465 réponses à ce sujet

[ExtremeOne]

I wish the cry babies would shut up and accept the changes

[Sleepicub09]

ExtremeOne wrote...

I wish the cry babies would shut up and accept the changes

this

[eternalnightmare13]

BobbyTheI wrote...

Fan of BioWare since BG1.  Loved ME2.

I wish the "true fans" would stop making these threads speaking for the rest of us. 

THIS!

[FataliTensei]

ExtremeOne wrote...

I wish the cry babies would shut up and accept the changes

I wish you could accept that people have different opinions than you

[Alratan]

Daeion wrote...

Personally it feels to me like they got their stories mixed up.  What I mean is ME2 would have been a much better intro, to the trilogy...
Then you introduce the plot from ME where the council is betrayed by one of it's own but they either don't' believe it or believe it, either way it's once again up to you to save the galaxy...
That to me would have been a much better build up to ME3 then going from an epic game with an epic ending to an epic game with a so so ending and little to no build up.

I actually really like this idea. Obviously, it'd include switching around the background between the games, but it would work nicely. First game: building a squad, earning the trust of squadmates  and being the first to counter the Collectors as a council sanctioned-Spectre. Second game: die shortly after of the suicide mission in ME1, resurrected by Cerberus and go hunting after Saren etc., whilst picking up your old comrades. The council's mistrust of you regarding the Reapers would make even more sense this way, as you'd have only learnt about the Reapers shortly before dying/whilst allied with Cerberus.

Frontloading the characters like this makes it far nicer from a narrative point of view. Make the revised ME1 have the same characters as ME1 plus, say, Jacob (then an alliance soldier before joining Cerberus), Miranda (make her true allegiance not revealed in ME1), Mordin (assigned to help you deal with the threat as an ex-STG member) and Samara (encounter her in the same way as you do now, except on Noveria). Revised ME2 would then fiddle about with the squad complement so that it's the same as ME2 is now - the other characters would be in ME2 and not ME1 because their presence is much more fitting with the Terminus systems and is harder to adapt to a Spectre's squad.

Most characters would be front-loaded, with only a little bit more loyalty stuff to deal with in revised-ME2 - all characters from ME2 that were put into revised-ME1 would have their loyalty missions there, and the loyalty missions they then have in revised-ME2 could quite easily be ones related to your absence specifically (e.g. Shadow Broker, Blue Suns who tried to steal your corpse and so on) rather than their own personal/father-issues, so it feels connected to the main plot.

[ExtremeOne]

FataliTensei wrote...

ExtremeOne wrote...

I wish the cry babies would shut up and accept the changes

I wish you could accept that people have different opinions than you

  


If you act like cry babies you deserve to be called out as cry babies. 

[FataliTensei]

ExtremeOne wrote...

FataliTensei wrote...

ExtremeOne wrote...

I wish the cry babies would shut up and accept the changes

I wish you could accept that people have different opinions than you

  


If you act like cry babies you deserve to be called out as cry babies. 

All we did was state that we didn't like some of the changes to the game, that's not being crybaby, it's you not being able to come up with a good respnse, and resorting to name-calling

[321scooter]

I don't understand a lot of the complaints about the story being relevant to the "main plot" or any of the other garbage. If the reapers are involved, their goal is to destroy all life (the main plot), so how is that not important within the confines of the ME universe?

[Daeion]

Daeion wrote...

Oawa wrote...

It seems to me that the people most upset about ME 2's streamlined RPG elements are those that are big fans of the older D&D rulesets and variants. Correct me if I'm wrong.

(Directed at those unhappy with the changes)Is it strictly the ruleset that defines a game as an RPG? Or is it that plus a number of different factors that defines a game as an RPG?

Lets take BG 1 for example. Say I change the combat to be more real time. Remove some of the loot. Remove the attribute skill ups(str,agi) and just allow you to add points to skills directly. Nothing else gets changed. Would you still consider BG 1 an RPG after those changes?

You mean like the did with ME2? 

