366 réponses à ce sujet

[ZennExile]

Jack reminded me of a girl I dated 8 years ago. Bat**** crazy and socially unacceptable. But she was fun. Jack was exagerated into a walking stereotype though. Way too over acted. Bashiit Crazy Biotic convics shouldn't act like 13 year old tweekers with daddy issues. In any rational scenario Jack would have been killed by her own stupidity long before Shepard met her. But I digress.

ME2 Missed a few key elements that would have made it Epic. You can screw around with the PC version of the client and see just how much was /cut from release. The biggest problem though, aside from all the missing content (which we all should be well aware of by now), is the lack of depth in the universe.

In ME1 you got a sense of balance between good and evil. There was a grey area and you could move back and forth freely between the two. In ME2 rather than carry on that omnipotent feeling they sharpened the line. They made it glamour style good vs evil and made every choice the untimate extreme. They even go as far as preventing Paragon and Renegade story arc from coexisting. In ME1 you could be the hero but still punch a **** in the mouth when the oppertunity called for it. In ME2 you have to choose one path or the other and both paths are completely linear and reflect a puzzling lack of any real imagination.

ME2 feels like a giant stereotype museum. It's like if you mixed the worst B rated Sci Fi ever created with a Lucas Arts special effects budget. It looks sweet, just don't stop to smell the roses or you'll notice the crap you're standing in.

Modifié par ZennExile, 17 février 2010 - 04:16 .

[Rilke21]

Azazel005 wrote...

It's my hope that the weapons will follow the ARMOUR route in the sequel and be a modular system allowing that feeling of attatchment and broadening the amount of ARMOUR/weapon pieces and research projects to give you a greater feeling of "sqeueeeee" when you do find them.

Do I detect another Canuck!?! 

My original post was in response to my first playthrough, and the game HAS grown on me since then. I just wish I could say the same for the story!

Why didn't Mass Effect 2 focus on the Geth/Quarian conflict? There was plenty of great material there, and it could easily have been the focus of an entire game. Sigh.

[SurfaceBeneath]

Rilke21 wrote...
I have to disagree with you, Surface. ME1 introduced a highly-detailed, creative and innovative universe to explore, which is unprecedented for a video game (and extremely rare for just about every other form of media.) The mass-extinction story line required a little suspension of disbelief, but the charismatic villans, the race-to-solve-the-puzzle storytelling and the interesting characters (possible exception of Kaiden and Ashley granted) were enough to keep my on my toes for two solid playthroughs. After I had my fill of the main story, I was able to look past the cookie-cutter side mission locals and enjoy the well-scripted side stories.

Mass Effect 2 just rode on ME1's coat tails. The complex and flawed characters mostly struck me as cliche or unbelievable. (Did anyone really take Jack seriously? "I'm a cold-hearted ****! But sometimes I just feel like a little girl again. ****, it's complicated." Seriously...seriously?)

Saren was a good villain?

Nevermind, not arguing anymore. That guy was about as complex a villain as Snidely Whiplash

And hey, aren't you being a little snippy with the good doctor?

I can't help he's so butthurt that other people are having fun while he'd rather /wrists. But it is funny watching him try to take out his impotent internet frustrations on people who are having a good time

EDIT:

race-to-solve-the-puzzle storytelling

"I don't care that Saren is landing on Ilos right now to complete his plan which will bring the Reapers to the galaxy and doom us all! I have 4 more uncharted copy-pasted planets to aimlessly wander around on in my space buggy!"

Modifié par SurfaceBeneath, 17 février 2010 - 04:21 .

[Rilke21]

Zenn, you're alive to tell the tale?

[Bibdy]

To be quite honest, I really liked the 'global upgrade' system. I've played far too many RPGs that I'm just sick and godamned tired of having to pick a select few party members, gear and equip them to absolute bloody hell, and then completely ignore everyone else. I liked jumping into every mission with 2 completely different party members each time and not feeling totally gimped, or having to mess around with a bunch of inventory items, stat points or what-have-you, just to be able to use those party members.

Games like DA:O kind of expect that kind of meta-game knowledge out of you, and push a lot of irritating inventory/stat management your way if you want to play like that (or simply equip everybody with something, but then be short on money). In ME2 I found it very enjoyable to switch things up and spend time with the whole team, rather than pick two, out of TEN, possibilities and use them the WHOLE game.

Modifié par Bibdy, 17 février 2010 - 04:25 .

[Rilke21]

Ah, I liked Saren. He had style. And he even managed to redeem himself in the end (which is totally the sign of a good villian. Vader ftw!)

