366 réponses à ce sujet

[Revan312]

General Battuta wrote...

Same. Been with BioWare since original Baldur's Gate and I think ME2 is their best yet.

I recently replayed Mass Effect 1 and no, it's not deeper. It feels cheesy and kind of awful by comparison to ME2.

Cheesy =



I'd take Saren over that ANY day of the week.

[Tokalla]

Revan312 wrote...

General Battuta wrote...

Same. Been with BioWare since original Baldur's Gate and I think ME2 is their best yet.

I recently replayed Mass Effect 1 and no, it's not deeper. It feels cheesy and kind of awful by comparison to ME2.

Cheesy =



I'd take Saren over that ANY day of the week.

You do realize that the final fight of ME1 is effectively a turian T800 (I even called him the Saren terminator when I explained the fight to my wife the first time).

[SurfaceBeneath]

Revan312 wrote...
You not having Fallout 2 in that list invalidates everything you've ever said... jking

I know some people who would call you a total n00b for liking Fallout 2 more than 1 haha

Fallout 2 is my favorite Fallout game too though

Still not in my top 5. Probably in my top 10 though.

[t3f3r1]

I am sorry if I repeat what others said but I have some serious problems with most of the complaints presented by the TC...

"Fans of the original probably noticed right away that the second Mass Effect is a streamlined version of the first. Think Deus Ex 2: an unbroken system of levelling, character development and inventory management was “fixed” by eliminating it completely. (Granted, the inventory in the first Mass Effect was a little clunky, but it still got the job done.)"

If by a "little" clunky, you mean you had no problems having to sift through 5 to 10 copies of the same item and make constant trips to the Vendor at the BOTTOM of one of the slowest in game elevators to reduce the 150 item limit then ok. No... ME 1 did NOT get the job done in inventory, it was the bastard child of a VERY outdated and redundant inventory system. Apparently the concept of change is very hard for some people to accept.

"Killing enemies no longer provides experience. Neither does exploring the world, searching out codex entries, picking obscure dialogue options, finding rare items, interacting with your squad, or any of the other little details that sets an RPG apart from a shooter. For the most part, these details have been streamlined into the abyss. Where they’ve survived, there’s no longer an incentive to find them."

I'm sorry but these are NOT what makes an RPG, they are not RPG elements, they are just elements that came to be found in RPGs as the genre progressed. If by "any of the other details" you meant the atmosphere, environmental detail, dialogue between passing NPCs, or exploring the side quest worlds that used more than the same 3 buildings over and over then maybe you just forgot those were there... Or how about the unique dialogue found when bringing certain characters into certain dialgoue sections throughout the game?

"In Mass Effect 2, you get to pick from 4 abilities. (Make that two if you’re playing as a soldier, since choosing your ammo hardly counts as a skill.) Using any of these powers makes the rest unusable until all of them recharge. Since only one or two of these powers is of any use in the first place, the chances are good that you’ll max out one skill and then spam it for the entire game. In effect, where the first game lets you use 13 powers in combat, the second lets you use 1. (I’d make a snarky comment about this exciting new development in tactical complexity, but I think you get the picture.)"

No... I don't get the picture... Mass Effect 2 on insanity was one of the most rewarding, 'non Cheap' hardest diffifulties I have ever played through. I played through as a Soldier, and used alot more than just 1 power... I used the powers of my squadmates, two of the 3 ammo types, adren rush, Reave, AND concussive shot on occasion. I think the confusion here is that this game is about alot more than predetermined stats causing predetermined amounts of damage with a predetermined chance of hit / miss and all you have to do is position your character right and hit the attack button. If that is what you were looking for then please, by all means stick with Dragon Age as that game was meant to cater to people that are unwilling to break out of the terrible repitition that once made KoToR or Jade Empire great games in their own time.

Or were you meaning to say that chasing "flighty" enemies around boxes as their AI attempts to maintain a set distance and spamming singularities to ez-mode your way through anything in ME 1 was a much better way to handle the shooting mechanics?

