847 réponses à ce sujet

[JamieCOTC]

ME1 side quests did get repetitive and entering the same two habitats was a little lame. However, on a few of them there was an actual story going on w/ a few choices. The renegade sidequest was kind of neat. If you stuck it out long enough you could end the situation peacefully. "I Remember Me" is still one of my favorite quests of the series.   (Colonist origin story). ME2 shook things up with adding new locations to the sidequests and someone them were fun, but Shepard never spoke a word. ME3 sidequests were basically MP in SP. Then there were the ME3 fetch quests. The Aria ones were sort of fun, right?  The problem, as I saw, was these quests were all about leveling up to meet some arbitrary number that would give the player a slightly different cutscene at the end of the game. All sidequests are about leveling up, but they don't have to be filler. DA:I had a similar mechanic w/ the Inquisition Power. It didn't change the ending, but it forced you to do a lot of sidequests that were kind of meaningless. I can't help but think there will be some sort of resource meter in ME:A that will need to be filled. That in of itself is not a bad idea, but when you are just given filler to fill it, then it does become a bad game mechanic. 

[In Exile]

TW3 is honestly just a mega classic grade game that kind of came out of wherever, I'd think just about anyone would be hard pressed to compete with it in some ways it was like their "moment" so to speak.

 

People say that, and certainly it had high production values and a way better combat system (and a lot of better game mechanics), but ultimately I think TW2 was superior. A richer world, and on a personal level some incredibly gripping quests, but I think ultimately not as brilliant as TW2. 

[SNascimento]

Objectively ME2's story is bonkers

I disagree with this opinion.

[themikefest]

ME2 is my favorite of the three

[Dean_the_Young]

The Collectors were actually a really neat enemy and had in my opinion the greatest plot twist in the trilogy, but yeah the problem was Mass Effect 2 barely used them since it had practically no main plot. They show up a total of six times in ME2.

 

Personally, I always felt the opposite- that the Collectors were pretty boring and unoriginal. Ever since someone pointed out to me that they basically fit the same function as the Geth- a reclusive, virtually never seen super-advanced mysterious race that lives behind a normally impassable relay in Terminus space and who serves as the proxies for the Reapers- I've never been able to take them. What, besides introducing the Reaper tendency for bio-mechanical fusion, did they really introduce that couldn't have been handled by the Geth?

 

I mean, what really would have changed in ME2 had the abductions been by Geth, rather than Collectors?
 

[AlanC9]

We'd have been fighting enemies with shields instead of barriers?

[Malanek]

They showed what happened to the Protheans.

[Kiera]

When a former founder says a some day eventually soon to be released game, that they are 100% confident will be great, then you know it sux.

So yes, it will be a bunch of dead storyless tripe.

[Giantdeathrobot]

People say that, and certainly it had high production values and a way better combat system (and a lot of better game mechanics), but ultimately I think TW2 was superior. A richer world, and on a personal level some incredibly gripping quests, but I think ultimately not as brilliant as TW2. 

 

I think TW2 had the better plot (and by a significant margin; TW3's plot is fairly weak outside of standout moments like the Baron and Kaer Morhen IMO) and that it was more... I don't know, ambitious? I mean, yes, TW3 is this giant open world full of interesting quests. But TW2 attempts a branching narrative on a scale very rarely seen in games. The Roche or Iorveth path choice changes a full third of the game at least; given the length of Chapter 2, it's probably closer to half. So while I overall prefer TW3, I think TW2 is the game where CDPR demonstrated their talents the most.

 

I still think the combat system from both games is pretty mediocre. Shadow of Mordor had a similar but IMO much more fluid and varied system.

[JasonPogo]

I know I will be burned at the stake of fanboy/girls everywhere but I could never get invested in any of the Wicher games since I don't like Geralt.  I love the lore and the world and all that.  Just can't connect with Geralt.

[slimgrin]

I know I will be burned at the stake of fanboy/girls everywhere but I could never get invested in any of the Wicher games since I don't like Geralt.  I love the lore and the world and all that.  Just can't connect with Geralt.

