631 réponses à ce sujet

[Heimdall]

Quote the Raven wrote...

PKchu wrote...

Perhaps this is heresy, but the plot of ME2 never bothered me much. It's a non-traditional video game structure, more like a TV series or a series of comic books than a singular plot. It's like saying TV is bad for not being a movie. I thought the way events played out and the experience of them worked very well as a total package.

The immersion, characters, making you care about the world - I think that's enough to validate the existance of ME2 in the series.

I agree.

It was unconventional and certainly not to everyone's taste, but I enjoyed the structure they went with.

I concur

[SNascimento]

BringBackNihlus wrote...

SNascimento wrote...

ME2 is a masterpiece of gaming

Thanks for the laugh. You should try your hand at stand-up. You'd slay crowds.

Not if the crowds are made of reasonable people.

[Mcfly616]

PKchu wrote...

xAmilli0n wrote...

ME2 is fine as a stand alone game, but it really is out of place in the trilogy.

If you look at the series now, yes. They didn't really payoff a lot of things in ME3.

That's the fault of them not designing ME3 to fit better with 2, not the fault of 2. 

have to disagree. ME2 did absolutely nothing to move the overarching plot forward. At the end of ME2 we're in the same exact position we were at the end of ME1. No progress was made. Leaving ME3 to fit the ENTIRE Reaper invasion/war/resolution into a single game, while also trying to tie up all of the character narratives.


Yeah, ME2 is the cause of many of ME3's issues. And a good amount of people feel this way.

[spirosz]

BringBackNihlus wrote...

SNascimento wrote...

ME2 is a masterpiece of gaming

Thanks for the laugh. You should try your hand at stand-up. You'd slay crowds.

Are you mad bro.  You would be sayin' ME2 a masterpiece if Liara was like, give me dat d, amirite?  

I think I'm cute
I know I'm sexy
I've got the looks
That drives the girls wild
I've got the moves
That really move 'em
I send chills
Up and down their spine!

Modifié par spirosz, 01 mars 2013 - 12:15 .

[ObserverStatus]

PKchu wrote...
Perhaps this is heresy, but the plot of ME2 never bothered me much. It's a non-traditional video game structure, more like a TV series or a series of comic books than a singular plot. It's like saying TV is bad for not being a movie. I thought the way events played out and the experience of them worked very well as a total package.
The immersion, characters, making you care about the world - I think that's enough to validate the existance of ME2 in the series.

Personally, I thought that change was an improvement over the story structure typically found in a lot of Bioware games like DA:O and KotOR where you discover that to save the world/galaxy you must travel to 4 locations and complete a similar task in each. Personally, I thought that KotOR would have been a lot better without the hunt for the star maps, made the whole thing feel too formulaic and video gamey.

[ElectronicPostingInterface]

Maxster_ wrote...

Oh please. The entire premise of ME2 makes no sense.
They could never finish that reaper, nor they could ever crush entire Systems Alliance fleet with a single transport, which is easily destroyed by a single frigate. This excuse of a plot also makes Harbringer an idiot.

1. Why couldn't they finish that Reaper? It's not like there are inherent laws of Reaper construction. The writers could determine the difficulty of construction themselves.
2. I remember the Collectors ambushing planets, not destroying whole fleets.
3. The frigate is heavily upgraded to specifically handle Collector attacks.
4. Harbinger is an idiot...because nitpicks?

Mass Effect has never been a super lore consistant game that has used suspension of disbelief and the Rule of Cool for things like cutscenes and plot elements like moving so many ships through a relay to Earth. This even occurs in Mass Effect 1 where the Conduit is somehow a teleporter instead of functioning like a proper Mass Relay.

If you were expecting an air tight plot that would survive all scrutiny and possible analysis, you really shouldn't be trying to find them in video games. Hell. Almost anything produced today.

[Mr.House]

PKchu wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

Oh please. The entire premise of ME2 makes no sense.
They could never finish that reaper, nor they could ever crush entire Systems Alliance fleet with a single transport, which is easily destroyed by a single frigate. This excuse of a plot also makes Harbringer an idiot.

