242 réponses à ce sujet

[davidt0504]

So apparently some people don't get the concept that the part of recruiting your team is just as integral to the plot and overall story as the missions with colletors.  Not just the recruiting but even the loyalty missions are integral to the story.  I present evidence of this in that if you just breeze through as little squad stuff as possible to tackle the collectors, you die and that game can't be used in me3.  This game is not all about shepard fighting the collectors.  Just like mass effect 1 was not all about shepard hunting saren.

[Schneidend]

People are just upset because they don't understand anything but plot-driven stories. They claim ME2 was "dumbed down" for the masses and yet can't comprehend characters being the driving force in a story. ME2 is in fact too complicated for them, ironically, because they've evidently never taken any literature courses.

[davidt0504]

haha ironically me2 sometimes reminds me of canterbury tales, obviously not alot but since you bring up literature courses thats what came to mind haha

[sergio71785]

I get it.

[rpgchuck]

I said this in another thread, I think if Shepard dies they should have a fat GAME OVER graphic appear. That would make these guys' heads explode.



"I can really DIE?!?!? I should just be able to make Kelly the main character of the next game!"

[Naltair]

The story made sense to me.

[TeaCokeProphet]

I think they should strike more of a balance in the next one. Mass Effect has given us some truly extraordinary characters, and I'd love to see them develop. But as the last act of an epic space opera, ME3 should give a satisfactory conclusion to the whole "story" side of the coin.



I don't think it's that people don't get it, it's just that they both like the story-driven Mass Effect more, and that they thought this game would be the second coming of Christ, not the remaking of.

[TeaCokeProphet]

Pardon my double post. Embarassing.

Modifié par TeaCokeProphet, 14 février 2010 - 02:19 .

[davidt0504]

i'm just posting this to all the people who are complaining about only having 3 missions before the suicide mission not involving the squad. Its their opinion but i find it a little annoying how much they are complaining haha.

[Fluwm]

As yet, Bioware has repeatedly failed to deliver a solid overarching plot. For nearly every outing, we've been defeating randomly evil demon things. Because of this, Bioware games necessarily rely more on the characters and character interactions. Sometimes, there's not a lot of depth to this, and the game suffers--this was a flaw in ME1, and DAO was astonishingly bad in this respect. ME2 isn't about the big picture plot--which is a GOOD thing, because the big picture plot sucks (thus far: it's possible it'll turn into something genuinely interesting in ME3, but I'll not hold my breath).



It's the details--and in this case, the characters--that matter most. The level of polish and care taken with each of the characters in ME2 is... unparalleled. ME2 is not about killing bad guys. It's not about saving the galaxy. It's a game about people--how you deal with people, and how people deal with you. The dialog wheel and interupt system are the heart of the game, and make it so incredible.



Eh... think I got sidetracked a bit there. Whoops.

[Serogon]

Well, I think saying that is a bit unfair. Yes, there are people who actually don't get it, but there are people who just don't like it. I don't agree with them, but it's still a bit unfair to just say they don't get it.

[Myrmedus]

davidt0504 wrote...

So apparently some people don't get the concept that the part of recruiting your team is just as integral to the plot and overall story as the missions with colletors.  Not just the recruiting but even the loyalty missions are integral to the story.  I present evidence of this in that if you just breeze through as little squad stuff as possible to tackle the collectors, you die and that game can't be used in me3.  This game is not all about shepard fighting the collectors.  Just like mass effect 1 was not all about shepard hunting saren.

A gimmick to produce consequences in the main plot if you don't exhaust side-content doesn't remove the fact that it IS side-content. Each loyalty mission has no direct relevant to the plot in of itself, therefore that constitutes a "side mission".

You CAN complete this game without doing a single loyalty mission, and you can even keep Shepard alive through doing so. If you can complete the game without doing something then it is side content.

You could argue that if you don't beat all the Weapons in FFVII you're not doing content integral to the main story because you might have a couple of characters die against Sephiroth in the end - sure, it's not permanent, but it still doesn't remove the fact that just because a side-mission causes consequences in the main story arc it doesn't make it core or integral content.

Modifié par Myrmedus, 14 février 2010 - 02:29 .

[SharpEdgeSoda]

If someone likes something, they like something, and are satified. All they need to say is "I like it"



If someone dislikes something, they are disatified, and can only fill the void by complaining in the most public form availible to them.



