8 réponses à ce sujet

[Y0-Y0Jimb0]

Is it just me or is the Arrival DLC just appaulling bad ? Everything from the dialog and script, characters to the mission levels I've found to be terrible and even playing on Hardcore its simply too easy and tedious. Why are
you allowed to play the mission before completing the suicide mission  which is just really wrong .

I really liked the idea behind "Arrival" as it fills in a core missing part to the story when you play ME3 but  I can't believe the difference between it and say LoSB or even Kasumi.  Was it made by the same team or did Bioware outsource it to someone else to make ?

What a shame as they missed a real opportunity as it could have been an epic story to ME2..

Y0Jimb0

Modifié par Y0-Y0Jimb0, 23 janvier 2013 - 11:22 .

[Sir George Parr]

I always leave it until after the SM as it breaks the flow of ME2, if i do it any earlier. But if i were to do Arrival earlier in the game then i would think that taking down the collectors is the least of Shepard's concern's.
I would have preferred to have had a squad mate along to have enriched proceedings, Instead of flying solo for the bulk of it. It serves its purpose to bridge the two games.

[Y0-Y0Jimb0]

I was planning on doing Arrival after the SM but kept thinking that Hacketts message when I was 50% thro the game was that the reaper threat was imminent so that has to priority over the collectors.... not well thought out. It should have only activated after SM's been completed.

Your right about the lack of squad mate .. it just feels wrong and I don't think its been helped with how poor the actual DLC actually is...just a shame, it should have been made as good as LOSB to set u up for ME3.

[Sir George Parr]

It probably would have being a better opportunity for James to have being introduced as a temporary squad mate for 'Arrival' so that you wouldn't have spent time wondering why Shepard is so familiar with someone you have never seen before in ME3.

[Drayce333]

Its ok for the trilogy as a whole, play it as the final mission before importing to ME3. On adept insanity the part with protecting kenson against the zerging batarians is crap.

[Urdnot_Bucdawg]

Arrival was good to bridge ME2 and ME3. I liked how the story showed that while Shepard is a hero, sometimes you have to make decisions that there are no clear cut good answers too ( can't reveal spoilers but those who played it know the part I mean). I wish it were followed up better in ME3 but Shepard's actions had to have weighed heavily on his/her conscience after returning to Earth and there after.
Hoping ME3 had a DLC like that to bridge the presumed ME4 ( or whatever they're calling it ) set in the ME universe.

[PsiFive]

Y0-Y0Jimb0, no, it's not just you. Arrival is a mediocre mission with limited replay value due to soloing nearly all of it and a laughable story that requires us to believe that the principle villains, Harbinger included, have the mental capacity of a fresh salad. It's by far the weakest of ME2's playable DLC, and I'd even include the Firewalker crap with that. I actually uninstalled it because I just had no interest in playing any more only to find that saved Shepards who'd been started while it was installed wouldn't load anymore, so I had to put the bloody thing back. Half the time I just skip through the Hackett convo and then ignore the mission. It really is that bad.

I will admit that Arrival does manage to fulfil its role as a bridge between 2 and 3 in that it gives a marginally less stupid justification for Shepard being under house arrest at the beginning of 3. Frankly I feel that Arrival being a good bridge between the two games just says that the ME3 story is nearly as weak as Arrival rather than anything good about Arrival itself.