.

[Dysjong]

I wouldnt say that ME2 is the Best in the trilogy.

One thing that disappointed me, was the so called loyalty missions. I was expecting that someone would either stab me in the back or sabotage the mission, not therapist missions.

Maybe it's that they call it loyalty missions.

Modifié par Dysjong, 19 décembre 2012 - 03:20 .

[Guy On The Moon]

Dysjong wrote...

I wouldnt say that ME2 is the Best in the trilogy.

One thing that disappointed me, was the so called loyalty missions. I was expecting that someone would either stab me in the back or sabotage the mission, not therapist missions.

Maybe it's that they call it loyalty missions.

The only loyaltly missions that were actually worthwhile were Miranda's, Kasumi, Zaeed, and Grunt.  All of the others you're acting like what you said, a therapist

And Mordin...his was actually one of the most important ones

Modifié par Guy On The Moon, 19 décembre 2012 - 10:02 .

[xtorma]

Mordin's was best, and had far reaching implications for the entire galaxy

[Seboist]

Guy On The Moon wrote...

So is ME3 to blame for ME2's irrelevancy or is ME2 to blame for itself?

ME2 makes itself pointless. It's also far more detrimental to the series besides that too, it introduced all the comic book silliness(the superhero outfits that make no sense) and the Ed Wood level pulp schlock rubbish (Lazarus,Space Terminator.Clockwork oranging an Autist,etc).

Once a protagonist is killed off and revived in a completely nonsensical manner for plot contrived idiocy and relegated to the brunt of a few jokes in what's supposed to be a science fiction story the only direction for the franchise is straight down into the challenger deep of derp.

[Lars Honeytoast]

Huh, that's interesting. A lot of people say Mass Effect was at its peak at ME2, but I'm seeing a solid amount of people here saying it was really the cause of the downfall.



Personally, I can't really say one way or the other. But I can say, ME2 is the hardest to go back and replay now. There is really nothing of significance to the overall plot, outside of romances and possibly a few deaths. Samara, Jack, Grunt, Jacob, Thane (if Kirrahe is dead), Kasumi, and Zaeed ha little to no impact on the final story. And quite honestly, the plot of ME3 is more interesting if some of them are dead.

I tend to think this isn't so much of an issue with ME2 as it is an issue with they way people view the game, though. You are meant to play it as if Shepard makes the choices you would make, but many (most?) people try for that "perfect" run where everyone lives. I think this approach is what really ruins the game for people. (And personally, I wish it wasn't even possible to save everyone in ME2). The impact of your decisions is so much greater in ME3 if you stick to a type of character, and live with the consequences. We all know how to keep everyone alive, so we are biased to try and do that, since we really are connected to some of these characters. I challenge each of you run through ME2 picking a style of play, and just let some characters die as a result of this. It makes ME3 that much better. (Even more kudos if you go back to ME1. The whole series feels different if Wrex is dead. The krogan are just as, if not more dangerous than the geth.)

((This whole last paragraph is in parenthesis, ignore it if you need to.) People like to complain that the deaths of characters aren't properly felt in 3, so that's why they try to keep everyone alive. The thing is, the absence of the characters is supposed to be felt by you, not by the avatar of Shepard. I think 3 succeeds in this, and most (as in, most of us whiners on here) are just pissy because it is not explicitly shown to us.I give BioWare a lot of credit for trusting that their audience would carry the emotional response of the weight of their previous actions with them; it's just a shame that so many people were either incapable or unwilling to do that.)

[Aurora313]

Because Bioware had to demonise Shepard in-verse somehow, and shackling him up to the biggest humanity-first terrorist-leading bastard there was seemed a pretty good way to do it.

And they wanted an excuse to give some else for Shepard to angst over (though he never does it) - dying and coming back to life, for the sake of pointless drama.

Seriously - they could have just crippled him, cut a few limbs off then those two years could have been spent in Rehab, Coma or a combination of both. Or hell, maybe they could have used the Reaper obsession as an excuse to dump Shepard into the looney bin and leave him to rot. Only to let him out when they realize 'Oh crap something's going wrong!'

Modifié par Aurora313, 19 décembre 2012 - 07:51 .