 

For me he is honestly one of the most charismatic and engaging PCs in games. Especially in TW3. Bioware would do well to understand what makes him compelling, because trust me, Shepard is a wooden doll in comparison. Obviously part of that is the semi-blank slate depiction Bioware uses, but they can improve here. I actually hope Ryder is a more defined PC.

[Addictress]

Man....I should try TW2

[The Hierophant]

For me he is honestly one of the most charismatic and engaging PCs in games. Especially in TW3. Bioware would do well to understand what makes him compelling, because trust me, Shepard is a wooden doll in comparison. Obviously part of that is the semi-blank slate depiction Bioware uses, but they can improve here. I actually hope Ryder is a more defined PC.

I hope the facial animations are better this time around too. DAI's pc was like looking at a ventriloquist doll.

[Dean_the_Young]

They showed what happened to the Protheans.

 

Which is important... why, exactly?  What does it change? What does it matter going forward?

 

The Collectors aren't a species in terms of being, well, an identity group. They're puppets, and basically high-functioning husks. High-functioning husks were new, but didn't require the Collectors to demonstrate.

 

What the Collectors showed was the Reaper's preservationist tendencies... but those were already demonstrated by the reveal of the Reapers as species-boxes. That would apply even if the Geth were the builders of the human Reaper.

 

Considering that the only reasons the Protheans weren't made into a Reaper was an aribitrary hand-wave, the Protheans could have been just as preserved if Bioware got rid of the arbitrary limitation and just preserving them like the rest.

[Draining Dragon]

I hope the facial animations are better this time around too. DAI's pc was like looking at a ventriloquist doll.

I agree. They need to make their dialogue animations more like this:

[Addictress]

Which is important... why, exactly? What does it change? What does it matter going forward?

The Collectors aren't a species in terms of being, well, an identity group. They're puppets, and basically high-functioning husks. High-functioning husks were new, but didn't require the Collectors to demonstrate.

What the Collectors showed was the Reaper's preservationist tendencies... but those were already demonstrated by the reveal of the Reapers as species-boxes. That would apply even if the Geth were the builders of the human Reaper.

Considering that the only reasons the Protheans weren't made into a Reaper was an aribitrary hand-wave, the Protheans could have been just as preserved if Bioware got rid of the arbitrary limitation and just preserving them like the rest.

Sometimes an idea in media should be expressed in more one way in order to be interesting.

No movie or book or game would be interesting if themes were expressed in one rigid way.

I think that having more than one manifestation of something makes the world stronger.

[Natureguy85]

@natureguy: Do we really know how the reapers got into the MW? All I can recall is that they hit Batarian space first. And their defense was overrun by Trojan horses and fifth columns. Once there the reapers can jump anywhere. I cannot say that I agree with that Shamus guy that Shepard should be the one who does everything and fixes everything though. I really don't see how being subordinate to Hackett takes away all agency from Shepard. Without Shepards activities the Alliance ends up with 200-300 EMS which is certain failure.

 

Yeah, they fly in. There is no other way. I assume they use FTL, though they were visible for the end of ME2.

 

Agency is not activity. Yes, Shepard is the guy who shoots the dudes, but he’s not a leader or a “bloody icon” that people will follow. He’s a grunt following orders. Shepard doesn’t need to do or fix everything. Shamus’ point is that Shepard does nothing other than point and shoot. He doesn’t make any decisions or discoveries. Contrast this with the pretend freedom of the first game. Here you’re ordered where to go. In the first game, you are given the main missions as suggestions but are told you can go do whatever you want. In ME3, Liara and Hackett already know about the Crucible. Nobody you're connected to knows about the Rachni when you got to Noveria. Nobody knows about the Throrian when you go to Feros. Shepard discovers these things and makes a decision on how to deal with them.