[SurfaceBeneath]

ZennExile wrote...

In ME1 you got a sense of balance between good and evil. There was a grey area and you could move back and forth freely between the two. In ME2 rather than carry on that omnipotent feeling they sharpened the line. They made it glamour style good vs evil and made every choice the untimate extreme. They even go as far as preventing Paragon and Renegade story arc from coexisting. In ME1 you could be the hero but still punch a **** in the mouth when the oppertunity called for it. In ME2 you have to choose one path or the other and both paths are completely linear and reflect a puzzling lack of any real imagination.

See now I know you're trollin. Because this right here is flatly and incontrovertably wrong. You were capped on how many points you could put in Charm/Intimidate in the first game by how high your respective Paragon/Rengade scores were.

In ME2, a full Paragon still got to do all the Renegade interupts they wanted.

[Dr. Peter Venkman]

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

I can't help he's so butthurt that other people are having fun while he'd rather /wrists. But it is funny watching him try to take out his impotent internet frustrations on people who are having a good time

I'm not butthurt about anything. You don't understand that me pointing out that you have no evidence to back up your "98% Assertion" has nothing to do with my views about the game or other forums. Very simple concept.

[SurfaceBeneath]

Rilke21 wrote...

Ah, I liked Saren. He had style. And he even managed to redeem himself in the end (which is totally the sign of a good villian. Vader ftw!)

Getting him to shoot himself in the head was a "HOLY $#^% DID I JUST DO THAT?" moment I'll give you that.

Up to that point he fell flat. Sorry, Irenicus is still the top tier Bioware villain.

Oh, except the Illusive Man. Now THAT is a villain done to pitch perfection. 

[Lurker 2277]

As myself being a lurker im not used to making these great essays that make 100% sense please try to bear (spelling?) with me.

now i took the liberty to look up the definition of "Role Playing Game" although many of you will probly call me a **** and ignore it.

"A game in which players assume the roles of characters and act out fantastical adventures"

with that in consideration how is stats essential to a RPG, its more really a traditional element that is not needed and many of you clearly don't like this change. Are you not assuming the role of shepard and making decisions that shape the world around you.

now to loot, IMO bioware has put alot of effort in to bringing good explenations for the game and making it as realistic as possible. So, does taking a few dozen different weapons and mods with you realistic. so the inventory on the normandy makes sense.
does having a hundred weapons that are basicly the same better then having a few that control and act differently better? sure there could be severel more but each one in ME2 are different enough to make each fight different.

sry i don't really know how to end this well so i will just let it go there, yow.

[SurfaceBeneath]

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

I can't help he's so butthurt that other people are having fun while he'd rather /wrists. But it is funny watching him try to take out his impotent internet frustrations on people who are having a good time

I'm not butthurt about anything. You don't understand that me pointing out that you have no evidence to back up your "98% Assertion" has nothing to do with my views about the game or other forums. Very simple concept.

[Mak89]

I think ME2 is a better game. The story may not be as good or epic, but I think it's a better game even if it is 'streamlined'. My main problem with it is that instead of them reworking the mako and 'exploration' they completely scrapped it and gave us more combat with a few pleasant suprises here and there. Why couldn't they have worked an extra month or more to give us a vehicle with some real exploration? The worlds were great, but everything feels too claustophobic and that's why ME1's sidequests were slightly better. Also there was dialogue and choices. Why wait for DLC? Not everyone can get it, put it in the game. That is the only reason why ME2 is slightly unpolished. We should be able to drive a decent vehicle to colonies, bases, epic battles, whatever. I guess that's asking for too much but it would be a complete package if they did that. I'm not one of those fans that feel like Bioware owes me something just because I buy ttheir games, but they should be able to see how good this series can be.

[Bibdy]

"A game in which players assume the roles of characters and act out fantastical adventures"

If you take that kind of definition for an RPG, then you're going to find almost every video game in existence counts as an RPG. That's a very broad generalisation.

Its obvious that by RPG people mean the traditional RPG, of say, the last 40 years they've been developed (in table-top format and video game format).

You play a dude. You get to customise that dude in appearance and in history/career (character class). Your dude advances in power as the game progresses. You get to make choices which affect the world.

In that sense ME1 and 2 fit the bill, in my opinion. Inventory and character stats management is just fluff to appease the math-nerds (who are, let's face it, the creators of such games). Don't get me wrong, I've got a degree in Physics/Electronics, so I'm not taking any moral highground against math-nuts. I'm all for theorycrafting and the tetris-esque inventory minigame every now and then, but I don't think it has to be absolutely integral to the RPG experience.

