140 réponses à ce sujet

[WilliamShatner]

The problem with excusing the lack of plot in favour of being character driven is that 1) your character, the main character doesn't really develop in the game at all and 2) neither do the squadmates.



Yes we are given lots of backstory but backstory is not development. We find out why they tick, but few of them actually change. Samara, the one new character I really like, doesn't even really change. We learn about her history and the nature of justicars but when you go down the romance path with her she even says that once the mission is over she will no longer follow Shepard and will follow the code again. So she's basically back to square one. Subject Zero no matter how nice I am to her still talks to me and the crew like dirt.



Tali is the only one given real development and that's because of what we know of her from ME1.



In the original game the character do change. For example, Ashley goes from being extremely untrustful of aliens on the Normandy to be proud to work alongside them and Kirrahe's men on Virmire. Garrus you can change a loose cannon to someone with ideals and willing to give C-Sec/Spectre application another chance - a path that is totally ignored in ME2.

[Protocept00]

Schneidend wrote...

Protocept00 wrote...

Yeah, I see that now, and after that was truly Biowares decision on an artistic merit and not because they wanted to "sell-out", then I'm fine with it. I still wished I could've gotten more answeres out of the story.

If the intention was to "sell-out" then they would have gone with the far easier to formulize plot-driven method. Character-driven stories are the greater gamble, as writing compelling characters isn't as easy as making cool stuff happen. Not that great plots are the poor man's storytelling, by any means, but look at how many movies and stories are about big, dramatic events happening rather than a bunch of people hanging out.

What I ment, is that by taking on the character-driven style they undertook for mass effect 2, they could easily disguise it. THe shooter crowd isn't likely to give a crap about the story, and probably won't pursue the characters as much, so when you play it as is, without pursuing the characters, it's a shooter game, with a story just as simplistic as Gears of War, which is what the crowd likes. The RPG and story-driven fans would be likely to absorb as much dialogue as they can, they have to go out of their way this time, since there isn't a story to really crave if you don't pursue the characters.

[Nautica773]

WilliamShatner wrote...

The problem with excusing the lack of plot in favour of being character driven is that 1) your character, the main character doesn't really develop in the game at all and 2) neither do the squadmates.

Can you imagine how long the game would have been though? That's part of the problem with ME2 is the inclusion of so many new characters. Most of the game is spent just explaining who they are, they certainly didn't have time for them to develop in any fashion. 

It was an interesting idea but a bit too ambitious. 

[WilliamShatner]

verskk wrote...

Protocept00 wrote...

DarthCaine wrote...

And how many were there in ME1?

Eden Prime=Freedom's Hope
Therum=Any recruitment mission
Feros=Horizon
Noveria=_____'s ship
Virmire=IFF
Ilos=Suicide Mission

Yes, plus dozens of cutscenes devoted to the plot. See my point? Mass Effect 2 has 4 missions, and only about... 6 cutscenes devoted to plot, most of which only follow the missions. There's a big disparity there.

Every one of those missions has cutscenes devoted to the "main" plot. I think you're missing the point of DarthCaine's post. ME2 has exactly the same amount of "main" missions, like DarthCaine just showed you. 6. It's just that whereas in ME1, the side missions were forgettable and in ME2, they're so much better that it seems the "main" plot is smaller or less important.

Long story short, the amount of "main missions" is the same in both games. 6.

I certainly didn't forget the sidequest involving Cerberus in ME1 which was far better woven into the overall story of ME1 than any sidequest in ME2.

Even the keepers sidequest, which started out as a fetch quest was paid off in a fantastic story related way in ME1.

[The Capital Gaultier]

WilliamShatner wrote...

The problem with excusing the lack of plot in favour of being character driven is that 1) your character, the main character doesn't really develop in the game at all and 2) neither do the squadmates.

Both wrong.

[mp84]

MajorTharmas wrote...

 i mean they probably wont introduce any new characters. that would be a little silly, we have enough already.

While I do agree the story of ME 3 will be more focused on the main plot, because as we know, it's the conclusion to the trilogy saga of Shepard, however, to think that there won't be any new characters in ME3, in my opinion, could be a wrong assumption. While you won't see the size of ME 2, I still think you'll see some new characters in ME 3. (perhaps 2 tops)

[WilliamShatner]

Nautica773 wrote...

WilliamShatner wrote...

The problem with excusing the lack of plot in favour of being character driven is that 1) your character, the main character doesn't really develop in the game at all and 2) neither do the squadmates.