 

 

 

The way that the Reapers are built up, to then realize Bioware didn't actually have a plan on how to deal with them or their motivations, I think ME3 should have been about uniting the galaxy against the oncoming Reapers, rather than having the game start with the Reapers in the MW. The game would remain largely unchanged, as Cerberus could still be working on Control and creating husks, and our goal is to stop them and end the conflicts amongst the species so that we have a united front when the Reapers do arrive.

 

The ending would be where the first Reapers begin arriving on the ends of the MW, cut to Shepard's motivational speech and then roll credits. It would probably still get a lot of fan complaints since the questions on the Reapers aren't answered and we don't see the outcome of the conflict, but IMO I would rather maintain the mystery and hope than have the lackluster explanation and nonsensical outcomes that we currently have.

 

Andromeda would still be unchanged, since there could be a throwaway line about a contingency plan of sending away a portion of each species to colonize new worlds.

 

That all sounds great but is there a reason that should not have been Mass Effect 2?

 

 

 

How do you figure? The plot was as brilliant as it gets.

 

You may have heard my head banging on my desk as I read that. The main plot was awful.

 

Shepard’s death and the Normandy’s destruction were nice and dramatic. I was totally wrapped up in the scene. However, both are made cheap by their immediate return. Had Shepard simply been injured and recovering for that time, I’d just question if the time skip was necessary. Having Shepard die and come back to life is so ridiculous and then the game does nothing with it. Some characters don’t even seem to realize that’s what happened.

 

Shepard is forced to work for Cerberus and puts up a mild argument at best. He makes no attempt to contact anyone else or get help elsewhere first. Like I described above with ME3, it’s different from ME2 in that Shepard is going everywhere because he was told, not because he has decided to. He doesn’t even know why he’s getting these people, where in ME1 he was at least investigating leads on Geth and Saren.

 

Most of the game is dedicated to getting characters who, while great, are of questionable value because you don’t actually have an objective. Some are particularly misplaced, such as Thane and Kasumi.

 

Shepard stumbles into a fairly obvious trap on the Collector ship and escapes because the Collectors are even dumber. Later, they charge through the relay without really knowing what’s on the other side and therefore without knowing if they are prepared. Luckily there just happens to be a base vulnerable to an assault by a small team with no explosives.

 

The Human Reaper was so stupid. The Collectors being made from Protheans had little to no value. The series plot was not advanced in the least bit. The Reapers are still coming and we still have no way of opposing them.

 

 

 

It's totally impossible. A gut punch is basically just cutscene magic ala Kai Leng.

Good villains work by winning off screen. Games will create tension by forcing the player to be in multiple places at the same time, giving the antagonist ground.

 

 

You have a point, particularly with games, but I don’t think this is entirely true. While there is something to be said for it, I don’t think a villain should be entirely off screen or they risk being too nebulous and distant rather than a real threat. You are more right in games than other types of media though. You want to find their handiwork after it’s done and don’t want to steal agency from the player. But I think there is room for both.

 

The “gutpunch” doesn’t have to be magic. The protagonist can lose by being legitimately beaten. The first example that popped into my head was Jedi Outcast where you get your ass kicked by the villain because he’s a fallen Jedi and you have no force ability whatsoever. The Mass Effect example that I thought of is Harbinger killing your squadmates. It could be structured better and placed in a different part of the story, but you can’t say it’s magic that a Reaper kills someone because they are a known and legitimate threat.

 

 

 

Not imo. ME1 had the best mechanics, but ME2 by far had the best opening, best pacing and the absolute best climax. What happened in ME2's climax was exactly what should have happened in 3's climax. I can't think of another game except maybe TLOU that delivered completely with the ending, and ME2 didn't drop the ball not once. It was strong from beginning, mid to end. Seeing all your team come together like that is exactly how ME3 should have ended with all the people you allied and helped out throughout all the games fighting the reapers. But that didn't happen.

 

Inquistion was standalone too, and it's story sucked. So that point is pretty moot. I have my doubts on Andromeda even providing half the narrative or interesting characters the trilogy did. Inquisition sure didn't. Trevelyan was no Shepard.

 

 

I agree, except ME2's opening was ridiculous.

 

But it's still my favorite of the bunch.