ME2 was a very welcome break from that fluff and gave me a very enjoyable pick-your-own-blockbuster-movie experience. It was fantastic.

Modifié par Bibdy, 17 février 2010 - 04:35 .

[Dr. Peter Venkman]

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

I can't help he's so butthurt that other people are having fun while he'd rather /wrists. But it is funny watching him try to take out his impotent internet frustrations on people who are having a good time

I'm not butthurt about anything. You don't understand that me pointing out that you have no evidence to back up your "98% Assertion" has nothing to do with my views about the game or other forums. Very simple concept.

[ZennExile]

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

ZennExile wrote...

In ME1 you got a sense of balance between good and evil. There was a grey area and you could move back and forth freely between the two. In ME2 rather than carry on that omnipotent feeling they sharpened the line. They made it glamour style good vs evil and made every choice the untimate extreme. They even go as far as preventing Paragon and Renegade story arc from coexisting. In ME1 you could be the hero but still punch a **** in the mouth when the oppertunity called for it. In ME2 you have to choose one path or the other and both paths are completely linear and reflect a puzzling lack of any real imagination.

See now I know you're trollin. Because this right here is flatly and incontrovertably wrong. You were capped on how many points you could put in Charm/Intimidate in the first game by how high your respective Paragon/Rengade scores were.

In ME2, a full Paragon still got to do all the Renegade interupts they wanted.

The cinematic interupts are fluff and mean nothing in this context.  Availible content and the feeling that there is "no right or wrong" answer was the point.  The actual points have nothing to do with in.  In ME1 you could take renegade missions even if you were a paragon.  In ME2 you are either on the paragon path or on the renegade path.  There is no grey area.  Random meaningless triggers for a couple points of Paragon or Renegade mean nothing.  They have no meaningful effect on the experience.  None of them are more than fluff and NONE of them change the course of play.  They are simply there for free points if you want them.

Mass Effect is not just a technology the universe is based around.  It's an ideology based on the freedom of choice.  ME2 takes a massive leap away from that ideology and in effect away from the IP itself.

And I survived but my house didn't.  She started a fire in the middle of my bed and made sure to do it in the middle of the day when everyone was at work.  There was nothing left but the fridge.  I ate my cold pizza out of a blackened charred fridge surrounded by what was the rest of my life.   The real journey started when the insurance check arrived. 

[Rilke21]

*insert moderatorial tone of voice*



Ok ok, Surface, Venkman...



can you please keep this up? I'm really getting a kick out of it

[SurfaceBeneath]

EDIT: jpg fail.

Modifié par SurfaceBeneath, 17 février 2010 - 04:39 .

[Rilke21]

wow.



Zenn, I've got to meet this girl.

[Bibdy]

ZennExile wrote...

The cinematic interupts are fluff and mean nothing in this context.  Availible content and the feeling that there is "no right or wrong" answer was the point.  The actual points have nothing to do with in.  In ME1 you could take renegade missions even if you were a paragon.  In ME2 you are either on the paragon path or on the renegade path.  There is no grey area.  Random meaningless triggers for a couple points of Paragon or Renegade mean nothing.  They have no meaningful effect on the experience.  None of them are more than fluff and NONE of them change the course of play.  They are simply there for free points if you want them.

Mass Effect is not just a technology the universe is based around.  It's an ideology based on the freedom of choice.  ME2 takes a massive leap away from that ideology and in effect away from the IP itself.

And I survived but my house didn't.  She started a fire in the middle of my bed and made sure to do it in the middle of the day when everyone was at work.  There was nothing left but the fridge.  I ate my cold pizza out of a blackened charred fridge surrounded by what was the rest of my life.   The real journey started when the insurance check arrived. 

Don't people usually play as the 'good guy' and the 'bad guy', one way or the other? Usually there's always 2 choices in these kinds of games. They just save you the bother of having to find out which dialogue option is meant to pertain to which (although other games usually list the evil choices at the bottom, so its normally obvious). ME just makes it more explicit.

These kinds of games always urge you to be super good or super bad. I can't think of a game which rewards Mr. Super Grey.

[SurfaceBeneath]

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

I can't help he's so butthurt that other people are having fun while he'd rather /wrists. But it is funny watching him try to take out his impotent internet frustrations on people who are having a good time

I'm not butthurt about anything. You don't understand that me pointing out that you have no evidence to back up your "98% Assertion" has nothing to do with my views about the game or other forums. Very simple concept.