Can you imagine how long the game would have been though? That's part of the problem with ME2 is the inclusion of so many new characters. Most of the game is spent just explaining who they are, they certainly didn't have time for them to develop in any fashion. 

It was an interesting idea but a bit too ambitious. 

Agreed which is why I think BioWare totally dropped the ball into a volcano with ME2.

Having the original crew and developing them + two or three new ones would have been so, so, so much more fulfilling.

[Protocept00]

WilliamShatner wrote...

The problem with excusing the lack of plot in favour of being character driven is that 1) your character, the main character doesn't really develop in the game at all and 2) neither do the squadmates.

Yes we are given lots of backstory but backstory is not development. We find out why they tick, but few of them actually change. Samara, the one new character I really like, doesn't even really change. We learn about her history and the nature of justicars but when you go down the romance path with her she even says that once the mission is over she will no longer follow Shepard and will follow the code again. So she's basically back to square one. Subject Zero no matter how nice I am to her still talks to me and the crew like dirt.

Tali is the only one given real development and that's because of what we know of her from ME1.

In the original game the character do change. For example, Ashley goes from being extremely untrustful of aliens on the Normandy to be proud to work alongside them and Kirrahe's men on Virmire. Garrus you can change a loose cannon to someone with ideals and willing to give C-Sec/Spectre application another chance - a path that is totally ignored in ME2.

Talis romance was amazing, very heart-felt. I'm one of many who hope Tali returns in Mass Effect 3. It was very well-done, and since I role-play my Shepherd, she was absolutely perfect for my Hacker/Techy/Paragon Shepherd that I was roleplaying. What was really amazing about Tali, is that although I thought she was an amazing character in Mass Effect 1, I actually had my sights on Jack (at first, before acquiring Tali).... but the moment I had hugged Tali on her loyalty mission, I was like damn. I felt that. That playthrough is gonna be true to Tali, I just hope Mass Effect 3 will expand on the romance, because having a character that has been with you since day one, by your side, who you fell in love with out of nowhere, totally by surprised, would just be amazing in Video gaming. Kudos to Bioware on that one.

[mp84]

WilliamShatner wrote...

Nautica773 wrote...

WilliamShatner wrote...

The problem with excusing the lack of plot in favour of being character driven is that 1) your character, the main character doesn't really develop in the game at all and 2) neither do the squadmates.

Can you imagine how long the game would have been though? That's part of the problem with ME2 is the inclusion of so many new characters. Most of the game is spent just explaining who they are, they certainly didn't have time for them to develop in any fashion. 

It was an interesting idea but a bit too ambitious. 

Agreed which is why I think BioWare totally dropped the ball into a volcano with ME2.

Having the original crew and developing them + two or three new ones would have been so, so, so much more fulfilling.

If I'm not mistaken the original crew, at least the top guys were the same people.

At least that's what I saw when I compared the credits of ME 1 to ME 2, after I beat ME 1 again last week.

[Nautica773]

WilliamShatner wrote...
Agreed which is why I think BioWare totally dropped the ball into a volcano with ME2.

Having the original crew and developing them + two or three new ones would have been so, so, so much more fulfilling.

Indeed. I feel that trying to make a story based around the Reaper threat without actually involving the Reapers was too awkward. The Collector's should have been a new threat on their own and the story could have revolved around Shepard and the gang's development over this new threat.

But, alas, complaining won't do much good. 

mp84 wrote...
If I'm not mistaken the original crew, at least the top guys were the same people. 

At least that's what I saw when I compared the credits of ME 1 to ME 2, after I beat ME 1 again last week.

I think he means the same followers as the ones from Mass Effect 1.

Modifié par Nautica773, 09 février 2010 - 12:49 .

[verskk]

Nautica773 wrote...

verskk wrote...
Every one of those missions has cutscenes devoted to the "main" plot. I think you're missing the point of DarthCaine's post. ME2 has exactly the same amount of "main" missions, like DarthCaine just showed you. 6. It's just that whereas in ME1, the side missions were forgettable and in ME2, they're so much better that it seems the "main" plot is smaller or less important.

Long story short, the amount of "main missions" is the same in both games. 6.

Well, except Thyrum is associated with any recruitment mission and all the Mass Effect 2 missions have significantly less plot during these key story segments. 

Therum WAS a recruitment mission. It was the mission to recruit Liara, no different from the style of any recruitment mission from ME2, except in ME2 there are 8-9 of them. Each coupled with the 10-11 loyalty missions.