 

 

I liked the opening from a cinematic standpoint. It was really powerful having the sound cut out and only hearing Shep's labored breathing as they struggled with their helmet. Then cue the title.

But from a narrative standpoint, especially since it was a poor excuse to have Shep out of action for two years and restart at level one, it was bad.

 

ME2’s opening was good but it was diminished by what came immediately after. Getting Shepard and the Normandy back immediately ruined that drama and sense of loss. There’s no deep thought from Shepard about the experience or what it means to be back.

 

What are you considering the “climax” of ME2? The Human Reaper reveal and that the Reapers are cyborgs dependent on Organic goop weren’t good. ME2 dropped the plot ball from the start. You don’t even have a clear goal.

 

 

 

Mass Effect 2 left me with such a great feeling, I do not think that structurally, it was obligated to focus on the reapers directly. In the end, the release of Harbinger after we disarm the collector base re-enforced the malevolent and menacing threat of the reapers which had at the very end of Mass effect 1 still been perceived as rather removed and impotent because of Shepard's Citadel/Sovereign victory. And so Mass Effect 2 began with enough leeway to explore a route of internal character development, overall universe and lore enrichment, before kicking it up for direct reaper confrontation in Mass Effect 3. I would argue the reason Inquisition felt so weak was because it introduced a very strong antagonist but we faced him with an under-developed protagonist and team, alongside a lot of new lore, so the drama was not as intense. Whereas in Mass Effect 3, we have all this side story in Mass Effect 2 - which, mind you, was not entirely irrelevant to the reaper threat at hand.

 

Also, there is a difference between a mistake and an intention in authoring plot points. Just because someone goes from point A, to point B, to point C, does not mean point B was a mistake. Shepard and everyone in the Milky Way is, in the course of Mass Effect 2, learning about new developments with as little information as we have. We don't really know much about the reapers. We've only seen sovereign, seen one of his agents. In Inquisition, they blow up Corypheus in our faces on the get-go. There isn't a lot of mystery or removed foreboding. Corypheus shakes our hand at Haven. "Hi, I want to open up the veil, hello, take over the world, want to become a god. This is what I plan on doing. Bye." In Mass Effect 2, we are investigating the collectors. Literally, we have no clue what's going on. And that's why the Illusive Man sends us on all these missions to investigate. So it never truly feels like we are derailed. We don't even know the track we are being derailed from. It's simply going along a journey, as a story ought to be.

 

The first game ended with Shepard declaring that he was going to find a way to stop the Reapers. It’s the most important thing Shepard can do. The impending threat is too great to go do something completely unrelated.

 

The scene showing the Reapers was cool, but the Collector threat was not nearly at the scale of that posed by Saren and Sovereign. The other problem is that all the character development you mention, while certainly great, did not happen on the main plot. Also none of it was for Shepard, despite all that could be done with a character dying and being brought back to life. Because of this, the excellent character development and expansion of the Genophage and Quarian/Geth arcs cannot be used to defend the main plot or its lack of Reaper relevance.

 

You’re right that we don’t know much about the Reapers but what we learn is of little to know value. That the Collectors were Protheans is of some interest, but it ultimately doesn’t matter. We already had every reason to oppose the Reapers because they were going to kill everyone.

 

That lack of intel and a clear goal is a weakness of ME2, not a strength. You have no idea why you’re getting these people TIM is sending you to get.  It just so happens that there is a base capable of being assaulted and destroyed by your small ground team. What luck!

 

 

 

If it all took place in ONE comprehensive game - a game to be judged as a singular story, then I would agree that delving into collectors in the middle is a bit A.D.D. But if it is multiple games, instead of feeling A.D.D., the outcome is that we explored more of the universe, and saw more aspects of the universe and character than just one game would've allowed. ME2 is judged by itself, ME1 is judged by itself, ME3 is judged by itself. Yet, some characters, themes, and foreboding elements string them together. The result is an accumulative and immersive experience.

