430 réponses à ce sujet

[Ozymandias23]

SwobyJ wrote...

Kabraxal wrote...

For the new characters, the writing is decent enough (though some of Jack's early stuff is groan inducing).

The whole Liara deal was just so jarring though that it really makes me question the entirety of the writing for this game. My perception is a bit tainted because of that moment now, so any cheesy lines or overly dramatic rants are a bit more noticeable now.

I thought it was very well done considering the context of her situation - it also brings a maturity to the narrative that only makes the fans of Liara upset as it doesn't fulfill their wishes for how they think she should be, instead of how the plot demands her to be (for ME3, cuz you know she is pretty much going to be a presence in ME3). People, don't worry.

One thing I didn't like wasn't the script for her, but the voice acting. Too deep sounding.

SwobyJ as much as I would love to believe she is going to be a 'presence' in ME3 the reality of what we've seen in ME2 suggests otherwise. The contrived story that ensures she can't join your squad, the personality transplant, her attitude ... none of this suggests that Bioware intend to reintroduce her as a squad mate in ME3. Quite the opposite in fact. My guess would be another unsatisfying, minor cameo role.

[Kabraxal]

I liked the combat in ME1, but the combat in this game is both tedious and typical of FPS games. I hate the reloading, the nuetering of powers (recharge and actual use), and the cover system is worse than ME1's.



I can't believe Bioware actually thought this was an improvement.

[FDrage]

For me there are two issues ... no I haven't played ME2 yet as I haven't received it yet ... so I try to keep it out a bit

First Issue is that when you enjoyed a game a lot then inevitable a sequel has to be better to achieve the same "awe". For example (ok it is not an RPG) Civilization and Pirates. Personally I count both as 2 of the games I enjoyed the most. the hours I spend on playing them. There aren't that many games that achieved a "What the sun is rising ... already!". In there days these two did just that sometimes. While their sequels are undoubtedly better games they never really pulled me in as these two originals were. Maybe that was because they were originals. As exciting as I am for sequels of games that I really enjoyed as cautious am I in approaching these sequels because they kind of have not just have to live up to the "mystical" first chapter but surpass it.
So I can understand if people could potential feel disappointed by a sequel that is in principle better than its predecessor.

Second issue about playing a game for to short a time to be able to judge it. there is another side to that coin. Any game, in my personal opinion, needs to pull you in. If a game doesn't achieve that than it isn't really the best of games. ME1 did just for me that from the start of creating your character, from the opening scenes, the music, Eden Prime ... it was just right. I got plenty of games that I played for a while and then put down again, not necessary as a conscious decision, but as a lack of interest as the game failed to catch my initial interest. Maybe the games were really great and I missed the best bits of it. Maybe I should have stayed with them for longer to see that or maybe they were just not as aspiring.
However, for me at least, they had one important flaw .... they didn't pull me in. At one point I need to make the decision, conscious or subconscious, to go on in the hope that the next hour pulls me in ... or the one after that or the one after that or try another game. So yes you can make a judgement not necessary a complete judgement but frirst impressions due count. On the other hand you get games where you work through the initial disappointment and see the game for what it is .. a great game.

Modifié par FDrage, 27 janvier 2010 - 10:33 .

[Ozymandias23]

Kabraxal wrote...

I liked the combat in ME1, but the combat in this game is both tedious and typical of FPS games. I hate the reloading, the nuetering of powers (recharge and actual use), and the cover system is worse than ME1's.

I can't believe Bioware actually thought this was an improvement.

Yes but you're not looking at it the way Bioware is. Their goal was to attract the FPS shooter market. ME2 is designed for them and that includes the combat system.

[FDrage]

Ozymandias23 wrote...

Yes but you're not looking at it the way Bioware is. Their goal was to attract the FPS shooter market. ME2 is designed for them and that includes the combat system.

I tyhink you are quite right there and that can causes a problem with people that don't come from, at least partially, a FPS angle.

SwobyJ wrote...

we'll see. I'm only saying that the fact
that she is written to be an agent for the Shadow Broker is likely not
a small thing come ME3.

If she is in ME2 in a role as and agent of the shadow broker then, me haven't played the game yet, could be also considered a spoiler ... you know

Modifié par FDrage, 27 janvier 2010 - 10:48 .

[SolemnProphet]

Kabraxal wrote...

