631 réponses à ce sujet

[Budgier]

ME2 is my favorite of the series, but the main story of the reapers was never the reason I played Mass Effect anyway which is probably why. I play it for the characters and ability to RP with Shepard so well, which ME2 did best.

[TODD9999]

PKchu wrote...

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. 

I always want to say something like this when I see people saying that ME2 contributed nothing to the series.  I usually don't, because I don't feel like getting dragged into an argument - people are welcome to like or dislike whatever they want.  ME2 has its flaws, certainly, but this particular argument bothers me.

So I wanted to quote this and give props where they're due.

You can't retroactively say that that ME2 had nothing to do with the other two games, so *it's* the weak point in the plot.  ME3 could have connected to ME2 better, but as you say, they didn't pursue that sufficiently.  It's ME3's fault that ME2 sticks out as a side-story.  There could have been missions in ME3 to destroy Reaper-making facilities or prisoner collection warehouses, the Collectors could have been a component of the Reaper forces, the Reaper fleets could have been made of a smaller number of Reapers with a large number of Collector consorts, and so forth. 

As for the series as a whole being overrated, I'm not sure.  It hasn't been exceptionally original, but as a whole it's been a pretty well-assembled bit of story and world-building.  And what they did with the concept of your decisions carrying over from game to game was an absolutely wonderful idea with spotty execution.  Personally, I like the setting just fine, although of course everyone has their own take.

[Mr.House]

TODD9999 wrote...

PKchu wrote...

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. 

I always want to say something like this when I see people saying that ME2 contributed nothing to the series.  I usually don't, because I don't feel like getting dragged into an argument - people are welcome to like or dislike whatever they want.  ME2 has its flaws, certainly, but this particular argument bothers me.

So I wanted to quote this and give props where they're due.

You can't retroactively say that that ME2 had nothing to do with the other two games, so *it's* the weak point in the plot.  ME3 could have connected to ME2 better, but as you say, they didn't pursue that sufficiently.  It's ME3's fault that ME2 sticks out as a side-story.  There could have been missions in ME3 to destroy Reaper-making facilities or prisoner collection warehouses, the Collectors could have been a component of the Reaper forces, the Reaper fleets could have been made of a smaller number of Reapers with a large number of Collector consorts, and so forth. 

As for the series as a whole being overrated, I'm not sure.  It hasn't been exceptionally original, but as a whole it's been a pretty well-assembled bit of story and world-building.  And what they did with the concept of your decisions carrying over from game to game was an absolutely wonderful idea with spotty execution.  Personally, I like the setting just fine, although of course everyone has their own take.

Then why did many of us feel the same before ME3 even was in production? Bioware showed in ME2 with how they treated the ME squad and going from ME to ME2, that they did not care that much about continuation thus how is ME3 such a surprise? People tried to tell people not to hype themselves and that the chance of ME2 squadmates being important in ME3 was going to be slim. No one wanted to listen.

[Maxster_]

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.

Almost entire SA population is on Earth.
Of course, if reaper could be made from few millions, there would be no need to even attack Earth at all(not in ME2, not in ME3). Just make that reaper from colonies, and destroy the rest with orbital bombardment.
And of course, in case of reapers arrival - there is no need to act at all.
And ME3 confirmed that speculation(based on shepard's words). So, ME2's story makes even less sense, that it had before ME3.

2. I remember the Collectors ambushing planets, not destroying whole fleets.

They are attacking some minor colonies, which for some derp reasons, are not protected by SA ships. They couldn't attack major colonies, like Terra Nova, or they will be instantly vaporized.

3. The frigate is heavily upgraded to specifically handle Collector attacks.

Lol. A frigate designed for stealth operations, which uses standart spinal-mounted gun, and standart frigate shielding - still easily destroys that pathetic transport.
And of course, a single frigate pack would be an overkill. And Systems Alliance fleets are far more than just a single frigate pack.
And that allpowerful collectors ship, also, was almost destroyed by simple surface defences.

4. Harbinger is an idiot...because nitpicks?

Because he thinks he could ever finish said reaper.
Of course, motivation of antagonist - is a nitpick. EVIL does not need a motivation for it's actions. They act in a specific way just because.

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.

Proper mass relay also a "teleporter". Otherwise it could never transport anything.

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.

Somehow even Bioware(when it still existed) was managed to do that in ME1. And there is also witcher series, or even a games like Star Control 2.