 

But the three chapters have a cohesive story. Imagine if The Two Towers had Frodo going on some side quest rather than moving toward Mordor. The exploring more of the universe was certainly worthwhile, but it was all side stuff. It wasn’t done one the main plot other than sending you to a particular location. All of the character stuff was side content.

[Natureguy85]

 

But I think Mass Effect 2 used the character development as its ticket into Mass Effect 3. People complain of space jesus and chosen one vibes in Mass Effect 3. I would normally agree with them. I hate chosen-one vibes too. But I feel like Mass Effect 2 legitimized it. It gave Shepard the cred to be as respected and powerful as s/he was in ME3.

 

Also, Harbinger was an agent of the reapers. It was sad. An entire race enslaved from being conquered by the reapers in a prior cycle. So sad! It re-enforces the terror of the reapers - we see their legacy. It gives us a duration of time to let the universe grow on us. And it does so with the impunity of being a standalone game, so it is not obligated to hit up the reapers ASAP.

 

How did ME2 legitimize Shepard’s status? His actions are not nearly as publicly known as those in the first game. Everything happens in the Terminus systems and the final battle is in the galactic core. Shepard starts the next game grounded, not being given a medal.

 

Harbinger was a Reaper, not merely an agent. The process of building a Reaper certainly made the Reapers more horrific in a way, but if the Reapers are already going to kill everyone, is it that big a deal what they do with the corpses afterwards?

More importantly, it isn’t a stand-alone game. It was a sequel and the second chapter in a trilogy. It wasn’t “another adventure with” like the Indiana Jones or James Bond movies. The first game already made me really like the locations, races, and individual characters. I was glad to get more of that in ME2, but the main plot stunk. Finally, since the Reapers are coming, they have time to search for a solution or prepare. Once the Reapers are already here, it’s too late, except we luckily happen to find plans for the Crucible just in time!

 

 

 

Yes, Shepard was treated as a chosen one off the bat with Miranda and the opening Lazarus project intro, but that itself is legitimizes by the Sovereign success.

But you know how it is. Sovereign could've been just a stroke of luck. A one-time thing.

Proving himself again with he collectors nailed his hero status even more. Now he can face down the reapers for suuuure.

And Harbinger's "Assuming Direct Control" persona? Badass. Totally badass. Don't know why it bothers people.

 

Most people really don’t know about Shepard’s activities with the Collectors. Everything happens in the Terminus systems, applies only to Humans, and is finalized in the galactic core. Nobody knows anything about what happens except when Shepard turns in a report at the end.

 

Harbinger assuming direct control was cool at first, but as someone once pointed out to me, by the end of the game you’ve killed him a hundred times, ruining that intimidation or fear factor. Harbinger can’t hold a candle to Sovereign. His goofy combat taunts got old. “Assuming Control” will never be as good as being referred to as “rudimentary creatures of blood and flesh.”

 

 

 

Definitely, but I just can't think of an epic, narrative-driven RPG that doesn't involve solving more than a couple distinct cultural problems. Not that it couldn't be done (or hasn't), but I can't imagine it's a simple task.
 

Plot arc, maybe not, but the personal insights into characters and their cultures established in ME2 does grant it a fair deal of relevance to the story of Mass Effect. I don't think the disputes among any of the races are something that can just be stowed away into a single game. They're ongoing problems that rest at the core of the trilogy and define Mass Effect's identity.

 

While ME2 may have taken too much of a break from the Reaper side of the narrative, it still added substance to the series. Rannoch, Tuchanka, and so many other parts of ME3's story would be significantly worse if we didn't have ME2 to establish their premises and players. Do we ignore Empire Strikes Back because it wasn't about finding the 2nd Death Star's plans and it's hero's ended up in a worse position then when they started?  No, because personal character development is far more important than that.

 

Those things add to the universe of Mass Effect and I’m glad they were in ME2. However, they had nothing to do with the main plot. Those things are not a justification for the pointless main plot.