Thus, the Forum was born, mostly to satified the needs of those harboring hate towards a product.



PS. ME2 is beautifully written, anyone who says otherwise needs to go back to thier poorly written fan fiction.

[Frotality]

i can understand it perfectly; it just sucks compared to the wide-scale plot of ME1; and ironically the first was the one called 'space opera'...

it is inconsistent with the plot set up, so it makings no sense is the problem. we expected and wanted to continue the story of the reapers, and we liked the character stories...but as the focus of the plot, in the sequel no less...does not compute.

[Myrmedus]

Of course, what there is of ME2 is immense, I just feel there isn't enough of it (core story at least).



In many ways BW can view that as a compliment.

[Myrmedus]

Frotality wrote...

i can understand it perfectly; it just sucks compared to the wide-scale plot of ME1; and ironically the first was the one called 'space opera'...

it is inconsistent with the plot set up, so it makings no sense is the problem. we expected and wanted to continue the story of the reapers, and we liked the character stories...but as the focus of the plot, in the sequel no less...does not compute.

Exactly.

People went in to ME2 off the back of ME1's plot, especially since it was almost a cliffhanger. We wanted the core plot, the story of the Reapers and our war with them. BW tickled our fancy which meant ME2 needed alot more core content IMHO.

[ShadowWolf_Kell]

Schneidend wrote...

People are just upset because they don't understand anything but plot-driven stories. They claim ME2 was "dumbed down" for the masses and yet can't comprehend characters being the driving force in a story. ME2 is in fact too complicated for them, ironically, because they've evidently never taken any literature courses.

Not necessarily lack of literature courses, though that'd definitely tie into it.  TV now days offers little room for any critical thinking whatsoever.  It's all designed to spoon feed you whatever a particular network wants to spoon feed you.

It's so bad, people watch shows like House, ER and so on and then ARGUE with their doctors about their diagnosis just because they saw it on TV.  I'd quote the statistics that I'd read on how badly they were off on their "self diagnosis", but I honestly don't recall what the number was other than a high percentile.

When I was taking my various psychology classes awhile back, I actually ran across quite a few psych journals through ebscohost and other sources that delved into that, as well as the consumerism issues and other things.  Quite a bit of interesting info, but at the same time rather depressing.

The reason I was even looking at the information was for a research paper I was working on for cause and effect of apathy, technology and society in general and how our core values have been dwindling away and taken for granted.

That said, it's not that people are dumb now days.  Quite the contrary in many ways.  It's that they lack the incentive to think for themselves.  Why think for yourself when the internet will give you the "answer"?  Escapism is so much more interesting to them rather than using critical thinking to determine what's BS and what's not.

[davidt0504]

Myrmedus wrote...

davidt0504 wrote...

So apparently some people don't get the concept that the part of recruiting your team is just as integral to the plot and overall story as the missions with colletors.  Not just the recruiting but even the loyalty missions are integral to the story.  I present evidence of this in that if you just breeze through as little squad stuff as possible to tackle the collectors, you die and that game can't be used in me3.  This game is not all about shepard fighting the collectors.  Just like mass effect 1 was not all about shepard hunting saren.

A gimmick to produce consequences in the main plot if you don't exhaust side-content doesn't remove the fact that it IS side-content. Each loyalty mission has no direct relevant to the plot in of itself, therefore that constitutes a "side mission".

You CAN complete this game without doing a single loyalty mission, and you can even keep Shepard alive through doing so. If you can complete the game without doing something then it is side content.

You could argue that if you don't beat all the Weapons in FFVII you're not doing content integral to the main story because you might have a couple of characters die against Sephiroth in the end - sure, it's not permanent, but it still doesn't remove the fact that just because a side-mission causes consequences in the main story arc it doesn't make it core or integral content.

what about the thorian, the rachni, etc in me1? These things had nothing to do with Saren, the geth or the reapers.  The thorian can sort of count because of the cypher but overall was just added to give more stuff to do on that mission, and make it more interesting than just chasing a rogue turian around.  These games are largely about experiencing the galaxy they've created.  The story elements presented in squad quests and loyalty quests are just as integral and will most likely be extremely relavent to me3, and probably much more relavent than the results of those interactions in me1, which by your definition are more a part of the main story than the geth heretics, or the quarian flotilla, or the genophage cure, etc.

and by the way, I don't mean this for those who just honestly didn't like the story in mass effect 2, everyone has their own opinion and tastes, but it seems like a lot of people didn't get the fact that so much of mass effect 2 revolved around your crew, and squad.  The characters were the focus of this game, even more so than the collectors.