It's hard to define a RPG now days because they mean different things to different people and different genres are taking different things from the RPG genre.  To me a RPG is something where your character continues to grow from the begining of the game and you decide how to specialize them.  Now this may define a RPG for everyone, but each person is going to have different things that they consider to be a part of growth, development, and specialization.

To me the problem stems from the fact that I played ME because I was looking for a new RPG that offered something different then your typical BG, KOTOR, or DA:O, I was not looking for a shooter.  I like having stats, I like seeing my character grow both through the story and the gear they use; if I'm becoming more of a bad@ass, then my gear should reflect that as well.  I played ME multiple times including hardcore and insanity with a soldier because I enjoyed the class the most.  However I never used Immunity spam like apparently everyone else did and I never used double frictionless materials because I was using other mods and having fun exploring the different options.

I felt ME was the perfect RPG having struck the sweat spot between action, story telling, and character development.  Now that's not to say it didn't have any flaws, the MAKO was poorly implimented, there were too many items, and the inventory management was poorly implimented.  They fixed the MAKO by giving us the hammerhead, though we have yet to really see what it will be all about.  However they didn't fix the inventory, instead of simply getting rid of 50% of the manufacturers and drops while at the same time making same items stack, grouping like items, and adding better filters, they just removed it from the game.  So now I'm running through the game with the same shotgun strapped to my back for the entire thing.

Oawa wrote...
Here's where I'm getting confused a bit.  You mentioned how you were looking for an RPG that was different from what you called "typical".  I played the games you mentioned also, and other than the lack of dice roll oriented combat and lack of attribute leveling, ME 1 imo still falls into the category of what you considered a "typical" RPG. 

Something different doesn't mean something that tries to redefine the genre.  By different I meant a RPG where your choices really mattered.  Before I bought ME the one thing that always came to mind when thinking about it was the distress call commercial.  I was sitting there thinking sweet, I actually get to decide who I'm going to rescue and that's going to impact the game.  Now obviously that's not what we really got but that's what I was expecting.  I was also looking forward to the flowing combat where the game didn't pause every time you came across an enemy.  I will say that the two things you mentioned, lack of dice roll and no stats does to me make for a different experience then say KOTOR or DA:O because you aren't worrying about attributes.

Oawa wrote...
ME 2 improved the combat system in ME 1, streamlined the itemization and stats, and lets be real, streamlining means exactly that.  Saying it was dumbed down, really is an over-exageration unless you consider the tediousness of constantly having to sort through randomly looted items and deciding where to put your next skill point after you already gotten the vital skills as "smarter".  I'm sure we can agree, a lot of the "skills" in ME 1 were just to make things seem more complex then they actually were.

Except for headshots not always hitting, I didn't have an issue with the way combat worked.  I liked being able to chain together biotic and tech abilities, not having to sit and wait for all abilities to cooldown before I could use a different one. 

I think this is also where a lot of the disagreement between the two
camps comes from.  One side finds inventory systems to be tedious and
the other side doesn't.  One side likes to find new items and take time
to decide what they want to use, the other side doesn't.  I wouldn't say that they streamlined itemization, I'd say they removed it. and I will say they dumbed it down becuase it's no longer up to me to decide what's an upgrade, it says right in the item description what it upgrades. 

I will agree that there were too many manufacturers and items droped more frequently then they needed to.  But a true streamlining of this system would have have been removing 50% of the manufacturers and item drops and then making same items stack, group like items, and put in better filters so that I'm not looking at krogan, turian, and quarian armor when trying to equip shep.  Add in auto equip, auto sell, and atuo break down buttone and those who don't want to take the time to make the choices themselves don't have to but those who want to still can.

I don't see how the skills were complicated and I don't see how taking ammo mods from weapon mods and making them abilities is any smarter.  Biotic ammo makes sense because it's biotic in nature, but everything else is just a mod.  You're telling me that my adept forgot how to use ammo mods but learned how to use a nuke gun while dead?

Oawa wrote...
The story is still there, it's just not presented in a manner that some people liked.  Lets be honest about this too however, the majority of the threads started by people with gripes are generally filled with the same people agreeing with the op, or defending Bioware, with very few "newcomers" chiming in. 