1. Why couldn't they finish that Reaper? It's not like there are inherent laws of Reaper construction. The writers could determine the difficulty of construction themselves.
2. I remember the Collectors ambushing planets, not destroying whole fleets.
3. The frigate is heavily upgraded to specifically handle Collector attacks.
4. Harbinger is an idiot...because nitpicks?

I think what he means is the Collectors would need to attack Earth to finish the Reaper. The issue is in order to get to Earth you need to get past Arcturs(sp) station which is a massive space station with several fleets staioned there. You would need alot of ships to get past it, let alone get past the defenses. Even if you did manage to get past the station and into Sol you then have the fleet at Earth and all the defenses there. It's just simply imposeable.

[ElectronicPostingInterface]

"have to disagree. ME2 did absolutely nothing to move the overarching plot forward."

More heresy: don't think this is the end all be all of what the middle game of a trilogy has to be. ME2 contributes to the trilogy in character development and making you like and care about the setting more by going on these awesome experiences.

[TheBlackBaron]

bobobo878 wrote...

PKchu wrote...
Perhaps this is heresy, but the plot of ME2 never bothered me much. It's a non-traditional video game structure, more like a TV series or a series of comic books than a singular plot. It's like saying TV is bad for not being a movie. I thought the way events played out and the experience of them worked very well as a total package.
The immersion, characters, making you care about the world - I think that's enough to validate the existance of ME2 in the series.

Personally, I thought that change was an improvement over the story structure typically found in a lot of Bioware games like DA:O and KotOR where you discover that to save the world/galaxy you must travel to 4 locations and complete a similar task in each. Personally, I thought that KotOR would have been a lot better without the hunt for the star maps, made the whole thing feel too formulaic and video gamey.

I do feel like Bioware deserves at least a modicum of credit on this front. KotOR was the purest distillation of the four star maps formula, but ME1 did it, and AFAIK Jade Empire did it, and Neverwinter Nights has the dubious distinction of doing that -three- times, once in each chapter before the final endgame. 

DA:O broke them out of that shell a bit, since it at least had five locations and a lot of criss-crossing, but ME2 was the one to finally have a completely different story structure.

Modifié par TheBlackBaron, 01 mars 2013 - 12:24 .

[JesseLee202]

Mr.House wrote...

PKchu wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

Oh please. The entire premise of ME2 makes no sense.
They could never finish that reaper, nor they could ever crush entire Systems Alliance fleet with a single transport, which is easily destroyed by a single frigate. This excuse of a plot also makes Harbringer an idiot.

1. Why couldn't they finish that Reaper? It's not like there are inherent laws of Reaper construction. The writers could determine the difficulty of construction themselves.
2. I remember the Collectors ambushing planets, not destroying whole fleets.
3. The frigate is heavily upgraded to specifically handle Collector attacks.
4. Harbinger is an idiot...because nitpicks?

I think what he means is the Collectors would need to attack Earth to finish the Reaper. The issue is in order to get to Earth you need to get past Arcturs(sp) station which is a massive space station with several fleets staioned there. You would need alot of ships to get past it, let alone get past the defenses. Even if you did manage to get past the station and into Sol you then have the fleet at Earth and all the defenses there. It's just simply imposeable.

Why would they need Earth? Shepard only said something about Earth because he was in awe of how much room they had for holding pods in the ship.

There are millions of humans out in space, the Collectors don't need Earth.

[Mr.House]

PKchu wrote...

"have to disagree. ME2 did absolutely nothing to move the overarching plot forward."

More heresy: don't think this is the end all be all of what the middle game of a trilogy has to be. ME2 contributes to the trilogy in character development and making you like and care about the setting more by going on these awesome experiences.

MIddle chapter is ment to bridge 1 and 3, to get you ready for the final and do something big.

Empire Strikes Back: We witness the rebels get defeted badly to the point they have to retreat big time, we see Han get captured and brought to Jabba, we at lkeast see the Emperor after hearing about him and we find out there is a big connection between Darth Vader and luke. They manged to make you care about the characters, not introduce too many new characters that took away the old characters and it built oyu up for the final.

At best, ME2 starts to build up the genophage and geth/quarian plotline.

[Smeffects]

Mr.House wrote...

PKchu wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

Oh please. The entire premise of ME2 makes no sense.
They could never finish that reaper, nor they could ever crush entire Systems Alliance fleet with a single transport, which is easily destroyed by a single frigate. This excuse of a plot also makes Harbringer an idiot.