"The inventory is a pretty essential part of any RPG, and not just because it’s fun to hit the I-key and play dress-up with your characters. The reason inventories are important is because loot management sets RPGs apart from their mindless shooter brethren.  In Mass Effect 2 you’ll occasionally find new items (maybe five or six, but only if you blow 10 bucks on the DLC.) But because there’s no inventory there’s virtually no way to distinguish which gun does more damage, or which armor offers more protection. The only noticeable differences between the weapons in Mass Effect 2 are clip size and accuracy, but since each gun is about as effective as the other guns, you might as well just keep one for the entire game."

This seems like a very shallow and biased viewpoint... I am sorry but inventory is NOT essential to any RPG. Think back to Dungeons and dragons as an example... I cannot vouch for everyone but aside from the "bare essentials" (food, water, a bedroll) Most times a "flashy new item" was only sparsely rewarded at the end of a meaningful campaign or very important session. This made the new item meaningful, valuable, and rewarding. I would say that Mass Effect 2 stands apart from the mindless inventory managers like Diablo or even ME 1 because each new item means something and has real value. Saying you can't distinguish the damage done by weapon types would imply that either you cared so little you did not actually test the new guns, or that you pay absolutely no attention to anything other than stats displayed on a screen. I am sorry but guns do not come with stat sheets to tell how much each bullet deals in damage most of the time...

"My point is that much of the replayability of an RPG comes from finding new items, customizing your character with them, and enjoying how much of a badass you can become. When you take items and experience out of an RPG, you take away the incentive to develop your character. You take away half the incentive to play the game at all."

If this really is your point then again, you are displaying a very shallow, biased viewpoint. Saying that a game is "no good" because you can't spend hours managing inventory or hunting for that next "uber" randomly generated item is a very strange concept to me. Once again, RPG and inventory are NOT synonymous. In most early cases, an inventory system was implemented as the easiest way of giving a character a sense of progression when dealing with 8 bit sprites but seriously... buying a new weapon at every one of 20 to 50 item shops you visit where each one just happens to have a weapon slightly better than the last? I much prefer actually finding a worthwhile improvement the way a true RPG would handle it.

"What makes up the other half of a great RPG? You guessed it...the story! And here is where Mass Effect 2 really fails to shine. Do you remember in Alien 3 when the survivors from the last movie are killed off in the first 20 seconds? It’s a plot device that writers fall back on when they’re either very strapped for time, or they just aren’t sure how to continue their last story."

This one is very difficult to really contend as it all just personal preference... However I would like to say that in Alien 3 you dont see ANY of the emotional and powerful buildup to the destruction, and considering that the entire pace of the game is meant to be a much more personal affair between shepard and crew, this was the perfect opening to use. It instilled a sense of need to exact revenge upon the Collector's. Again though, that is just personal preference and immersion.

To summarize your next couple of paragraphs about why the plot and story were bad let me quote you directly:

"The beauty of any good story is in the details. But when the details are thrown in as filler, and the story is nowhere to be found, they just detract from the whole experience."

Once again, I suppose this entire complaint you have with the story is just personal preference, because there is as much or as little detail present in this game as in any other I have ever played if not more. If you care so little about all of the side quest NPC's the answer is VERY simple. DON'T DO THE QUESTS! It is not written in stone anywhere that you had to talk to samesh bahtia or let Shiala live or even talk to her again on Illium. Why complain about something that is there ON PURPOSE as a minor detail?

"Mass Effect 2 is not much of an RPG. So why does it deserve the praise that people have been throwing at it? The answer is that the game looks like a movie. (If you ignore the side quests and the left-half of the dialogue wheel, it even plays like a movie.) But the cinematic quality of the second game is nothing new to the Mass Effect series. And when you combine bare-bones plot with uninspired side-quests and depth-free combat, Mass Effect 2 just plays like a gutted version of the original. Lip service has been paid to what made the original Mass Effect great (the voice acting is mostly excellent and the combat is still good for the occasional adrenaline rush), but much of the substance of the origional has been removed. We’re left with a decent third-person shooter that is by no means a bad game. It’s just not what I expected from BioWare."