Also, I'm sure there are others that feel this way too.  There is no question in my mind the way the story played out in ME 1 was nothing short of truly epic.  It was new and fresh to all of us, it's very difficult to match that scope when you revisit the universe, the flashy newness is gone.

Yes ME2 has a story, a story that is better then most games, however I personally don't feel that it lives up to the standards set by previous BW games.  It also doesn't live up to the standard set by the first game and doesn't seem to really progress the plot.  At the end of the first game the reapers were coming and no one believed shep, after ME2 the reapers are still coming and still no one believes shep.  Also a lot of people don't like how the ME cast was basically thrown out in favor of this newer cast.  To me they should have ran the ME2 storyline first and then the ME storyline, this would have lead to a much better build up for ME3.

I think the majority of the threads are started by different people but then you get the same people arguing in all of them.  That's pretty much how forms work, everyone has an opinion and wants to be heard.

Modifié par Daeion, 25 février 2010 - 10:59 .

[Daeion]

ExtremeOne wrote...

I wish the cry babies would shut up and accept the changes

I wish the crybabies had shut up an accepted the first game for the gem that it was.

Did I do that right?

[Daeion]

ExtremeOne wrote...

FataliTensei wrote...

ExtremeOne wrote...

I wish the cry babies would shut up and accept the changes

I wish you could accept that people have different opinions than you

  


If you act like cry babies you deserve to be called out as cry babies. 

So everyone that cried about the first game is a crybaby, oh, and lets not forget elitests like you borugh up in a different thread.

[Daeion]

321scooter wrote...

I don't understand a lot of the complaints about the story being relevant to the "main plot" or any of the other garbage. If the reapers are involved, their goal is to destroy all life (the main plot), so how is that not important within the confines of the ME universe?

Because it doesn't really advance the plot.  At the End of ME the reapers were coming and no one believed you, at the end of ME2 the reapers are still coming and no one believes you.  ME2 feels more like a side mission or xpac to the first game then the actual 2nd half of a trilogy.

[Krogan Face]

U can be a fan of something and complain about it because u want to see the franchise grow and become even better. All u idiots who say the games perfect and i heart BW without question are part of the problem. U have to push and push some more because u want it to be that much better.

There were plenty of problems with ME2, but ya it is a great game and i appretiate BW's effort. If only all game makers tried as hard as they do, but u still have to question and even complain.

[Tleining]

uh, no. At the end of ME1 you knew that the Reapers existed, but as far as you knew, they were still waiting for Sovereign to activate the citadel. That is why you still had time to look for a way to stop them. You didn't have to rally the troops, the reapers were not yet on there way. They were just a threat that would one day be upon them all.

At the end of ME2 the reapers start to move. The distant threat is a real one. There is no time to debate it any longer. The galaxy has to prepare or they will all be destroyed.

Plus, you now have definite proof of their existence, no longer visions or talks with a damaged VI (everyone would believe a VI, right?).

[SuperZombieChow]

I'll agree that the main plot of ME2 felt like filler. The game itself, gathering teammates and resolving conflicts between them (there should have been more of the latter IMHO, including some that forced you to take a side), was fun, but the handful of missions based around actually foiling the reapers felt underprepared, almost an afterthought. The final boss' design was terribly cliche too. All in all I ended ME2 feeling like if the developers had simply bridged directly from ME1 to ME3 there would have been very little story development lost.



I attribute all of these things to middle-of-a-trilogy syndrome. A case of having a great point A (ME1) and fabulous point B (ME3, I hope) planned out, but not a great middle section. Happens all the time, and I fully expect ME3 to vindicate this opinion.



As for the combat system (and inventory system) I greatly prefer the new style. ME1's system felt very cubersome to me, and I can barely go back and play it because of how comparatively slow the combat and item management is. There may be a middle ground, including the previous game's item mod system while keeping the current armor, weapons, and upgrades system perhaps, but if I had to choose between the two I would take ME2's gameplay style every time.

[SuperZombieChow]

Double post.