Your comparison to Empire Strikes Back is terrible. True, they are both focused on the characters, but only in Empire do those characters develop over the main plot. Han and Leia start their relationship. The main character, Luke, develops in the movie, primarily through his training with Yoda. The reveal that Vader is his father is incredibly important. Conversely, Shepard doesn’t develop over ME2, despite having the opportunity to do so, and the reveal of the Collectors being Protheans and the Reapers being made by sticking organic goop into a synthetic body don’t add anything or have any importance to the resolution of events.

 

 

 

 

Some of Harby's lines were pretty cheesy, though, and silly when we realize it's a ginormous Reaper taunting one human. It's like a schoolyard bully putting way too much energy into taunting someone less powerful than themselves.

 

That said, thinking now about Harbinger assuming direct control of Collectors, it reminds me of something...of cybernetic Saren being commanded by Sovereign. And guess what happened when we killed a possessed Saren? The Reaper's shields went down and allowed us to destroy the ship. Why couldn't one of the outcomes of ME2 be finding the technology aboard the Collector base that shows how a Reaper directly controls a cybernetic organism and use that knowledge to attack Reapers? Sure it's not a one button kill all solution, just evening the playing field a bit, but at least it calls back to the first game rather than rely on the Crucible which came from left field in the last game.

 

We could even use it in the current endings. Since Shep is now partially cybernetic, maybe the Crucible/Citadel/Catalyst can be adapted to channel this "direct control" energy through Shep's body and into all remaining Reapers. That would have made a lot more sense than the current space beams of magic we have, IMO.

 

This should have been put front and center, with understanding it and reversing it being the key to TIM’s Control plan.

 

 

 

ME2 is the best game of the series, that's a widely recognized fact. 

 

That is debatable. However, if it is true, that is certainly not due to the main plot.

 

 

 

Your opinion is terrible and you had a sheltered upbringing :/

 

ME2’s main plot sucks.

 

 

 

They showed what happened to the Protheans.

 

But what really is that value of that? It's interesting, but what does it really do for the story?

 

 

I know I will be burned at the stake of fanboy/girls everywhere but I could never get invested in any of the Wicher games since I don't like Geralt.  I love the lore and the world and all that.  Just can't connect with Geralt.

 

I can't blame you. I didn't really either but I still enjoyed the games. I didn't connect or identify with Geralt, but I like that he's a guy trying to make his way in a world that doesn't really like him but knows he's necessary. I liked that he was dragged into events he'd rather avoid.

[The Hierophant]

I agree. They need to make their dialogue animations more like this:

Very dramatic. Lol

[Addictress]

Yeah, they fly in. There is no other way. I assume they use FTL, though they were visible for the end of ME2.

Agency is not activity. Yes, Shepard is the guy who shoots the dudes, but he’s not a leader or a “bloody icon” that people will follow. He’s a grunt following orders. Shepard doesn’t need to do or fix everything. Shamus’ point is that Shepard does nothing other than point and shoot. He doesn’t make any decisions or discoveries. Contrast this with the pretend freedom of the first game. Here you’re ordered where to go. In the first game, you are given the main missions as suggestions but are told you can go do whatever you want. In ME3, Liara and Hackett already know about the Crucible. Nobody you're connected to knows about the Rachni when you got to Noveria. Nobody knows about the Throrian when you go to Feros. Shepard discovers these things and makes a decision on how to deal with them.




That all sounds great but is there a reason that should not have been Mass Effect 2?




You may have heard my head banging on my desk as I read that. The main plot was awful.

Shepard’s death and the Normandy’s destruction were nice and dramatic. I was totally wrapped up in the scene. However, both are made cheap by their immediate return. Had Shepard simply been injured and recovering for that time, I’d just question if the time skip was necessary. Having Shepard die and come back to life is so ridiculous and then the game does nothing with it. Some characters don’t even seem to realize that’s what happened.

Shepard is forced to work for Cerberus and puts up a mild argument at best. He makes no attempt to contact anyone else or get help elsewhere first. Like I described above with ME3, it’s different from ME2 in that Shepard is going everywhere because he was told, not because he has decided to. He doesn’t even know why he’s getting these people, where in ME1 he was at least investigating leads on Geth and Saren.