I am sorry but I much prefer the movie quality experience in ME 2 to watching two static characters move their mouths at eachother while delivering dialgoue and then having a poorly done action sequence few and far between. I would say that the the cinematic quality of the dialogue IS new because unless you are watching the unskippable movie moments, the characters never move, they hardly emote visually, and overall feel much less alive in games like ME 1, DA:O, or other older bioware games. Finally, if by saying much of the substance of the original was removed you are referring to countless hours spent climbing barren terrain or walking back and forth between terminals in the needlessly large citadel, yes those things were removed with good reason. Are you meaning to say that when a company attempts to innovate beyond a stale system of delivery that they themselves developed 10 years or more ago that you don't like them for it?

"It’s probably apparent that I’m not a 16-year-old with an Xbox. I understand that mass (console) appeal makes money, and in principle there’s nothing wrong with that. I’m part of the old cabal of Bioware supporters, and I’ll probably buy Mass Effect 3 (even if they resurrect Sovereign as a renegade Hanar and have Shepard kick its butt in a boxing match.) BioWare is still at the top of my list of game developers. (After all, it’s nigh impossible to resent the company that released Dragon Age two months ago.)"

No but it is clear that you are very bias'ed towards a dragon age (KoToR) style of gameplay. That system is dated, very slow, and again is a matter of personal preference. This game was alot more than the "cheap cop out to make a quick buck" that you come across as saying it is... it was an attempt by Bioware to push their own gaming formula out the window and deliver something fresh, and I applaud them for being willing to try despite all these really narrow minded critcisms that seem to crop up.

To Drive a point home one more time.... INVENTORY MANAGMENT DOES NOT EQUATE TO RPG. I did not ever say it is a bad thing to be able to put new outfits or looks onto your PC but to say that because a game has limited inventory managment it is no longer an RPG seems like a very uninformed opinion.

Modifié par t3f3r1, 17 février 2010 - 08:24 .

[Revan312]

Tokalla wrote...

You do realize that the final fight of ME1 is effectively a turian T800 (I even called him the Saren terminator when I explained the fight to my wife the first time).

Yep, a T800 with a personality that talks and has emotions.  Like I said, I'd much rather have Saren than a giant T800 skeleton fetus that barfs lasers yet can be killed by tiny bullets and can't get you behind a halfwall... 

Also, ME1 seemed a bit more epic as the entire council/alliance fleet was involved, cuttng back and forth between their crazy space fight with Sovereign and your fight with Sarensovereign rather than 3 people on a floating platform fighting a mega 3 dimensional Contra 3 boss

Modifié par Revan312, 17 février 2010 - 07:57 .

[Revan312]

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

I know some people who would call you a total n00b for liking Fallout 2 more than 1 haha

Fallout 2 is my favorite Fallout game too though

Still not in my top 5. Probably in my top 10 though.

Oh don't worry, the friend that turned me on to Fallout way back has called me that for liking such an inferior sequal

[SurfaceBeneath]

Revan312 wrote...

General Battuta wrote...

Same. Been with BioWare since original Baldur's Gate and I think ME2 is their best yet.

I recently replayed Mass Effect 1 and no, it's not deeper. It feels cheesy and kind of awful by comparison to ME2.

Cheesy =



I'd take Saren over that ANY day of the week.

Well, first of all, Saren was the antagonist of the first game. The Reaper-Human embryo was an end boss, but not an antagonist.

Secondly, I personally thought that fight was epic as hell. In fact, its only real downfall was that the thing was just way too damn easy. Just like Saren in the first game come to think...

One area that Bioware really does fail at is boss battles. They need to go play some God of War or something and learn a thing or two about epic and fun fun boss fights. (Note: I've never actually played God of War... so I'm not sure if that analogy carries... I've just heard that game had fun and epic boss fights)

[SurfaceBeneath]

Revan312 wrote...
Oh don't worry, the friend that turned me on to Fallout way back has called me that for liking such an inferior sequal

I'm actually really looking forward to Fallout: New Vegas. Hopefully getting the series back in the hands of its original creators will bring the series back to greatness.

In a preview I read there's going to be a hardcore mode where your character has to drink water periodically to avoid dehydration, ammo has weight, and limb injuries cannot be cured with a simple stimpack but actually have to be mended by a doctor or with appropriate first aid skill and a doctor's bag and take time to heal. I think that's awesome!