1. Why couldn't they finish that Reaper? It's not like there are inherent laws of Reaper construction. The writers could determine the difficulty of construction themselves.
2. I remember the Collectors ambushing planets, not destroying whole fleets.
3. The frigate is heavily upgraded to specifically handle Collector attacks.
4. Harbinger is an idiot...because nitpicks?

I think what he means is the Collectors would need to attack Earth to finish the Reaper. The issue is in order to get to Earth you need to get past Arcturs(sp) station which is a massive space station with several fleets staioned there. You would need alot of ships to get past it, let alone get past the defenses. Even if you did manage to get past the station and into Sol you then have the fleet at Earth and all the defenses there. It's just simply imposeable.

Who said they had to instantly finish the reaper??? No one lol. Your own crew assumed they had to attack earth, exactly what is done in ME3 funny enough. ME2 can be seen as reaper simply taking a head start on their building.

[ElectronicPostingInterface]

"I think what he means is the Collectors would need to attack Earth to finish the Reaper."

We aren't really told the exact number of colonies or people needed to build the Reaper, we just get EDI's estimate. There isn't like some clear picture of events that have to happen from the data we know.

I doubt they were going to finish the Reaper without going to Earth, but I'm sure it's a quicker process to raid colonies and then finish construction once Earth is conquered by the Reapers.

[Ralen1]

o Ventus wrote...

People blow the identical dialogue in ME1 way out of proportion. Yes, it happens, but whenever I see someone post about it on BSN, they insinuate that it happens every other dialogue pick. That's pure hyperbole. Ditto for the renegade/paragon in ME2. You are in no way forced down a path 90% of the game for a blue or red check.

This. ANY rpg is going to have identical dialogue if you stand in front of someone and press the talk button over, and over, and over again. The discussions you could have with your squad in ME1 were still far more in depth than the third installment of the game.

You could also argue that Baldur's Gate and KotoR have 'crappy combat mechanics' because all you do is point and click, but that doesn't detract from the fact that they're two of the best rpg's to ever hit the genre. Mass Effect 1 is up there on a level with them in terms of pure scope, world-building and storytelling. When people recall the Virmire mission or the final run up the outside of the citadel tower towards Sovereign, i guarantee you their recollections of those moments aren't going to be 'meh but sometimes i shotz da wall becos off da gun mechanik'; but the atmosphere and overall 'wow' factor of those scenes. Flashy game mechanics and polish can only take you so far, and that's something mass effect 3 sadly proves more and more as you advance through the game towards that inescapable fluorescent little **** at the end.

[Mr.House]

JesseLee202 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

PKchu wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

Oh please. The entire premise of ME2 makes no sense.
They could never finish that reaper, nor they could ever crush entire Systems Alliance fleet with a single transport, which is easily destroyed by a single frigate. This excuse of a plot also makes Harbringer an idiot.

1. Why couldn't they finish that Reaper? It's not like there are inherent laws of Reaper construction. The writers could determine the difficulty of construction themselves.
2. I remember the Collectors ambushing planets, not destroying whole fleets.
3. The frigate is heavily upgraded to specifically handle Collector attacks.
4. Harbinger is an idiot...because nitpicks?

I think what he means is the Collectors would need to attack Earth to finish the Reaper. The issue is in order to get to Earth you need to get past Arcturs(sp) station which is a massive space station with several fleets staioned there. You would need alot of ships to get past it, let alone get past the defenses. Even if you did manage to get past the station and into Sol you then have the fleet at Earth and all the defenses there. It's just simply imposeable.

Why would they need Earth? Shepard only said something about Earth because he was in awe of how much room they had for holding pods in the ship.

There are millions of humans out in space, the Collectors don't need Earth.

Shepard did not say Earth, Miranda did in my game and it made sense. EDI says it would take billions of humans to finish the reaper and even at it's stage with all the humans used, it's still a "baby". Unless they go after the big three human colonies that also have strong defenses the Colelctors would need to stay with Terminus system colonies and that would not work, at all.

[ElectronicPostingInterface]

Mr.House wrote...

MIddle chapter is ment to bridge 1 and 3, to get you ready for the final and do something big.