As for the 'amount of plot,' i thought there was plenty enough to drive the story, but if you want to nit-pick, i would prefer to have all missions (including side-missions) fleshed-out with storylines than just have 6 that have a fair amount and everything else just copy-paste warehouses.

[Schneidend]

WilliamShatner wrote...

The problem with excusing the lack of plot in favour of being character driven is that 1) your character, the main character doesn't really develop in the game at all and 2) neither do the squadmates.

I'm inclined to disagree. My main Shepard was able to let go of his distrust and hatred of AIs, for instance. The game provided him with Legion and EDI, and I simply couldn't justify him being prejudiced against synthetics any more. Still hates batarians with a passion, though. Damn slaving terrorists...

As for the characters, well, Tali develops, as you said. Garrus develops, either into a remorseful Paragade or an even more badass Renegade. Grunt obviously develops, although admittedly it is a small transition from a violent, uncertain blank slate into a far more self-assured, purposeful wrecking ball. Jack discovers she isn't the badass she thought she was, and noticeably softens. And...I realize only now that this is the NO SPOILERS forum, so I'm gonna stop...

[hanifj]

please don't compare ME2 to 7 Sumarai - even the "threat" they faced in that movie was far more elaborated upon than the weak sequences of dialogue with the ________, etc. The suicide mission was a paltry joke to what happens in 7 Samurai

people simply need to stop defending ME2's ****** poor main plot - it is clear they sacrificed it to get the game out - the reveals were weak - maybe they did it to make money off an expansion?

the writing was just really, really bad for the most part... so many incredibly awkward and goofy lines... for all the talk about "the reapers are the real threat" early in the game, they sure spent as little time as possible helping people understand what the Reapers are doing and why they are doing it... who knows what kinda brain fart occurred at Bioware...

When Casey "The Spoiler" Hudson blew the plot of ME2 in the interview by saying "The Collector's are working with the ______" - I wanted to punch him for that minor spoiler. Now I am even more pissed off because that was pretty much the entire plot of the game.

anyways, does all this make ME2 a bad game? NO, it has its own strengths and weaknesses.

does it disappoint a group of people that loved ME1 for it's mind blowing plot and reveals before even the gameplay? Yes.

I felt the game was more like Gears of War 2, rather than Mass Effect 1.

I'll be playing ME1 again for the 13th time, ME2 will be played only once more (Paragon play-through) before I never touch it again, unless Bioware wakes up and makes a stand-alone add-on or something that significantly adds to the main plot

Cheers

Modifié par hanifj, 09 février 2010 - 12:52 .

[Nautica773]

verskk wrote...
Therum WAS a recruitment mission. It was the mission to recruit Liara, no different from the style of any recruitment mission from ME2, except in ME2 there are 8-9 of them. Each coupled with the 10-11 loyalty missions.

True, but Liara was a bit more connected to the main story than... say Samara. Not only was she studying Prothean ruins (connecting to the Prothean beacon subplot) but she was also related to a prominent NPC in the storyline. 

[Soruyao]

Protocept00 wrote...

What I ment, is that by taking on the character-driven style they undertook for mass effect 2, they could easily disguise it. THe shooter crowd isn't likely to give a crap about the story, and probably won't pursue the characters as much, so when you play it as is, without pursuing the characters, it's a shooter game, with a story just as simplistic as Gears of War, which is what the crowd likes. The RPG and story-driven fans would be likely to absorb as much dialogue as they can, they have to go out of their way this time, since there isn't a story to really crave if you don't pursue the characters.

If they were trying to appeal to shooter fans, it would be far easier to have a plot driven game and make you get every crew member in the first couple missions and then have the rest of the game be fighting a massive war against the collectors and spend most of the time blowing things up.

There has never been a character driven TPS game.   (Though halo ODST was an attempt to make a shooter have this sort of story.)

Getting into a character driven mission is harder for a straight shooter fan, or at the very least it would be wasted on them.  For instance,  Jacob's loyalty mission:  They would go "Wait, why am I fighting these guys?   Who is this guy?   Why aren't I fighting the bug guys anymore?"   Wheras if you put them on the collector ship, they'll feel perfectly at home.   "Okay, I have to fight bug guys?   You want me to go that way and kill bug guys on the way?   Alright awesome!"

Anecdote: one of my best friends is exactly this stereotype, he loves gears of war and call of duty and halo and doesn't really like games that aren't like them.    He likes plot driven action WAY more than character driven action.   Funnily enough, he played all the way through ME1 and liked it, which totally suprised me because I thought he'd hate it for being so non-shooterish.

[WilliamShatner]

Schneidend wrote...

WilliamShatner wrote...