[Maxster_]

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.

link

Terra Nova[/b] was one of the class-1 colonization prospects discovered by the first wave of Alliance surveys in 2150. It was the second human extrasolar colony, and the first beyond the Charon Relay. It currently has the highest population of any Alliance colony.
Though banded by a harsh equatorial desert, areas closer to the
poles are temperate. The pace of development was modest until extensive
deposits of platinum were discovered in the 2170s. This rare metal,
required in the clean-burning hydrogen cells that power private vehicles,
attracted a 'platinum rush' of immigrants and investment from
throughout Alliance space. In the past twelve years, Terra Nova has seen
a 30% rise in population, and growth does not appear to be slowing.

Population
4.4 million (2183)
4,150,000 (2186)
(Pop. estimates are pre-invasion)

[AshenShug4r]

The series strong points make up for its flaws(imo)

[The Heretic of Time]

Maybe the series has been overrated this whole time...

[JesseLee202]

Maxter, again, you are assuming that EDI's numbers are perfectly set in stone. Not to mention that you are assuming that the Collectors were the only avenue for the Reapers.

Who's to say they were not just the first stage, and were awaiting the Reaper fleets arrival? Harbinger said "We will find another way..." because the Reaper baby was destroyed.

Is it really that hard to use your imagination for once in your life?

[Maxster_]

JesseLee202 wrote...

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.

Oh i'm sure, "They acted that way just because" is a better explanation.
And of course, ME3 answered that question. And that answer rendered ME2 even less sensical, that it was before ME3.
And to present ME2 as making sense, you need to discard two characters guesses, on a premise that ME2 is making sense, just because it exists.

[BulletFMV2413]

i honestly think your right (no sarcasm)

[Maxster_]

JesseLee202 wrote...

Maxter, again, you are assuming that EDI's numbers are perfectly set in stone.

Of course.
Because there is no other explanation. Only "they acted that way just because".

Not to mention that you are assuming that the Collectors were the only avenue for the Reapers.

Which makes no sense, because with reapers arrival there is no need to act not for Harbringer, but also for Sovereign.
And there was no need for thousands of years of Sovereign's machinations at all.

Who's to say they were not just the first stage, and were awaiting the Reaper fleets arrival? Harbinger said "We will find another way..." because the Reaper baby was destroyed.

Sure.
Collector prepared reapers arrival via FTL, by abducting humans for no reason.
Does this make any sense? It does not

Is it really that hard to use your imagination for once in your life?

Sure, and why exactly i should use my imagination to cover EAWare plotholes and nonsense?

[Seboist]

No question ME is greatly overrated.

In terms of story the only entry worth anything is ME1 and even then it's just your standard prophecy and chase plot against big bad evil. The sequels on the other hand are some of the worst schlock imaginable where continuity goes straight out the window, the protagonist is brought back from the dead with nobody giving a damn, humans being turned into "genetically diverse" goo to form a three eyed space terminator, crucible deus ex machina and the reaper motivation that's so utterly moronic that it would make Ed Wood or Tommy Wiseau facepalm.

On the gameplay front the first two entries are mediocre TPS with half baked RPG elements(less of the latter in 2) and while 3 succeeds in creating a relatively competent TPS/spellcasting hybrid mechanic it's brought down by all the ****** poor RPG elements like the no content fetch quests.

The much hyped import system turned out to be a complete dud offering nothing but fluff such as shoehorned cameos and interchangeable dialogue(less so if you played Renegade) and even choices within context of a game itself turned out to be no better. Games like GTAIV and Saints Row 3 have more branching narrative than this entire franchise put together.

Modifié par Seboist, 01 mars 2013 - 01:03 .

[Reap_ii]

i disagree with the OP. i think ME are great games. just the ending of ME3 irks me. all other issues i have with the 3 games are very small and nitpicky.

[o Ventus]

Seboist wrote...

 Games like GTAIV and Saints Row 3 have more branching narrative than this entire franchise put together.

I don't normally say this much, but... U mad bro? 

Really, do you do anything besides browse the Mass Effect boards and then talk s**t about Mass Effect? Disliking a specific game I can understand, but if you don't give a f**k about the series... Then why are you here?

@Quoted text, lolno.

[JesseLee202]

Maxster, you realize that ME2 ended with the Dark energy plot-line? And the goal of the Human Reaper was to end the threat.

I'm done listening to you rant about how much you dislike these games, still, I find it quite funny you are on these forums so much considering...

Have fun being negative.

[ElectronicPostingInterface]

@Max:

1. I don't see why he needs to finish it to validate what he does in Mass Effect 2. He's starting the process and constructing the Reaper. To make assumptions about how it could be stupid when the details don't exist confuses me. Shepard wanted to stop colonies from dying, TIM seizing Collector tech.