[Oawa]

Myrmedus wrote...

You CAN complete this game without doing a single loyalty mission, and you can even keep Shepard alive through doing so. If you can complete the game without doing something then it is side content.

You're absolutely right about the fact that you can complete this game without doing any of the loyalty missions.  My concern is, you're only looking at this game as a "single" game, and not part of the overral story which is as much about Shepard him/herself as it is about the Reapers.

Shep dying after the final mission is in fact finishing the game, but that is also the end of Shepard and his/her story.

[DeathScepter]

well I like how Mass effect 1 went into Mass Effect 2. I am sure that Mass effect 3 will be just as good as the other two Mass effect games.

[davidt0504]

and shadow wolf couldn't agree more with you

[Oawa]

Frotality wrote...

it is inconsistent with the plot set up, so it makings no sense is the problem. we expected and wanted to continue the story of the reapers, and we liked the character stories...but as the focus of the plot, in the sequel no less...does not compute.

I think  this is where a lot of confusion comes from.  The Mass Effect trilogy isn't just about the Reapers.  It's about Commander Shepard, moreso than anything else.

[tertium organum]

Schneidend wrote...

People are just upset because they don't understand anything but plot-driven stories. They claim ME2 was "dumbed down" for the masses and yet can't comprehend characters being the driving force in a story. ME2 is in fact too complicated for them, ironically, because they've evidently never taken any literature courses.

You're one of the most arrogant yet ignorant users on this site. The real irony here is how completely oblivlious you are to this fact. None of what you're saying makes much sense - your distinction is trite and uninformative. The lack of a quality main narraive in ME2 is not something to be explained away by claiming it is "character-driven." It is not a fact of literature that character driven tales necesarily lack good story-telling. Please, ask for your money back from whatever "courses" you took.

[TheShady]

Character driven is something else than what ME2 did....



First problem is the vast amount of characters. It's hard to really get into the characters with 3 or less conversations each. (The TV series Lost had/has a similar problem, which is why they continually kill people off and stopped paying attention to some fan favourites some time into the series. Lost, though, that was a prime example of character-driven at least in the first 2 (or 3) seasons. In comparison, Six Feet Under had ... say... 5 main characters, depends how you count.)



Second problem is the extreme lack of character interaction and connection (it's just Shepard keeping it all together, like Seinfeld being the link between George and Elaine (at least in that one episode...)).



Third problem is the complete lack of connection between the individual character stories. You hop from one recruiting quest to the other, then get kicked into a loyalty quest at the advice of Kelly. It's like in a sitcom. Lots of different sub-stories that often have little to do with each other.



So what keeps the whole thing, all the plot, all the dialogue, all the individual quests together? The suicide mission, so the suicide mission is the story. The suicide mission amounts for like 10% of the entire game.



Says so on the box too:

"Entire human colonies on many worlds are vanishing." That should be element number one of the story. We get to visit 2 such colonies and don't get much from that.

"As Commander Shepard, you must assemble the galaxy's deadliest team to save mankind against impossible odds." Element number two of the story. We got that covered. Though... Shepard really just picks up what TIM tells him to, so he's more the Luigi of the story.

"They call it a suicide mission. PROVE THEM WRONG." Element number 3. The proving wrong part took me less than an hour. And they put it in capitals too.



The trouble is: the weight of the elements is poorly balanced. I felt a strong lack of immersion.

[Frotality]

Oawa wrote...

Frotality wrote...

it is inconsistent with the plot set up, so it making no sense is the problem. we expected and wanted to continue the story of the reapers, and we liked the character stories...but as the focus of the plot, in the sequel no less...does not compute.

I think  this is where a lot of confusion comes from.  The Mass Effect trilogy isn't just about the Reapers.  It's about Commander Shepard, moreso than anything else.

but the main narrative is about the reapers, not thane/ tali/ miranda/ etc. of course the story can encompass many more things, it is a universe of content after all, but the lack of foucs on the main drive of the story is what im getting at. without the main focus of the first game, ME2 is little beyond a spin-off storywise.