SEND YOUR FLEET IN

Ok, I'm amused. We're cool now.

Modifié par SurfaceBeneath, 17 février 2010 - 04:40 .

[Dr. Peter Venkman]

SurfaceBeneath wrote...


    http://images2.wikia...il_Chambers.jpg



SEND YOUR FLEET IN

You know what, I take everything that I said back. We're cool now

Modifié par Dr. Peter Venkman, 17 février 2010 - 04:42 .

[SurfaceBeneath]

ZennExile wrote...

The cinematic interupts are fluff and mean nothing in this context.  Availible content and the feeling that there is "no right or wrong" answer was the point.  The actual points have nothing to do with in.  In ME1 you could take renegade missions even if you were a paragon.  In ME2 you are either on the paragon path or on the renegade path.  There is no grey area.  Random meaningless triggers for a couple points of Paragon or Renegade mean nothing.  They have no meaningful effect on the experience.  None of them are more than fluff and NONE of them change the course of play.  They are simply there for free points if you want them.

Mass Effect is not just a technology the universe is based around.  It's an ideology based on the freedom of choice.  ME2 takes a massive leap away from that ideology and in effect away from the IP itself.

And I survived but my house didn't.  She started a fire in the middle of my bed and made sure to do it in the middle of the day when everyone was at work.  There was nothing left but the fridge.  I ate my cold pizza out of a blackened charred fridge surrounded by what was the rest of my life.   The real journey started when the insurance check arrived. 

None of this makes any sense... The Paragade choices you made in ME1 were every bit as shallow as they are in ME2. The only difference is ME2 offers you more flexibility and are generally more hilarious.

[ZennExile]

Bibdy wrote...

ZennExile wrote...

The cinematic interupts are fluff and mean nothing in this context.  Availible content and the feeling that there is "no right or wrong" answer was the point.  The actual points have nothing to do with in.  In ME1 you could take renegade missions even if you were a paragon.  In ME2 you are either on the paragon path or on the renegade path.  There is no grey area.  Random meaningless triggers for a couple points of Paragon or Renegade mean nothing.  They have no meaningful effect on the experience.  None of them are more than fluff and NONE of them change the course of play.  They are simply there for free points if you want them.

Mass Effect is not just a technology the universe is based around.  It's an ideology based on the freedom of choice.  ME2 takes a massive leap away from that ideology and in effect away from the IP itself.

And I survived but my house didn't.  She started a fire in the middle of my bed and made sure to do it in the middle of the day when everyone was at work.  There was nothing left but the fridge.  I ate my cold pizza out of a blackened charred fridge surrounded by what was the rest of my life.   The real journey started when the insurance check arrived. 

Don't people usually play as the 'good guy' and the 'bad guy', one way or the other? Usually there's always 2 choices in these kinds of games. They just save you the bother of having to find out which dialogue option is meant to pertain to which (although other games usually list the evil choices at the bottom, so its normally obvious). ME just makes it more explicit.

These kinds of games always urge you to be super good or super bad. I can't think of a game which rewards Mr. Super Grey.

ME2 and DA:O are the first two from Bioware that don't have a strong nuetral mechanic.  Most of the previous stories are built around the idea that being good and being evil are both part of the experience and both necissary.  You have the choice to become good or evil, but you also have the choice to follow a balanced path.  That really isn't an option in ME2. 

ME2 is also the first game by Bioware that doesn't seem to have a full evil story arc in the game yet either.  It's like they took the Paragon Story Arc and finished it then ran out of time.  So instead of building the Renegade Story Arc they attached it to the Paragon story arc just ignored any nuetral story arc.  In most previous Bioware titles your choices made a difference in the actual game you played.  If you followed one side or the other your experience was changed but you had freedom to flip flop back and forth if you saw reason to.  In ME2 you have two choices and both result in the exact same thing.  It's really just like the story was half finished and they fired the guy who wrote it only to pick the story back up again with interns.

[shaneho78]

I think ME2 is meant to cater to a broad spectrum of gamers, some who are instantly turned off by RPG but will give a decent shooter a try. Insisting that ME2 should cater only to hardcore RPG gamers like yourself is a little too self absorbed. ME2 is striving for a new level of realism (not carrying 100 unseen items) and urgency (not switching 20 inventory items from implants, boots and helmets around all squad members everytime you meet a different class of enemies). The fact that they revamped the whole combat system is further proof of that. It is meant to be a movie-game experience.

[SurfaceBeneath]

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

Yea, I really F'ed that one up. Damn these forums not having a preview function before posting... Fix'd now though