Modifié par SurfaceBeneath, 17 février 2010 - 08:04 .

[t3f3r1]

Revan312 wrote...

Yep, a T800 with a personality that talks and has emotions.  Like I said, I'd much rather have Saren than a giant T800 skeleton fetus that barfs lasers yet can be killed by tiny bullets and can't get you behind a halfwall... 

Also, ME1 seemed a bit more epic as the entire council/alliance fleet was involved, cuttng back and forth between their crazy space fight with Sovereign and your fight with Sarensovereign rather than 3 people on a floating platform fighting a mega 3 dimensional Contra 3 boss

I am sorry on Behalf of Bioware and Contra that the usage of the Human skeleton in a mechanical format as an attempt to drive home a stronger sense of association and repulsion for an enemy has already been somehow copyrighted by the Terminator Series... I would suggest you try looking closer at the Reaper Larva next time you fight it... it looks nothing like a T-800 and has tentacles on each side of it's skull... it was very much a Reaper Larva, not a T-800.

[Bibdy]

I dunno. I was thinking more of Unicron when I saw that thing. OH MAH GAHD! ITS GUNNA EAT MAH PLANITS!

[Hawkman-X71]

t3f3r1 wrote...



No but it is clear that you are very bias'ed towards a dragon age (KoToR) style of gameplay. That system is dated, very slow, and again is a matter of personal preference. This game was alot more than the "cheap cop out to make a quick buck" that you come across as saying it is... it was an attempt by Bioware to push their own gaming formula out the window and deliver something fresh, and I applaud them for being willing to try despite all these really narrow minded critcisms that seem to crop up.

To Drive a point home one more time.... INVENTORY MANAGMENT DOES NOT EQUATE TO RPG. I did not ever say it is a bad thing to be able to put new outfits or looks onto your PC but to say that because a game has limited inventory managment it is no longer an RPG seems like a very uninformed opinion.

A well though out argument. I only quoted a small portion so I could address it specifically, from my point of view. I agree with much of the sentiments from the original post, and I also agree with some of what is stated above. But I feel the need to drop my own few cents into the discussion again.

In my opinion (forgive me for not using acronyms that make me sound like I'm illiterate), I found the overall quality of Mass Effect 2 to be much greater than it's predecessor, but not without it's major flaws. As in any game, Mass Effect 2 is not perfect. It comes damn close, but there are just enough things that have been taken away from the original formula that turn me off a bit. Or a lot, in some cases. I feel that working for that small bit of experience, or hunting down that last piece of equipment has become an integral part of RPGs for me, with good reason. While the inventory system does not make the game an RPG, it certainly adds an element of depth and replayability that most other games don't have. So removing that removes much of the desire to replay the game, because there's not a whole lot more you're going to find. And if you were diligent in your first two playthroughs, the story doesn't pull you back in for a third, fourth, or more the way the Mass Effect 1 and KOTOR did. What's missing? All of these games boast incredible stories, and Mass Effect 2 has an unprecedented level of depth to it's characters, environments, and story. What is missing is the desire to go back through "just one more time" to finally get that ultimate weapon. To beat the game enough times to get my character up to level 60. The desire is just not there. If I can find all the best stuff, all the coolest armor, and reach the highest level (30) three-quarters of the way through the game, the depth is gone from that aspect of the game.

I loved Mass Effect, and Knights of the Old Republic even more. I'm not lauding the combat system from these two. Frankly, KOTOR's combat system was one of the worst I've ever seen. I don't want to see the Mass Effect franchise pulled back into that system. But I do want to see a return to the depth of an RPG. That special something that makes me want to put in ten forty-hour playthroughs. Bioware has, once again, brought us a game we are not worthy of. It's phenomenal in it's own right. But it needs that depth. That desire to go back again. Because Mass Effect 2 is found lacking. 

[Rilke21]

Tokalla wrote...

Rilke21 wrote...

Thanks Revan. Here's a repost for good measure...