Most of the game is dedicated to getting characters who, while great, are of questionable value because you don’t actually have an objective. Some are particularly misplaced, such as Thane and Kasumi.

Shepard stumbles into a fairly obvious trap on the Collector ship and escapes because the Collectors are even dumber. Later, they charge through the relay without really knowing what’s on the other side and therefore without knowing if they are prepared. Luckily there just happens to be a base vulnerable to an assault by a small team with no explosives.

The Human Reaper was so stupid. The Collectors being made from Protheans had little to no value. The series plot was not advanced in the least bit. The Reapers are still coming and we still have no way of opposing them.





You have a point, particularly with games, but I don’t think this is entirely true. While there is something to be said for it, I don’t think a villain should be entirely off screen or they risk being too nebulous and distant rather than a real threat. You are more right in games than other types of media though. You want to find their handiwork after it’s done and don’t want to steal agency from the player. But I think there is room for both.

The “gutpunch” doesn’t have to be magic. The protagonist can lose by being legitimately beaten. The first example that popped into my head was Jedi Outcast where you get your ass kicked by the villain because he’s a fallen Jedi and you have no force ability whatsoever. The Mass Effect example that I thought of is Harbinger killing your squadmates. It could be structured better and placed in a different part of the story, but you can’t say it’s magic that a Reaper kills someone because they are a known and legitimate threat.








ME2’s opening was good but it was diminished by what came immediately after. Getting Shepard and the Normandy back immediately ruined that drama and sense of loss. There’s no deep thought from Shepard about the experience or what it means to be back.

What are you considering the “climax” of ME2? The Human Reaper reveal and that the Reapers are cyborgs dependent on Organic goop weren’t good. ME2 dropped the plot ball from the start. You don’t even have a clear goal.




The first game ended with Shepard declaring that he was going to find a way to stop the Reapers. It’s the most important thing Shepard can do. The impending threat is too great to go do something completely unrelated.

The scene showing the Reapers was cool, but the Collector threat was not nearly at the scale of that posed by Saren and Sovereign. The other problem is that all the character development you mention, while certainly great, did not happen on the main plot. Also none of it was for Shepard, despite all that could be done with a character dying and being brought back to life. Because of this, the excellent character development and expansion of the Genophage and Quarian/Geth arcs cannot be used to defend the main plot or its lack of Reaper relevance.

You’re right that we don’t know much about the Reapers but what we learn is of little to know value. That the Collectors were Protheans is of some interest, but it ultimately doesn’t matter. We already had every reason to oppose the Reapers because they were going to kill everyone.

That lack of intel and a clear goal is a weakness of ME2, not a strength. You have no idea why you’re getting these people TIM is sending you to get. It just so happens that there is a base capable of being assaulted and destroyed by your small ground team. What luck!




But the three chapters have a cohesive story. Imagine if The Two Towers had Frodo going on some side quest rather than moving toward Mordor. The exploring more of the universe was certainly worthwhile, but it was all side stuff. It wasn’t done one the main plot other than sending you to a particular location. All of the character stuff was side content.

The Two Towers is kind of similar, though. Why are they spending so much time in Rohan and Helm's Deep? Well, they need them for the coming end game. Why is Shepard defending humans from Collectors? Well, the Collectors are working on behalf of the reapers and humanity will be exterminated if he doesn't. Actually, as far as Shepard knows, he IS stopping the reapers. It appears to him that this is the method by which they harvest and enslave organic life. This IS stopping the reapers.

[Addictress]

The reapers are a small hand reaching for cookies. In ME1 Shepard goes *slap* no

In ME2 the hand reaches again.

*slap slap*

"You have failed. We will find another way!"

Makes sense to me.

[Natureguy85]

The Two Towers is kind of similar, though. Why are they spending so much time in Rohan and Helm's Deep? Well, they need them for the coming end game. Why is Shepard defending humans from Collectors? Well, the Collectors are working on behalf of the reapers and humanity will be exterminated if he doesn't. Actually, as far as Shepard knows, he IS stopping the reapers. It appears to him that this is the method by which they harvest and enslave organic life. This IS stopping the reapers.