Modifié par SuperZombieChow, 25 février 2010 - 11:27 .

[Krogan Face]

summary of ME2 plot



since Soverign effed up in ME1, reapers went with plan B. Shepard stops plan B.



and something about a human reaper that never made scense to me...





The plot to ME2 certianlly wasent epic, but im not sure it always has to be. NO it wasent terribly exciting or anything like that but it was simple and I think very believable. The Reapers are lieing dormant in intergalatic space, and Shep threw a wrench in there back up plan to awaken them since Soverign failed. While i agree the ME2 plot wasent very eventfull and should have been better, i do enjoy the over all plot of the franchise so far, but sadly all of that was established in ME1.

[StreetlightEagle]

I wish the crybabies would shut up complaining about people complaining about this game!



See we can all do it, but what have we actually achieved? The expression of free thought is a positive thing.

[contown]

The main plot was pretty bad in ME2. The characters were great, but the core storyline felt like an afterthought.

[Tooneyman]

Easy and simple, Dudes and Dudets.



The reapers were the main story at the end of the game. We see at the end of the game they are coming. Guess what that has been the main plot the whole time. If you where disappointed with ME 2 then apparently you didn't beat the game. Now go back and beat it and pay attention.

Main plot:

The reapers are coming and the galaxy is in your hands. Will you destroy it or save it. That is the ultimate plot of Bioware's Mass Effect games. Have a nice day all.

[SuperZombieChow]

Krogan Face wrote...

 ...but sadly all of that was established in ME1.

Hope you don't mind if I just snip the end. I agree with the sentiment of your post completely.

This is the core of the issue. Nothing happened in ME2 that changes the landscape or conflict from ME1. The reapers were coming from dark space, and now they still are. Rather then feeling like a critical chaper in a limited series, ME2's plot felt like an episode in a tv series: New baddie shows up, hero trounces new baddie, cut to scene of real baddie shaking fist and saying "I'll get you next time!" There were a few revalations about the Reapers (not AI constructs) and the potential of keeping the base, neither of which couldn't have been part of a bit of easy downloadable content for ME1 no bigger then "bring down the sky".

Just to make sure I'm clear: I feel like I got my money's worth. As a game it's great, love the combat system changes and had fun learning about characters and shooting mercs. If it were a novel though I'd be sorely dissapointed in the lack of narrative progression.

[Daeion]

Tleining wrote...

uh, no. At the end of ME1 you knew that the Reapers existed, but as far as you knew, they were still waiting for Sovereign to activate the citadel. That is why you still had time to look for a way to stop them. You didn't have to rally the troops, the reapers were not yet on there way. They were just a threat that would one day be upon them all.
At the end of ME2 the reapers start to move. The distant threat is a real one. There is no time to debate it any longer. The galaxy has to prepare or they will all be destroyed.
Plus, you now have definite proof of their existence, no longer visions or talks with a damaged VI (everyone would believe a VI, right?).

Just rewatched the ending to ME, shep says the reapers are still out there and coming, so yes, we know they are coming.

[OverlordNexas]

I've never cared much for the whole Reaper plot, so Bioware's decision to put less focus on it in ME2 seemed like an improvement to me.

[321scooter]

Daeion wrote...

321scooter wrote...

I don't understand a lot of the complaints about the story being relevant to the "main plot" or any of the other garbage. If the reapers are involved, their goal is to destroy all life (the main plot), so how is that not important within the confines of the ME universe?

Because it doesn't really advance the plot.  At the End of ME the reapers were coming and no one believed you, at the end of ME2 the reapers are still coming and no one believes you.  ME2 feels more like a side mission or xpac to the first game then the actual 2nd half of a trilogy.

How can the reapers be coming if we stopped them from opening up the relay?  ME2 just showed a contingency plan for opening up the relay.  It's obvious that once they finished building a reaper they would try the same thing again.  Even at the end of ME2, they still can't just fly into the galaxy.  You can clearly see how far away they are.

I agree that ME2 seems more like a filler story, but it still doesn't change the fact that within the ME universe, stopping the collectors is what had to be done, therefore it is necessary.