I liked the combat in ME1, but the combat in this game is both tedious and typical of FPS games. I hate the reloading, the nuetering of powers (recharge and actual use), and the cover system is worse than ME1's.

I can't believe Bioware actually thought this was an improvement.

There is something seriously wrong with your brain. Combat has been redesigned to better fit the universe in which it takes place. The fact is, people can't take **** tons of bullets before they die, and while I agree the biotics seem a bit weaker, you can use them more frequently and with better variety and situational use. The fact is, you're no longer a god like you were at the end of ME1. And that's a GOOD thing. This is a universe that we can finally believe in, at least mostly. Just because you like old ass RPGs with slower battle systems and serious stat management doesn't mean it's right for this game. You want a game like that, go pick up Dragon Age. It's got all that stat grinding goodness. But don't crap on this fantastic game just cause you're full of ****.

[GallagherArt]

Why couldn't they of just fixed the fighting system and the ability to sprint while not in battle?...Really the only issues I had with the first.

[Snowie79]

I would say that Mass Effect 2 is a good shooter game, but my love stands with the original game and it's characters ... ME2 is like watching "Fantastic Four" with Mr.Fantastic only ... yeah not a best example but you get the memo.

[SolemnProphet]

Snowie79 wrote...

I would say that Mass Effect 2 is a good shooter game, but my love stands with the original game and it's characters ... ME2 is like watching "Fantastic Four" with Mr.Fantastic only ... yeah not a best example but you get the memo.

First of all, if anything, the characters in ME2 are JUST as complex, if not more so, than the first game. And there's more! How can you not feel anything for any of them? Maybe because rich stories with complex characters and genuine moments of morality don't appeal to you......Stupid.

[Kabraxal]

See, I found it to demean the existing universe since there was little actual continuity in some of the characters and the aura (feel) of the game. I know people hate this comment but... it feels like Gears of War. And that is not a good thing.

[Ozymandias23]

SolemnProphet wrote...

Snowie79 wrote...

I would say that Mass Effect 2 is a good shooter game, but my love stands with the original game and it's characters ... ME2 is like watching "Fantastic Four" with Mr.Fantastic only ... yeah not a best example but you get the memo.

First of all, if anything, the characters in ME2 are JUST as complex, if not more so, than the first game. And there's more! How can you not feel anything for any of them? Maybe because rich stories with complex characters and genuine moments of morality don't appeal to you......Stupid.

No need to be so rude. Snowie feels differently than you do, views things differently, perhaps was looking for different things from ME2, that doesn't make him/her stupid.

ME1 had a certain feel to it that ME2 simply doesn't share.

[Kabraxal]

SolemnProphet wrote...

Snowie79 wrote...

I would say that Mass Effect 2 is a good shooter game, but my love stands with the original game and it's characters ... ME2 is like watching "Fantastic Four" with Mr.Fantastic only ... yeah not a best example but you get the memo.

First of all, if anything, the characters in ME2 are JUST as complex, if not more so, than the first game. And there's more! How can you not feel anything for any of them? Maybe because rich stories with complex characters and genuine moments of morality don't appeal to you......Stupid.

And there are many that could argue these characters as nothing more than contrived attempts at "edgy" and "dark"... or simply say cliche.  It isn't a fact that this cast is as good as ME1's, because so far... it isn't. 

[Ozymandias23]

Unfortunately from what I've seen so far, I'm inclined to agree with you Kabraxal.

Edit:
http://www.bravenewg...-mass-effect-2/

This guy actually gave the game a high score in his review.

Modifié par Ozymandias23, 27 janvier 2010 - 11:02 .

[TuringPoint]

I see where the OP is coming from.  However, the only complaint I totally agree with is about the achievements.  They are far too easy to achieve, they aren't interesting, and they aren't as rewarding.

But I also agree with this:

Popstick wrote...

How can you even stand to play through ME 1 a dozen times? The characters had half a page of dialogue, the Mako was both frustrating and boring, progression of your character was slow and by end-game, pretty much every one had identical class builds, sorting through the inventory was a nightmare, especially with the 150 item limit, reducing all the useless loot to omni-gel was a chore, the combat was horrible and about as fun to play as seeing how many needles you can stick in your arm before screaming. Holding down left-mouse button in the middle of a battlefield is better than taking cover, firing in short bursts to conserve ammo and making sure you're not being flanked is better how exactly? Because that's pretty much all you had to in ME 1. Tape down left mouse.