"Apologies to Massadonius and Chained...I probably should have chosen my words more carefully. It's not my intention to insult, but I do feel that a "real" (or perhaps an old-school?) fan will take issue with the dumbing-down of what BioWare has perfected over a decade or two: the RPG elements that added so much to games like KOTOR, Baldur's gate, NWN...the list goes on. I slipped in the “real fan” barb because, in all honesty, I'm a little offended that a company that has never slipped from its founding principles "sold out" by streamlining something as brilliant as Mass Effect. To be clear, I’d probably consider myself a fan of Mass Effect 2 (I did just spend the last 33 hours of my life playing through every bit of content that it has.) I’m just a little upset with the new direction BioWare is taking, and I wanted to let them know that the old fans (which are no more real than the new fans) will probably agree with me."

In all fairness, that isn't much of an apology.  While you certainly apologized for for the insult, you then attempt to justify that "real" or "old school" fans would agree with your opinion.  In trying to justify the insult, you have merely repeated the it (effectively saying "sorry it insulted you, but real/old school fans would agree with me").  I find it likely that many who have brought this up did read your apology, but found it just as insulting due to your continued assertion that "old school" and/or "real" fans will share your opinion.  While I feel you were likely sincere in your apology, I honestly have never taken that "apology" to be a legitimate acceptance that your usage was inappropriate and wrong (which is what those real/old school fans who disagree expect in an actual sincere apology).

I have bolded the portion that I feel causes the issue.

I'm not sure I understand. People who were taking issue with the "real fan" comment were (rightfully) pointing out that their opinion is just as real as mine. By switching to "old school" I was clarifying the perspective I'm coming from, acknowledging that it isn't the only perspective, but suggesting that many old school gamers will agree with me.

From the posts I've read on this thread, it seems like the old school is niether with me nor against me. But it seems true that none of them believe ME2 is perfect.

[magnuskn]

I disagree almost completely with the OP. Besides tedious scanning, a bit lacking party interaction ( compared to Dragon Age ) and a fear that all your companions won't be around as playable and important NPCs in ME3, I think ME2 was done almost perfectly.

[Gyroscopic_Trout]

I'm sorry if this has been covered somewhere in here already, but this is the like the ninth or tenth "ME2 is bad" thread I've read this week and I don't have the patience to read through another fourteen pages. You don't like it, that's cool, not your cup o' tea. I thought the jab at "mindless shooters" was a bit sleazy, but whatever. I'll be the better man and let that slide.

But....Alien 3? Seriously? You didn't like how everyone from the second movie was killed off? Why not compare it to Aliens? Where the main character had been cryogenically frozen and was believed lost for 50 years? Isn't that really the same plot device? And isn't that considered a good movie? Urgh, ugh, nerd rage, too much coffee...okay I'm done. >.>

Modifié par Gyroscopic_Trout, 17 février 2010 - 06:53 .

[Scottthesnow]

SurfaceBeneath wrote...


Secondly, I personally thought that fight was epic as hell. In fact, its only real downfall was that the thing was just way too damn easy. Just like Saren in the first game come to think...

Seriously?  You didnt think the human-reaper baby was silly?  It was game jarring for me...but kinda fun.  The confrontation with Saren was cooler and more dramatic in my opinion, and it was so because of its personal nature.  I think a direct confrontation with the Collector general would have been a great alternative.  It could have been used as a vehicle to reveal motivations, threats or fears concerning the reapers that would have had more emotional impact.

Where ME2 really shone was a better combat dynamic, and amazing enviromental design.  But then it does some really, really stupid things.  The planet scanner was worse than elevators, and the whole gas mask thing is hard to forgive.  Getting rid of the inventory thing was really brave, and it works really well.  Its too bad there was so much laziness with lack of customization of squaddie armor, only a handful of weapon choices, an intrusive ill concieved ammo system and a reduction of skills.  

I never played Jade Empire, but I did play Shattered Steel.  This was the first game by bioware that I thought had unforgivably stupid moments.  I am really glad there are so many threads with people complaining about it.  I have high hopes for ME3.  Heck, if they released an editor this game could be modded to perfection.

[Tokalla]

Rilke21 wrote...

Tokalla wrote...

Rilke21 wrote...

Thanks Revan. Here's a repost for good measure...