Empire Strikes Back: We witness the rebels get defeted badly to the point they have to retreat big time, we see Han get captured and brought to Jabba, we at lkeast see the Emperor after hearing about him and we find out there is a big connection between Darth Vader and luke. They manged to make you care about the characters, not introduce too many new characters that took away the old characters and it built oyu up for the final.

At best, ME2 starts to build up the genophage and geth/quarian plotline.

I understand that idea and how it's a typical way to construct the story. It's not the only way.

For me, the bridge is not in plot elements but investment in the world and characters that makes the invasion of 3 even more of a threat you want to stop. It doesn't add new plot elements about the Reapers, but I didn't really think that was necessary. 

if you evaluate the game on its strengths and the way it went about things instead of "Story A - Story AB - Story ABC," I think it holds up much better under the criticism. 

The largest disagreement between you and me is that you found ME2's character and game to be unappealing and not investing. I felt the exact opposite, and I can't really say like, "No, you're wrong for not liking what I like."

[dreamgazer]

Most things that people really appreciate are overrated, especially franchises, and none of them are as perfect as they've convinced themselves that they are.

[xAmilli0n]

dreamgazer wrote...

Most things that people really appreciate are overrated, especially franchises, and none of them are as perfect as they've convinced themselves that they are.

+1

[Smeffects]

Ralen1 wrote...

This. ANY rpg is going to have identical dialogue if you stand in front of someone and press the talk button over, and over, and over again. The discussions you could have with your squad in ME1 were still far more in depth than the third installment of the game.

That is not what identical dialogue complained about are. Also the third game had auto dialogue another stupid system that is infact the same thing. ME2 had the best core system of the 3. What identical dialogue mean the way to OP state is the dialogue wheel, all doing the same thing. In many, many, many ME1 event, your wheel display up to 3 different options and yet all 3 of them trigger the same text from Shepard and the same reply to the person you are talking to. Effectively its an auto dialogue, that you have to click.

Modifié par Smeffects, 01 mars 2013 - 12:34 .

[Rip504]

nah

[BleedingUranium]

I could make a list easily this big for any piece of fiction ever made. That doesn't mean they're bad.

[JesseLee202]

Mr.House wrote...

JesseLee202 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

PKchu wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

Oh please. The entire premise of ME2 makes no sense.
They could never finish that reaper, nor they could ever crush entire Systems Alliance fleet with a single transport, which is easily destroyed by a single frigate. This excuse of a plot also makes Harbringer an idiot.

1. Why couldn't they finish that Reaper? It's not like there are inherent laws of Reaper construction. The writers could determine the difficulty of construction themselves.
2. I remember the Collectors ambushing planets, not destroying whole fleets.
3. The frigate is heavily upgraded to specifically handle Collector attacks.
4. Harbinger is an idiot...because nitpicks?

I think what he means is the Collectors would need to attack Earth to finish the Reaper. The issue is in order to get to Earth you need to get past Arcturs(sp) station which is a massive space station with several fleets staioned there. You would need alot of ships to get past it, let alone get past the defenses. Even if you did manage to get past the station and into Sol you then have the fleet at Earth and all the defenses there. It's just simply imposeable.

Why would they need Earth? Shepard only said something about Earth because he was in awe of how much room they had for holding pods in the ship.

There are millions of humans out in space, the Collectors don't need Earth.

Shepard did not say Earth, Miranda did in my game and it made sense. EDI says it would take billions of humans to finish the reaper and even at it's stage with all the humans used, it's still a "baby". Unless they go after the big three human colonies that also have strong defenses the Colelctors would need to stay with Terminus system colonies and that would not work, at all.

Shepard said Earth in my game. EDI is using estimates/guess work, she does not have "word of god" on this matter.

The Collectors could have had anything planned, we, the player, do not know. Saying the premise "doesn't make sense", because of a question left unanswered, is very ignorant.

[ElectronicPostingInterface]

dreamgazer wrote...

Most things that people really appreciate are overrated, especially franchises, and none of them are as perfect as they've convinced themselves that they are.

There's also a "this is too popular or well liked" effect where people begin underrating things in response to the overreaction.

In five years I think there'll be a clear picture on how this series is "rated" and people have had more time to digest it and think about it.

Or it'll be like, "Woo that game is the best because nostaglia."