The problem with excusing the lack of plot in favour of being character driven is that 1) your character, the main character doesn't really develop in the game at all and 2) neither do the squadmates.

I'm inclined to disagree. My main Shepard was able to let go of his distrust and hatred of AIs, for instance. The game provided him with Legion and EDI, and I simply couldn't justify him being prejudiced against synthetics any more. Still hates batarians with a passion, though. Damn slaving terrorists...

As for the characters, well, Tali develops, as you said. Garrus develops, either into a remorseful Paragade or an even more badass Renegade. Grunt obviously develops, although admittedly it is a small transition from a violent, uncertain blank slate into a far more self-assured, purposeful wrecking ball. Jack discovers she isn't the badass she thought she was, and noticeably softens. And...I realize only now that this is the NO SPOILERS forum, so I'm gonna stop...

Grunt does develop but he develops into a substantially less interesting character.  He goes from a person looking for purpose in life to someone who just wants to kill stuff.

Modifié par WilliamShatner, 09 février 2010 - 12:55 .

[reepneep]

To the OP:
Well, lets see.  Pardon me, I don't remember all the planet names and I can't list them without spoilers.

Spoiler

Eden Prime, Citadel, Feros, Noveria, Rescuing Liara, Vermire, Ilos/Return to the Citadel.
Cerberus Station,  Freedom's Progress, Horizon, Collector Ship, Derelect Reaper, Galactic Core.

I count seven plot missions in the first, and six plot missions in the second.  ME2 also had twenty side missions that were of main-mission quality, compared to none in ME1.  I personally consider the squaddie missions every bit as much a part of the story as the 'plot' missions you're griping about, but I'm sure you won't care.

*Edit*Hmm... anyone know how to make the spoiler tags work?

Modifié par reepneep, 09 février 2010 - 12:57 .

[verskk]

Nautica773 wrote...

verskk wrote...
Therum WAS a recruitment mission. It was the mission to recruit Liara, no different from the style of any recruitment mission from ME2, except in ME2 there are 8-9 of them. Each coupled with the 10-11 loyalty missions.

True, but Liara was a bit more connected to the main story than... say Samara. Not only was she studying Prothean ruins (connecting to the Prothean beacon subplot) but she was also related to a prominent NPC in the storyline. 

Liara is no more connected to the main plot than, say, miranda. If they had just made a recruitment mission for miranda and then used that as an excuse to nix half of the ME2 characters and sub-plots, i would be upset.

[verskk]

reepneep wrote...

To the OP:
Well, lets see.  Pardon me, I don't remember all the planet names and I can't list them without spoilers.

Spoiler

Eden Prime, Citadel, Feros, Noveria, Rescuing Liara, Vermire, Ilos/Return to the Citadel.
Cerberus Station,  Freedom's Progress, Horizon, Collector Ship, Derelect Reaper, Galactic Core.

I count seven plot missions in the first, and six plot missions in the second.  ME2 also had twenty side missions that were of main-mission quality, compared to none in ME1.  I personally consider the squaddie missions every bit as much a part of the story as the 'plot' missions you're griping about, but I'm sure you won't care.

*Edit*Hmm... anyone know how to make the spoiler tags work?

I agree, i feel that the recruitment and loyalty missions were as important to the story as any "main" mission. Shepard very much needed skilled individuals in ME2, and needed to make sure they were focused on the mission before undertaking it. I welcome the fact that each character gave us an opportunity to hear a new story. Besides, if there had been 20 missions that had all been focused on the characters having some quarrel with the collectors, i would have learned nothing about them.

[Schneidend]

WilliamShatner wrote...

Grunt does develop but he develops into a substantially less interesting character.  He goes from a person looking for purpose in life to someone who just wants to kill stuff.

He has simple needs. I find it interesting that he has decided on a purpose and is content with something so seemingly basic. Too often a character searching for purpose is such a yawning chasm of overly ambitious melodrama. Grunt has the sense to realize life doesn't have some idyllic "greater meaning." Besides, a character who can realize they're racist and then go "huh, good to know," is anything but uninteresting in my book.

Modifié par Schneidend, 09 février 2010 - 01:03 .

