169 réponses à ce sujet

[Steelcan]

I maintain that ME2's main issue was that ME3 didnt carry anything on. The huge ME2 cast could have had larger roles *cough* Miranda and Jack *cough* or making the CB decision actually relevant to ME3, or showing a rift and maybe even an ultimate choice between Cerberus and the Alliance.

[evilgummybear]

Loved ME2.
However some squad loyalty missions felt like it was a side quest really.
Other than that ME2 was brilliant. collector base etc was done perfectly. Seeing normandy SR2 rebult scene was a fist pump. ME3 did make ME2 all pointless tho. Like seriously collectors/harbringer/squads mates all got side lined after all that.

[nos_astra]

Steelcan wrote...
I maintain that ME2's main issue was that ME3 didnt carry anything on. The huge ME2 cast could have had larger roles *cough* Miranda and Jack *cough* or making the CB decision actually relevant to ME3, or showing a rift and maybe even an ultimate choice between Cerberus and the Alliance.

And you don't think ME2 should resolve something, anything for itself. 

To think people have claimed that because of its lack of continuity ME2 is a standalone game. O'rly? How so if it can't stand on its own without ME3 retroactively making it relevant.

Modifié par klarabella, 25 février 2013 - 08:50 .

[Seboist]

ME2 made the CB pointless by having it's capture be optional and thus made it's sole possible claim to any kind of relevance to the greater story null and void(it should have been a choice to give the base to Cerb or Alliance/Council).

The squad was made irrelevant from the start due to them being disposable mooks for the SM(the exceptions being top fan service material Tali and Garrus of course).

[Steelcan]

Seboist wrote...

ME2 made the CB pointless by having it's capture be optional and thus made it's sole possible claim to any kind of relevance to the greater story null and void(it should have been a choice to give the base to Cerb or Alliance/Council).

The squad was made irrelevant from the start due to them being disposable mooks for the SM(the exceptions being top fan service material Tali and Garrus of course).

. We have the former Cerberus second in command wanting to help us.  Should we use her to fight Cerberus, gain insight into TIM's operations, how about examine their new actions.  Naw, lets have her run after her sister again

[Rip504]

It's epic awesomeness.

[nos_astra]

Steelcan wrote...
We have the former Cerberus second in command wanting to help us.  Should we use her to fight Cerberus, gain insight into TIM's operations, how about examine their new actions.  Naw, lets have her run after her sister again

Miranda's importance in the story stood and fell with Cerberus.

Cerberus' role in ME3 was omnipresent dark-gray-stupid cannon fodder.
Cerberus' role in ME1 was evil-stupid cannon fodder.
Cerberus' role in ME2 was completely vague: We do stuff because *handwave* humanity.

You might want to blame ME3 for screwing up but like many things the groundwork was laid before.

[Seboist]

Steelcan wrote...

Seboist wrote...

ME2 made the CB pointless by having it's capture be optional and thus made it's sole possible claim to any kind of relevance to the greater story null and void(it should have been a choice to give the base to Cerb or Alliance/Council).

The squad was made irrelevant from the start due to them being disposable mooks for the SM(the exceptions being top fan service material Tali and Garrus of course).

. We have the former Cerberus second in command wanting to help us.  Should we use her to fight Cerberus, gain insight into TIM's operations, how about examine their new actions.  Naw, lets have her run after her sister again

It is strange how the squadmate that's the hardest to kill in the SM isn't more prominent in ME3 but that's BW for you.

[Mr.House]

klarabella wrote...

Steelcan wrote...
We have the former Cerberus second in command wanting to help us.  Should we use her to fight Cerberus, gain insight into TIM's operations, how about examine their new actions.  Naw, lets have her run after her sister again

Miranda's importance in the story stood and fell with Cerberus.

Cerberus' role in ME3 was omnipresent dark-gray-stupid cannon fodder.
Cerberus' role in ME1 was evil-stupid cannon fodder.
Cerberus' role in ME2 was completely vague: We do stuff because *handwave* humanity.