2. "Minor" colonies still have populations to harvest. As for lacking protection...because there is not an on-screen explanation as to why how things are executed doesn't mean it must inherently be stupid. They could have put in a bit in the Codex about it being expensive to watch over colonies or the Alliance being spread out because of being in the Council now and protecting others, or a bit about stealth Collector tech. I don't think the events are so implausible when I play the game I'm like, oh nope. Definitely ruined.

3. I don't think it's that ludicrous that the Normandy blew up the Collector ship. It happens in a cutscene and utilizes the music and feel of the game to get away with it in the "Rule of Cool." It didn't seem so outlandish looking on the surface that it could never happen, like Shep killing the Reapers with blinking. There are levels of stress events can take.

This is clearly a game of science fantasy and not science fiction - biotics are not realistic enough for this to be some kind of hardcore sci-fi game.

4. You're assuming he intends to finish the Reaper. There could be all sorts of reasons to want to construct an embryo, like brain development before adding on more. To abscribe stupidity to his motivations as an assumption is unfounded.

Re: ME 1

I cannot *find* this exact spot in the Codex that explains the problem, but there's an issue with the Mako either going into the beam without some kind of mass adjustment or technology to interface with the Conduit or an issue about it having the potential for drift and it splatting into the Citadel instead of getting inside it. I've seen people bring up this issue with how the beams function in 1 and 3. Can't remember the details - basically, the approximation is that they play fast and loose with how the relays work with the Conduit.

I could level similar complaints about ME1 like you are about Harbinger - why doesn't Saren just ambush the control panel? But there are possible hypothetical answers to that. it's not like a guy having the obvious means to do something right in front of him and then not taking it. I think the suspension of disbelief is reasonable in both ME1 and ME2.

As for the Witcher or Star Control 2...good for Witcher or Star Control 2? Sorry every game is not the Witcher or Star Control 2? I've never even played them, but something tells me they are not paragons of story telling perfection. My point is that minor details don't obliterate the entirety of a story.

---

"Have fun being negative."

I don't mind disagreements or discussion, but coming here is like: "Everything is bad, this game is terrible, why would anyone like Mass Effect."

tl;dr

Assuming their cannot be an explanation to minor inconsistencies or questions is not necessary.

Modifié par PKchu, 01 mars 2013 - 01:12 .

[TODD9999]

Mr.House wrote...
Then why did many of us feel the same before ME3 even was in production? Bioware showed in ME2 with how they treated the ME squad and going from ME to ME2, that they did not care that much about continuation thus how is ME3 such a surprise? People tried to tell people not to hype themselves and that the chance of ME2 squadmates being important in ME3 was going to be slim. No one wanted to listen.

I can't tell you why you felt the same before ME3, because I think we have very different feelings on ME2.  I can give you my take, and you can see where we differ, perhaps?

My take (leaving aside any discussion over whether the Lazarus project should have happened, etc. - only discussing the story as it was done) was that the whole Collector issue was a sort of 'fifth column' threat.  Yes, the Reapers were still out there, yes they were still dangerous, and compared to them, the Collectors were a total sideshow - but the fact remained that the Collectors were wiping out colonies and building a Reaper.  If they hadn't been stopped, there would have been a new-made Reaper within the galaxy, coupled with the loss of many human systems, a more isolated humanity (in response to the failure of the Council to help).  The Collectors and their new Reaper might have been able to accomplish the disruption that was Sovereign's aim, in addition to possibly finding a way to activate the Citadel relay and pull in the others from dark space.

To summarize, the Collectors were a sideshow compared to the main Reaper force, but they were still a viable threat that had to be dealt with, and could have had continuing influence in the third game instead of vanishing.  I feel their irrelevance to the main Reaper plot is due to a lack of follow through in ME3, not a weakness on ME2's part.

As for the general continuity, I thought it was fine.  The ME1 squadmates showed up in some capacity, and you got to meet some new folks.  Fist was in Afterlife if you spared him, Gianna Parasini was on Ilium, the Rachni queen's agent was also on Ilium, Conrad was on Ilium - there was some sense of continuity, some interaction with the folks you'd worked with, saved, or spared in the past.  Not all of the interactions were as deep as I would have liked, but there were a lot of them present.  LIke the Rachni queen's agent - I was willing to accept such a minor presence, in the expectation that it would be further built up in the third.  I was fine with Wrex becoming a clan leader and Ashley going back to the Alliance - who wants to see awesome characters chained to your ankle, stuck as the perpetual Number One to your Captain Picard, when they could just as easily be awesome leaders on their own?

in short, I was generally pleased with the consequences of my actions in ME1 that I saw in ME2, with the caveat that I expected most of those consequences to continue to echo, or that what I saw in ME2 was just a "we didn't forget your decision, but it will matter more in the next game". 