This game really polarizes the ME1 fans, doesn't it?  I always thought the skills and RPG aspects of ME1 were weak, and the shooting was weaker.  It was a great game, very strong story.  

But the sequel has a stronger, more thoroughly emotional story.  The dialogue sequences are ten times as cinematic, well-written, understandable and interesting.  There's a greater variety of gameplay and story in the game than in the first.  The shooter aspect is stronger - yes, it demands that you think about placing your shots.  I find myself constantly surveying the battlefield and evaulating what skill I need to use next, where I need to take cover, if I can flank the enemy.  In the first game, the most tactical evaluation I remember was easily summed up in discussion on these forums - be a vanguard, take singularity as a bonus talent, spam carnage and singularity.  Voila, instant success, any difficulty level.

I just think some people aren't even giving it a chance.  I could be crazy in my perceptions, but I'm fine with that - because ME 2 is a much more engaging experience for me, regardless.

[Seraphael]

Seems to me we mainly have two opposing opinions here; the ones who consider the RPG-genre as something static and a singleplayer derivative of generic MMORPGs on one side, and those who are more concerned with gameplay and actual roleplaying rather than shoehorning a game to fit a rigid definition of what an RPG is supposed to be on the other.

Experience tells us dinosaurs unable to adapt will inevitably be left behind in the dustbin of (gaming) history. But hey, Diablo 3 is not that far from being released and until then there are a gazillion clones and MMORPGs out there whose aim it is to dazzle you with overly extensive loot and skillsets to distract you from the general lack of story and meaningful roleplaying.  I for one am glad Bioware value gameplay over conservative standards and have evolved the series, and with it, the RPG-genre further.

[TuringPoint]

The characters might not be as unique. They do seem more fully developed, though - and they have motivations of their own which go beyond a loyalty stat. More of the story is devoted to developing these characters, and that story is told more cinematically - rather than statically, in a conversation about the spaceship you're all travelling on.

[Kabraxal]

Yes, because we clearly aren't complaining about aspects of the story either...

[TuringPoint]

Seraphael wrote...

Seems to me we mainly have two opposing opinions here; the ones who consider the RPG-genre as something static and a singleplayer derivative of generic MMORPGs on one side, and those who are more concerned with gameplay and actual roleplaying rather than shoehorning a game to fit a rigid definition of what an RPG is supposed to be on the other.

Experience tells us dinosaurs unable to adapt will inevitably be left behind in the dustbin of (gaming) history. But hey, Diablo 3 is not that far from being released and until then there are a gazillion clones and MMORPGs out there whose aim it is to dazzle you with overly extensive loot and skillsets to distract you from the general lack of story and meaningful roleplaying.  I for one am glad Bioware value gameplay over conservative standards and have evolved the series, and with it, the RPG-genre further.

Haha!  I hate to say it, because this is rather inflammatory post, but I agree completely.

Err, minus the social darwinist aspect, and arbitrarily categorizing peoples' characters based on their aesthetic interest.

Modifié par Alocormin, 27 janvier 2010 - 11:09 .

[Falklol]

@ OP

Although I love the game, I would really like see some kind of inventory system, with loot other than just ammunition. I would also like to see a larger skilltree, like you said. I'm 99,9% sure we wont get any of these, but I'm hoping they will release mod tools, so that the community can take care of these things, for us who really miss them from other RPG's.

[SolemnProphet]

Seraphael wrote...

Seems to me we mainly have two opposing opinions here; the ones who consider the RPG-genre as something static and a singleplayer derivative of generic MMORPGs on one side, and those who are more concerned with gameplay and actual roleplaying rather than shoehorning a game to fit a rigid definition of what an RPG is supposed to be on the other.

Experience tells us dinosaurs unable to adapt will inevitably be left behind in the dustbin of (gaming) history. But hey, Diablo 3 is not that far from being released and until then there are a gazillion clones and MMORPGs out there whose aim it is to dazzle you with overly extensive loot and skillsets to distract you from the general lack of story and meaningful roleplaying.  I for one am glad Bioware value gameplay over conservative standards and have evolved the series, and with it, the RPG-genre further.

THIS. Mass Effect was never an RPG to begin with. Not one for the "hardcore" fanbase, anyway. ME2 just becomes truer to it's universe. You want an RPG? Go buy Dragon Age. You want a gripping sci-fi story that makes sense? ME2 is it.