"Apologies to Massadonius and Chained...I probably should have chosen my words more carefully. It's not my intention to insult, but I do feel that a "real" (or perhaps an old-school?) fan will take issue with the dumbing-down of what BioWare has perfected over a decade or two: the RPG elements that added so much to games like KOTOR, Baldur's gate, NWN...the list goes on. I slipped in the “real fan” barb because, in all honesty, I'm a little offended that a company that has never slipped from its founding principles "sold out" by streamlining something as brilliant as Mass Effect. To be clear, I’d probably consider myself a fan of Mass Effect 2 (I did just spend the last 33 hours of my life playing through every bit of content that it has.) I’m just a little upset with the new direction BioWare is taking, and I wanted to let them know that the old fans (which are no more real than the new fans) will probably agree with me."

In all fairness, that isn't much of an apology.  While you certainly apologized for for the insult, you then attempt to justify that "real" or "old school" fans would agree with your opinion.  In trying to justify the insult, you have merely repeated the it (effectively saying "sorry it insulted you, but real/old school fans would agree with me").  I find it likely that many who have brought this up did read your apology, but found it just as insulting due to your continued assertion that "old school" and/or "real" fans will share your opinion.  While I feel you were likely sincere in your apology, I honestly have never taken that "apology" to be a legitimate acceptance that your usage was inappropriate and wrong (which is what those real/old school fans who disagree expect in an actual sincere apology).

I have bolded the portion that I feel causes the issue.

I'm not sure I understand. People who were taking issue with the "real fan" comment were (rightfully) pointing out that their opinion is just as real as mine. By switching to "old school" I was clarifying the perspective I'm coming from, acknowledging that it isn't the only perspective, but suggesting that many old school gamers will agree with me.

From the posts I've read on this thread, it seems like the old school is niether with me nor against me. But it seems true that none of them believe ME2 is perfect.

Your clarification is insulting for the same reason your initial remark had been.  Those old school fans who do not share your perspective take offense at the implication they are not old school fans since they disagree.  The bolded comment states you feel old school fans will take issue with what you see as the dumbing-down of the RPG elements.  You made the exact same generalizing offense by trying to realign your comment, rather than simply admitting the error.  As many of those who the comment offended are old school fans of both bioware and rpgs, the generalization being altered to a category still including them did not remove the insult it caused.

If you wish to claim you apologized to the person who wrote the "manifesto", it would require an apology for using both the terms "real" and "old school", not simply saying you apologized by explaining what you meant the term to mean (as they clearly fit the redefined meaning of the term as well).

I agree that the old school group is not with or against you universally, but you have made claim they are all with you in your opinion (the bolded portion of your apology says exactly this).

Nothing is perfect.  Accepting that something isn't perfect does not mean they share your perspective on what is lacking or flawed, and the degree to which they are lacking or flawed.  Your apology expresses that old school fans will agree with your opinion on what is wrong (and the degree to which it is wrong) with ME2.

An actual sincere apology would accept that making any generalization was an error, not merely attempt to alter the generalization being made.

[LN19]

ShadowAldrius wrote...

kardox12 wrote...

I was talking about the main story arc. There are more missions in general. But if you put them aside the main story quests have very little development.

The main story arch is putting together your squad.

The first game was about gathering information on Saren to find out how to beat him and where he was headed.

The second is about gathering weapons and allies to battle the Collectors and rescue humanity.

If you really think about it, Feros, Artemis Tao and Noveria have like nothing to do with the main plotline... other than their endings where you get the information you need.

Feros, Artemia Tao, and Noveria had a lot to do with the main plotline. You knew Saren had betrayed the Council but you had no where to go with it, so you had to retrace his steps, look up his allies, or else you could not progress at all with the plot because there would be no information to further it.
The Thorian gave you the Cypher, Benezia gave coordinates to the Mu Relay, and Liara gave you the ability to piece it all together,

But ME2, you are not required to do all the missions to further the plot, the loyalty missions do not have anything to do w/ the main plot.

[Azazel005]

You know I don't really think it's call to keep slamming the original poster based on phrasing that you didn't appreciate. Amongst the scores of people complaining on there soapbox about his game Rilke is more then willing to discuss there reasoning and has been nothing but polite and good humoured about it all.