If you were not satisfied with the way decisions or squadmates were carried over from ME1 to ME2, that's fair enough.  However, when you say "we warned you and no one listened!", then all I can do is shrug.  I didn't participate in those discussions, and even if I had, I would have pointed to the ME1 to ME2 transition and made the points that I just made.  To me, ME2 was done fine, so long as it was followed through, which it wasn't.

[JesseLee202]

PKchu wrote...

"Have fun being negative."

I don't mind disagreements or discussion, but coming here is like: "Everything is bad, this game is terrible, why would anyone like Mass Effect."

I just find it funny that people who dislike this game and bash it, are on the forums of said game, for how many hours. Why don't they go find something they like and say something good about it?

[phagus]

All games are flawed. The flaws in ME1 and ME2 I let slide as the overall experience is fantastic compared to other games I've played. The satisfaction in completing each ending in the first two for me at least made up for any shortcomings. ME3 on the other hand had a poor original WTF ending and a Meh EC ending IMO. This made me much more critical of everything in ME3 and retrospectively tarnished my whole veiw of the trilogy. The overall story, especially the Crucible and starchild now seem more contrived and even more unbelievably stupid. It really didn't have to be this way. ME2 just about wrote ME3's ending. A suicide mission style ending where Shepard (the player) chose which acquired assets to deploy and where, in a final fight to the death with Harbinger deciding the fate of the galaxy would have been epic (this boss fight was needed and isn't too videogamey in this video game).

ME3 ending like this would have solidified my veiw that the ME trilogy are the best games I have ever played. I would have completely swallowed starchilds insane logic and the crucibles improbability and forgotten about the damn face import bug and day one dlc. Instead all I now see is p#ss poor writing and a rushed game (I am looking at you Priority; Earth). I am easily pleased if all the time I spend in a game feels worth it in the end. The destination is just as important as the journey especially in a trilogy where choices were supposed to matter.

Modifié par phagus, 01 mars 2013 - 01:27 .

[IntelligentME3Fanboy]

CoD is overrated too

[Dean_the_Young]

PKchu wrote...

I agree it wasn't a wise decision, but I thought they were going to honor it. Or at least honor it a little better than they did, but they work for EA and EA rushes games and forces microtransactions, so that was naive.

Even before EA, has Bioware ever warranted that sort of faith in Major Consequences?

KOTOR, Jade Empire, even DAO: in all of these Big Decisions mattered little, and I can't think of a single character arc in which a character continued to be major after a potential-death moment. While I will admit that I've never played through Baldur's Gate, I've also never heard any conherent praise on such grounds either.


I'm just saying, you might be pushing a little too hard to put all the sins of video game making on EA. What makes you think Bioware would have rejected microtransactions, or not tried to accelerate it's video game creation cycle even without EA?

[CaIIisto]

IntelligentME3Fanboy wrote...

CoD is overrated too

Well, except CoD4......

Is the ME franchise overrated? No, not IMO. The final game left a sour taste, but I enjoyed the first two games immensely at the time. Probably the only games that I've put more time into than ME1 and ME2 are GTAIV and CoD4.

[Jadebaby]

Dragon Age origins was the bomb.

[ElectronicPostingInterface]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Even before EA, has Bioware ever warranted that sort of faith in Major Consequences?

I think we've discussed this before, but I haven't actually played to completion any other Bioware games and my view of them was, "Oh, these are quality games and I really enjoyed them - they know what they're doing." As I said, it was naive. 

I do know in regards to the ending they wanted a delay to change things around and make the prothean the catalyst and all that, so I think if they had more time in general like they wanted, things would have been put together somewhat better.

And sure, Bioware loves money too. And nor are they perfect - I mostly bring up EA in relation to budget and deadlines for games, everything needing to come out fast and sell _many_ millions to be continued, forcing everything to be a large windfall success or not exist. (Primary example being the issues with Dead Space 3.) That's not a good context for dealing a game having to rely heavily on import flags.

Modifié par PKchu, 01 mars 2013 - 01:29 .

[Mcfly616]

I didn't "retroactively" blame anything on ME2. I knew as I was playing it that ME3 would have problems. The entire game is based on recruiting a team of badasses to go take out a base.


It's one of the things that hindered Episode 3 (besides George Lucas and Hayden Christensen). They waited too long to explain many things. And left the burden of starting/tying up everything to the final installment.


I was turned off by ME2 the minute I picked it up. So many things I came to love about the first game, were completely absent in the sequel. EA's handprints were evident from the jump. If anything, ME3 is an improvement. But this is all besides the point.