 

I notice you focused on the side characters, not the main character. The activities in Rohan are analogous to the side content with the characters in ME2, but half the book is still Frodo making progress toward the main goal. The relationship with Gollum/Smeagol is also important to the ultimate resolution of events. This can not be said of Shepard in ME2.

 

You also exaggerate the Collector threat. They are operating in the Terminus systems, targeting small colonies. They have one ship. I know a squadmate will guess that the Collectors are going to target Earth, but the idea is silly. They'd get annihilated by a defense fleet.

 

 

 

 

 

The reapers are a small hand reaching for cookies. In ME1 Shepard goes *slap* no

In ME2 the hand reaches again.

*slap slap*

"You have failed. We will find another way!"

Makes sense to me.

 

How do the Collector's activities facilitate the Reapers' return as Saren and Sovereign's did?

[KaiserShep]

You also exaggerate the Collector threat. They are operating in the Terminus systems, targeting small colonies. They have one ship. I know a squadmate will guess that the Collectors are going to target Earth, but the idea is silly. They'd get annihilated by a defense fleet.

 

 

How do the Collector's activities facilitate the Reapers' return as Saren and Sovereign's did?

 

 

This was the part I had a lot of trouble buying in ME2. Suddenly it's assumed that the Collectors are going to target Earth, but we just saw them flee a couple of dinky defense cannons on Horizon. So if the Collectors needed more than the colonies could provide to finish the human reaper, they would get wiped out trying to take Earth head-on, and if they did manage to complete it from their supply in the Terminus, the most they could do is maybe make another break for the Citadel to try to unlock it again, which would be hilariously daft of them. 

[Addictress]

I notice you focused on the side characters, not the main character. The activities in Rohan are analogous to the side content with the characters in ME2, but half the book is still Frodo making progress toward the main goal. The relationship with Gollum/Smeagol is also important to the ultimate resolution of events. This can not be said of Shepard in ME2.

You also exaggerate the Collector threat. They are operating in the Terminus systems, targeting small colonies. They have one ship. I know a squadmate will guess that the Collectors are going to target Earth, but the idea is silly. They'd get annihilated by a defense fleet.






How do the Collector's activities facilitate the Reapers' return as Saren and Sovereign's did?

Shepard and everyone still had no clue where the reapers were or how they operate. The collectors at the time we're the main threat and they didn't have just one ship. Remember how they attacked the "collector base" and as they approached, a smaller ship emerged and undocked to tangle with them after going through the omega 4 relay. The ship was tiny in comparison to the base, like a bee embarking from a hive. There was another ship for the IFF. So clearly, they had many ships. We only met 2, plus the base. As they walked through a ship they noted that there were enough pods for all of humanity, not just fringe communities. In addition, the harvesting was getting worse and worse, spreading to more and more colonies. So it was a legitimate suspicion to Cerberus that this was a major strategy of the reapers. What other reaper activity was there?

The collectors facilitated the reapers' cause:
The reapers were building another reaper, for one
And even before they knew of the human reaper, they knew the reapers were bent on extinguishing life. The collectors were harvesting life...no one returned....and though the link wasn't proven, TIM explicitly said in conference he suspected they were linked. It seemed so: that's what reapers do. Shepard should stop them. And again, there was no other trail to follow at the time.

[Addictress]

This was the part I had a lot of trouble buying in ME2. Suddenly it's assumed that the Collectors are going to target Earth, but we just saw them flee a couple of dinky defense cannons on Horizon. So if the Collectors needed more than the colonies could provide to finish the human reaper, they would get wiped out trying to take Earth head-on, and if they did manage to complete it from their supply in the Terminus, the most they could do is maybe make another break for the Citadel to try to unlock it again, which would be hilariously daft of them.

I thought the scene in which they walk into the derelict reaper cathedral of countless pods was dramatic enough to indicate they were heading for earth