Give it a rest, they have apologised if the apology was not what you thought it should be... toughen up. It's pretty clear that ill will wasn't intended.



I think there needs to be a distinction with complaining about the design of the final boss and the concept of the final boss. I didn't think the design was great but the concept is unnverving and impactful, essentially absorbing scores of "souls" by grinding down there organic matter so as to create an omniscient human/machine hybrid that can take it's place among a force of genocidal ships...



creepy.

[Azazel005]

ZennExile wrote...

SurfaceBeneath 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. 

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.

It doesn't make sense because you don't understand.  Instead of trying to guess and use your imagination to repair your misunderstanding you could ask but you don't.  This implies to me that you are trolling for the sole purpose of being disruptive and have no intention of continuing any kind of rational conversation.  Cool Story though and have fun trolling.

Gotta call shenanigans on this. I don't think I am a moron but I don't get what you are implying.

Is it that the Renegade/Paragon options themselves are too polar?

I don't see what you are getting at and rather then disagree without a proper frame of reference and get a "Your out of your element Donny!" response, what exactly do you mean? What decisions are you comparing from ME1 to ME2?

[Tokalla]

Azazel005 wrote...

You know I don't really think it's call to keep slamming the original poster based on phrasing that you didn't appreciate. Amongst the scores of people complaining on there soapbox about his game Rilke is more then willing to discuss there reasoning and has been nothing but polite and good humoured about it all.

Give it a rest, they have apologised if the apology was not what you thought it should be... toughen up. It's pretty clear that ill will wasn't intended.

If this is in reference to my pointing out why I believe some posters who appear to have read beyond the initial post are still attacking the phrasing, then you have utterly missed the point of my posts.  I have not attacked or been offended by Rilke.  Had this been an issue for me, I would have expressed it over two weeks ago when the apology was first made.  I merely pointed this out now, as I feel that some of the recent posts mentioning the issue were aware of the attempted apology before posting.  As Rilke has now directly explained the apology was an attempt to clarify the meaning of the term "real" being used (that it was meant to refer to lont time fans, and not as a measure of devotion), I see little reason to tell people who are actually "old school" fans they should not be offended at the assumptions the remark places upon them.

Actually, an apology was issued to fans that did not fit the specific meaning of the clarified term only.  As the apology itself includes a restatement of the insult with a narrower group being specified.  If I claimed that all "real" shooter fans love this game because it is nearly perfect, then apologized because I meant it as all "old school" shooter fans, have I actually apologized to any "old school" shooter fans that might have taken offense to my assertion?  No, I apologized to all shooter fans not subject to the "old school" label only.

I feel those who disagree or are offended by inclusion in the assumption being made are perfectly warranted in expressing their dissenting perspective here, just as I feel the OP should be able to express thier discontent with the game.  Trying to claim those who disagree with something that Rilke has stated they should agree with should "toughen up" is little different than claiming Rilke should just toughen up and stop expressing the discontent they felt for the game.  If one side has the right to speak their view, then the other should not be forced into silent acceptance.

I think there needs to be a distinction with complaining about the
design of the final boss and the concept of the final boss. I didn't
think the design was great but the concept is unnverving and impactful,
essentially absorbing scores of "souls" by grinding down there organic
matter so as to create an omniscient human/machine hybrid that can take
it's place among a force of genocidal ships...



creepy.

I agree that the concept is more disturbing than the visual presented, but I am not so willing to state that the visual was as terrible as many have expressed.  Until I learn more about what exactly it was (beyond the rather vague concept of the human reaper), what exactly the reapers are, and how reapers develop I am unwilling to outright assume the design was poor. 

Having seen some of the concept art, I feel there had to have been a good reason for the choice we see in the game.  If that choice was made simply because they wanted to make absolutely certain no one missed what it was, then I will be rather disappointed with the end result.  However, if the reason is more design/lore based, then I may actually be rather impressed by their willingness to choose a fitting representation despite the possible bad reaction some would feel (as I find it unlikely that no one brought up tht possibility during the creation of the in game reaper larva).

[Azazel005]

Tokalla wrote...

Azazel005 wrote...