[hanifj]

the other thing about ME1 sidequests was that you REMEMBERED them - whether it was the Indian guy who wanted his ___'s body or the ____ that asked you to kill her sister...



outside of the stupid loyalty missions, not a single sidequest means anything to me in ME2, it was endless Gears of War testosterone driven shooting... go hit a button at the end... hit the B button, back inside Normandy... woohoo!



the only side quest i remember in ME2 was one of the last ones where you have to select one of two options (and there is a freaking glitch that auto-selects the other) and it has a specific outcome... but it was pathetic and lame compared to most of the stuff in ME1 (like the biotic research facility sidequest in ME1)

[Nautica773]

verskk wrote...
Liara is no more connected to the main plot than, say, miranda. If they had just made a recruitment mission for miranda and then used that as an excuse to nix half of the ME2 characters and sub-plots, i would be upset.

Really? Because outside of performing CPR, Miranda doesn't have much of a reason to be following Shepard around the galactic core. I suppose she's human and has some sympathetic leanings for the human colonies....

[hanifj]

I agree, i feel that the recruitment and loyalty missions were as important to the story as any "main" mission. Shepard very much needed skilled individuals in ME2, and needed to make sure they were focused on the mission before undertaking it. I welcome the fact that each character gave us an opportunity to hear a new story. Besides, if there had been 20 missions that had all been focused on the characters having some quarrel with the collectors, i would have learned nothing about them.

wtf? what actual skills did you use besides basic biotic/tech hacking stuff? the funny thing about the whole suicide mission is HOW WEAKSAUCE IT WAS. you could have picked any number of people to do anything, it would have made no flipping difference at the end.

[hanifj]

the ME2 apologists make no sense to me



go play the game if you liked it so much, let us grumpy people who wanted an epic plot cry some more over a wasted 2 year wait

[Soruyao]

hanifj wrote...

please don't compare ME2 to 7 Sumarai - even the "threat" they faced in that movie was far more elaborated upon than the weak sequences of dialogue with the ________, etc. The suicide mission was a paltry joke to what happens in 7 Samurai

I'll compare what I feel like comparing, good sir.   Could the plot have been handlled better?  Sure.  Was it as emotionally engaging and well written as a Kurosawa film?    Maybe not, but I'd say they got close.  But they did a better job of tackling this type of story than any other game developer has.   People have been complaining about the shape of the story in this game, and my argument was that it's following a tried and true shape, and then cited a classic example of that same story shape working well.

people simply need to stop defending ME2's ****** poor main plot - it is clear they sacrificed it to get the game out - the reveals were weak - maybe they did it to make money off an expansion?

the writing was just really, really bad for the most part... so many incredibly awkward and goofy lines... for all the talk about "the reapers are the real threat" early in the game, they sure spent as little time as possible helping people understand what the Reapers are doing and why they are doing it... who knows what kinda brain fart occurred at Bioware...

Because they tried multiple times in the past and nobody bought it.   It was clear this was something they needed to take on on their own.   Any time they could be spending beating their heads against a wall to try and get people to realize the real threat would have been better spent preparing themselves to take on the threat themselves.

When Casey "The Spoiler" Hudson blew the plot of ME2 in the interview by saying "The Collector's are working with the ______" - I wanted to punch him for that minor spoiler. Now I am even more pissed off because that was pretty much the entire plot of the game.

Can you honestly say you were suprised when you learned that?   Were you expecting the second game to not involve the _____ at all?    I was much more suprised whean I learned in the collector ship that the collectors were ______.   Now that was interesting.

I felt the game was more like Gears of War 2, rather than Mass Effect 1.

Have you even played gears of war 2?  It was all one threat all the time and constantly going through and fighting the same dudes.   You had four guys who mattered at all and only one of them got any character development at all.   All of the plot points involved "Oh noes, the locust have X, we have to fights it!"    That fits ME1's story better, since it was all about fighting the geth and reapers, while ME2 has some seperate short story like plots that only tangentially related to the main threat.

Someone who likes the way the plot worked in gears 2 would have liked ME1 MORE than ME2, even though they would have liked the combat gameplay more.

I'll be playing ME1 again for the 13th time, ME2 will be played only once more (Paragon play-through) before I never touch it again, unless Bioware wakes up and makes a stand-alone add-on or something that significantly adds to the main plot

Cheers

On the other hand, I played through ME1 8 times, and I'll probably play ME2 at least 10 times.   (Halfway through playthrough two and I'm genuinely sad I'm running out of missions.)

It's impossible to please everyone, it's just a matter of what's going to please the most people.

-edit-

hanifj wrote...

the ME2 apologists make no sense to me

go
play the game if you liked it so much, let us grumpy people who wanted
an epic plot cry some more over a wasted 2 year wait

But what else am I supposed to do during biology class?   Pay attention?  THIS IS NOT AN OPTION!

Modifié par Soruyao, 09 février 2010 - 01:20 .