You might want to blame ME3 for screwing up but like many things the groundwork was laid before.

As I've said many times, Cerberus is so inconsistant it's not funny and they never should have been invovlved in the main story,they should have stayed and ended as a ME side mission bady. This is what happens when you don't plan things. *looks at Drew*

[Seboist]

ME1 Cerberus was actually their best incarnation despite their being under developed throwaway side quest fodder. They actually behaved like a clandestine organization and didn't take too much focus away from the main antagonists.

[Evo_9]

yeap i think the ones who like me2 didnt play me1 first.

no normal person would like how ME2 spat on everything me1 built up, storyline wise.

spectres, cerberus, reapers, past squad mates and ofcourse shepard all completely shat on by ME2.

oh and human reaper....dear o dear lol

Modifié par Evo_9, 25 février 2013 - 10:10 .

[MECavScout01]

I started with ME1. I loved it, but I wasn't as entrenched in anyone except Shepard.

ME2 is the best game I ever played though. Bar none. Some people criticize it.

I rejected reinstatement into the Spectres, and I embraced working for Cerberus.

I don't see how ME2 did anything to the Reapers. All it did was expand on them.

Google eyes at the end was nutty as hell, but I thought it was an otherwise effective plot device. It would have been cooler if it was the sick human embryo in the art book.

[Anubis722]

main problem ME2 it has nonsensical plot and does noting for overall story of Mass Effect series. it pretty much a filler.

[moater boat]

ME2 was a great game, but it was a horrible second installment of a trilogy. Plus the events of the arrival DLC are, in my opinion, the ultimate source of problems for ME3

[FlamingBoy]

one of my favorite games ever.

But I would be a fool to say it didn't have problems, or recognize that a lot of the complaints on this forums are justified.
In particular how little the story sits in the main plot


Edit: I really didn't like how the game story was cut up in dlc,
most notably arrival, kasumi, and zaeed. To a lesser extend shadow broker.

Modifié par FlamingBoy, 25 février 2013 - 11:07 .

[Juumanistra]

I think it's unfair to assert that ME2's plot is "filler", as that is the benefit of hindsight talking. ME1 is, no matter what the Bioware creative team says about what they were thinking when it was released, a stand-alone game that was eventually turned into a trilogy. The most comparable film -- which seems the place to look instead of at comparable games, given the focus on the plot arc -- would be probably be Star Wars, especially given how the development team prior to ME2's launch used that same analogy. What did The Empire Strikes Back do? It pulled the drag-chute, focused on developing the characters, and establishing Plot Points -- such as Luke's training for the final confrontation with Vader and the revelations about his parentage -- to be resolved in the trilogy's finale. This isn't to say that ME2 did its job well, but it certainly narrowed the scope of the narrative and focused on the characters, while there's plenty of advancement of the trilogy's meta-plot through the myriad instances of Ominous Foreshadowing with regard to dark energy, learning of the Geth Schism,  and learning how Reapers are made. That ME3 ultimately chose to do absolutely nothing with most of it can't really be blamed on ME2, can it?

Though in retrospect, what animated the Collectors should have been the hunt for the Crucible: Perhaps at the behest of their masters, they were trying to make sure that all copies of the schematics were truly destroyed prior to the return of the Reapers without the benefit of surprise.  It would've given Cerberus a fine incentive to spend ungodly sums of money making the Bionic Shepard and give him a swanky ship, even if he was a Paragon!Shep who was liable to stab them in the back at the earliest possible moment. And it would have given the Council a fine reason to believe that it was just a legend. (As there being something like the Crucible would directly contradict what Vigil told Shep on Ilos. We could even get the turian councilor implying Shep's schizo from it! As Shep's the only one who talked to Vigil, too.)

[Landon7001]

Mass Effect 2 is "filler"? Well, if the best game of all time can be filler....ok? Me 2 is universally hailed and lauded as one of the best ever. Its number 86 in g4s top 100 ever games...For my money, me 2 was damn near perfect. It was enthralling, engaging, smart, epic, deep....it simotaneosly let us get intimate with all-time great characters and GREATLY expand and enhance the scope of mass effects mythology and on a larger scale. I agree me 1 could have been stand alone game. But its great in its own right.....me 2 took it to a WHOLE other level.