You know I don't really think it's call to keep slamming the original poster based on phrasing that you didn't appreciate. Amongst the scores of people complaining on there soapbox about his game Rilke is more then willing to discuss there reasoning and has been nothing but polite and good humoured about it all.

Give it a rest, they have apologised if the apology was not what you thought it should be... toughen up. It's pretty clear that ill will wasn't intended.

If this is in reference to my pointing out why I believe some posters who appear to have read beyond the initial post are still attacking the phrasing, then you have utterly missed the point of my posts.  I have not attacked or been offended by Rilke.  Had this been an issue for me, I would have expressed it over two weeks ago when the apology was first made.  I merely pointed this out now, as I feel that some of the recent posts mentioning the issue were aware of the attempted apology before posting.  As Rilke has now directly explained the apology was an attempt to clarify the meaning of the term "real" being used (that it was meant to refer to lont time fans, and not as a measure of devotion), I see little reason to tell people who are actually "old school" fans they should not be offended at the assumptions the remark places upon them.

Actually, an apology was issued to fans that did not fit the specific meaning of the clarified term only.  As the apology itself includes a restatement of the insult with a narrower group being specified.  If I claimed that all "real" shooter fans love this game because it is nearly perfect, then apologized because I meant it as all "old school" shooter fans, have I actually apologized to any "old school" shooter fans that might have taken offense to my assertion?  No, I apologized to all shooter fans not subject to the "old school" label only.

I feel those who disagree or are offended by inclusion in the assumption being made are perfectly warranted in expressing their dissenting perspective here, just as I feel the OP should be able to express thier discontent with the game.  Trying to claim those who disagree with something that Rilke has stated they should agree with should "toughen up" is little different than claiming Rilke should just toughen up and stop expressing the discontent they felt for the game.  If one side has the right to speak their view, then the other should not be forced into silent acceptance.

We are in fact still on a forum designed to discuss this video game correct? Did I switch to a social etiquette forum somewhere down the line?

I am merely pointing out generally speaking not targetting anyone in particular that it felt like every page had one or two posts directed at this, after an apology and it just kept rearing it's head. I understand the semantics of the particular discussion. There was no offence meant, I think that's abundantly clear, it isn't a forum a that the nature of social etiquette and clarity of apologies need to be discussed, I don't think it's fair to expect a "Fish called Wanda" apology out of Rilke. No offense meant there should be no need to cross and dot every line to insure that no offense can possibly be taken. Anyway now I'M de-railing the damn thread and I'd be just annoyed at myself for the carry on.

Back to the reaper baby, I agree if it's design is to simply impart an overt visual connection, it will feel a little weak. As long as the concept holds strong I will be willing to accept it though.

[Kolaris8472]

Agreed on all points with the OP, yet I still found myself enjoying ME2. A lot.



...but as a different game. It tries to stand apart from the trilogy, I'd have to imagine, and it succeeds. Its a high point as a game for me, but it will likely go down as a very weak point in the trilogy.

[ILALQ]

Honestly, the only three things I miss are the numbers(stats, wep damage, ect), the lack of different armor for my squad, and the elevator conversations. YES! I miss the elevators.



Other than that, I have no problems with the game. I enjoy the "tedious" scanning of the planets. I enjoy not having boatloads of money. I enjoy the main story (although, I do consider the main story to be the recruitment of the squad, with the collector threat tied into the gathering. For me, ME1 was all about introducing the Reaper threat and establishing the universe, ME2 was about gathering the squad that you will carry over (hopefully, mostly, even if all survived) into ME3, and ME3 will be the culmination of all the choices of the previous games tied together. Like the Rachni, impact borders on none in ME2, but I have a feeling it'll be a huge choice in ME3.)



Here's hoping that they step up the squad interaction A LOT in the next installment. Was the biggest bummer of what few complaints I had.

[Tokalla]

Azazel005 wrote...

We are in fact still on a forum designed to discuss this video game correct? Did I switch to a social etiquette forum somewhere down the line?

Snarky hyperbole does not tend to resolve side commentaries that are derailing a topic, as the other party will generally feel the need to respond.

Modifié par Tokalla, 18 février 2010 - 04:36 .