[Bleachrude]

Again I'll point out that ME2 did do some things right with regard to plot.

It expanded on the geth/quarian and the krogan genophage issue by making us look at it a second time with new information....

When given this as a source material, ME3 more than accomplishes its job (Prority Rannoch, Priority Tuchanka) so we KNOW that Bioware can complete a story arc with a satisying conclusion.

The problem is that the other arc (reapers are coming), ME2 simply left ME3 with noting to work with that bridged between itself and ME1

[Juumanistra]

Bleachrude wrote...

Again I'll point out that ME2 did do some things right with regard to plot.

It expanded on the geth/quarian and the krogan genophage issue by making us look at it a second time with new information....

When given this as a source material, ME3 more than accomplishes its job (Prority Rannoch, Priority Tuchanka) so we KNOW that Bioware can complete a story arc with a satisying conclusion.

The problem is that the other arc (reapers are coming), ME2 simply left ME3 with noting to work with that bridged between itself and ME1

Utterly destroying all of the geth's development in ME2 just to roll with another permutation of a synthetic creature wanting to be a real boy was satisfying for you? Seriously, Priority: Rannoch is probably a better example of everything that's wrong with ME3 from a narrative perspective than anything else, even the ending. Fangasms regarding Legion's demise notwithstanding, it was horrendous from start to finish.

On the question of the Reapers, ME2 is immensely clear that the reason why the Collectors -- beyond their general villainy -- matter is because they're the only lead to the Reapers that is currently available. That was ME2's narrative bridge: The Reapers are up to...something that requires a Reaper, and they are building one in situ because the rest of the gang is trapped beyond the galactic rim. Why such was being done is implicitly being setup to be answered in ME3. (My headcanon will always be that the Collectors were building the Baby Terminator to try to open the Citadel relay again.)  ME2 can't be blamed for the fact that they chose not to expound on anything in ME3: To the extent that ME2 can be faulted, it was for kicking the can down the line with regards to answering questions. (Which is probably the best criticism of it: It never bothers to answer anything it doesn't absolutely have to. Probably the best example of that was their punting on having to do character design for quarians, which led to the biological stupidity we witnessed aboard Migrant Fleet and the resulting maelstrom of sturm und drang when there was no dramatic reveal of Tali's face in ME3.)

Modifié par Juumanistra, 26 février 2013 - 01:15 .

[Bleachrude]

Wait what?

The geth were not interested in "being a real boy" at the time of the start of ME3. They were willing to fight the old machines until the quarians surprised them and they decided to throw their lot in with the reapers.

It's only at the very end of the arc that Legion springs the surprise that the reaper code can be used for another purpose.

[Shaleist]

I think all the ME2 criticisms are from poor deluded individuals that still cling to the Idea that the main plot for ME *Stop Da Reapers* was EVER something profound or great. It really wasn't... just a solid foundation for a trilogy arc. The fact that ME3 was the one focused most on that 'solid, not great' story is kinda why I think ME3 was the weakest of the 3.

[Rick Lewis]

I loved ME 2 and there wasn't much I didn't like about it. My only gripe was maybe the Thermal Clips and buggy cover system. I found myself missing mods that made my weapon barely overheat at all in ME 1. Who needs thermal clips when you got mods?

[darkway1]

Mass2 was pretty much perfect......lots of varied content,lot's of replay value,epic game.

[ScriptBabe]

The lack of a personalized villain weakened ME2. When Harbinger would assume direct control and trash talk Shepard that helped a bit, but having Saren as the stand-in for Sovereign and the Reapers in ME1 was a very smart choice. Also, the human Reaper was just silly. The game uses the structure of the Dirty Dozen which is okay, but I'm in a second play through of ME2, and it's less engaging this time while ME1 was more fun the second time through.