10273 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

uberdowzen wrote...

I think the problem is that a lot of people only consider something plot if a cinematic starts, the camera pans to an NPC and that NPC explains things in very clear terms. IMO, this is bad storytelling and not playing to the strengths of the genre. ME2 creates feelings and emotions, the gradual build up to the mission, Mordin's feelings of guilt over the genophage, Garrus' change in outlook after his experiences on Omega, Samara's curse, Jacob's uncertainty in Cerberus...the list goes on. Just because not a lot happens, doesn't make it a terrible plot.

Actually, a lot does happen, and they make great plots.  Just not for this particular story.  A whole novel or  even a seperate game could have been made about Garrus in Omega.  A whole series could have been done about Samara's 400 year search for Morinth.  I'd actually like to hear more about Miranda's past.  But none of it is relevent to this  story.  Mass Effect 2, second volume of Commander Shepard's story.  his quest against the Reapers.  The "Fight for the Lost".  As sidequests, I think it's fine to stick them in the game, visit another story briefly, but they cannot and should not carry the entire game. 

[Onyx Jaguar]

Addendum: You can survive the bare minimum if you have two loyal squadmates go with you at the end



But if you are going for the mega happy huge success ending? Need 10-12 squaddies

[hex23]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

"Fun with a video game" huh?

Said it before but let's reiterate it yet again. Every year shooter fans get dozens of games that cater to their tastes that they can "have fun with". Overall there are countless games that focus on combat at the expense of plot. Story driven fans have barely any. ME1 is released. Perfect combat that doesn't take away from story and character interaction. The shooters whined and bi***** about cutscenes that dragged and the combat was "broke". It's not enough that you guys have countless of games that cater to your tastes. Despite there being genres in every other form of media, all that do very well in their respective categories since there's room for all demographics, shooter fans can't stand when there's a game with guns that focus on story.

The combat in "ME1" wasn't perfect. In fact, it was quite terrible. So right off the bat your assessment is inaccurate.

People complained about the combat because it wasn't good. Period. I don't play "Halo", "Gears of War", or any of that, so I have nothing to gain by them "Halo-ifying" the "Mass Effect" experience, but it is a third person action RPG on a console. It's not a PC RPG. It's on the same console as "Halo". So it's obvious what they were aiming for in the combat department, and the first game fell way short of that. I'd even go as far as to say, the second game is more like what they intended the first game to be.

[Chanegade]

The story was very cliche and very bad. That's all.

You know I wish BIoware did less " You are the last hope of the earth" story.

[Iakus]

KitsuneRommel wrote...


Heavy risk...

Well Jack is supposed to be the most powerful human biotic (despite her not even knowing Singularity) so she's definitely a strong asset.

Not arguing that Jack's an asset (I always use her for the Long Walk.  Given her violent  criminal past, I figure it would do her some good to protect people for once)  What I wonder is why she comes along to begin with, and not give me the slip the next time Normandy docks at Omega or Illium.

[Onyx Jaguar]

hex23 wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

"Fun with a video game" huh?

Said it before but let's reiterate it yet again. Every year shooter fans get dozens of games that cater to their tastes that they can "have fun with". Overall there are countless games that focus on combat at the expense of plot. Story driven fans have barely any. ME1 is released. Perfect combat that doesn't take away from story and character interaction. The shooters whined and bi***** about cutscenes that dragged and the combat was "broke". It's not enough that you guys have countless of games that cater to your tastes. Despite there being genres in every other form of media, all that do very well in their respective categories since there's room for all demographics, shooter fans can't stand when there's a game with guns that focus on story.

The combat in "ME1" wasn't perfect. In fact, it was quite terrible. So right off the bat your assessment is inaccurate.

People complained about the combat because it wasn't good. Period. I don't play "Halo", "Gears of War", or any of that, so I have nothing to gain by them "Halo-ifying" the "Mass Effect" experience, but it is a third person action RPG on a console. It's not a PC RPG. It's on the same console as "Halo". So it's obvious what they were aiming for in the combat department, and the first game fell way short of that. I'd even go as far as to say, the second game is more like what they intended the first game to be.

Personally I feel the games are a lot closer to GRAW/R6

There is strong similarity with Gears of War in regards to its regen system and cover system

But it is nothing like Halo.  If it was like Halo it would have Thermal Clips and guns that would overheat.

[uberdowzen]

iakus wrote...

Actually, a lot does happen, and they make great plots.  Just not for this particular story.  A whole novel or  even a seperate game could have been made about Garrus in Omega.  A whole series could have been done about Samara's 400 year search for Morinth.  I'd actually like to hear more about Miranda's past.  But none of it is relevent to this  story.  Mass Effect 2, second volume of Commander Shepard's story.  his quest against the Reapers.  The "Fight for the Lost".  As sidequests, I think it's fine to stick them in the game, visit another story briefly, but they cannot and should not carry the entire game. 

So, what ME2 has to be exactly the same as ME1 only with a new villain and some improved game mechanics? That would have been the cheap way out.

[Terror_K]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

I fail to see how this proves anything. If one took Gears of War and simply added dialogue wheels that effected the outcome of things it would probably be closer to Mass Effect 2 than Mass Effect 2 is to Mass Effect 1.

Translation: Terror_K has never played Gears of War.

Good to know k thx.

Ummm... I own Gears of War. So... yeah....

[Onyx Jaguar]

ME 1 = GRAW 1
ME 2 = Gears 2 combined with Graw 2

In a way.

Modifié par Onyx Jaguar, 23 mai 2010 - 05:33 .

[KitsuneRommel]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

ME 1 = GRAW 1
ME 2 = Gears 2 combined with Graw 2

In a way.

I don't remember you being able to circle-strafe mobs of enemies in GRAW though.

[Onyx Jaguar]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

ME 1 = GRAW 1
ME 2 = Gears 2 combined with Graw 2

In a way.

I don't remember you being able to circle-strafe mobs of enemies in GRAW though.

You can't, I'm just inferring the cover mechanic, control scheme and use of squadmates.

[Onyx Jaguar]

gmartin40 wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

ME 1 = GRAW 1
ME 2 = Gears 2 combined with Graw 2

In a way.

No. ME2= Fallout 3 combined with Call of Duty.

Not really, there really isn't any Call of Duty in Mass Effect.

The distinguishing things in Cal of Duty are its mission linearity, which was in Half Life.  The intensity of its missions, which is not the case in Mass Effect 1 or 2. 

The gun system is the same in COD as it is in Gears and Halo, which is not what is used in the ME games.  The hud system is similar, but it is the same that is used in Gears of War (however COD 2 was released first).  

The narrative is also not the same as COD uses a hyper paced version of what Half-Life does.


It also is not much like Fallout 3.  It is not an open world in the same sense.  As you can revisit locations but that is more like KOTOR/many JRPGS.  The combat system is not the same, although you do have more of an effect on stats in ME 1 but that came before Fallout 3.

The mission structure is similar in a way though.  But that is the same in the Elder Scrolls game

[Lumikki]

smudboy wrote...

It's been suggested I post here, so I am:

(1 of 6) ME2:
Plot Analysis

You made nice video, only proplem is that you tryed to make anyalys to show problems, what you did, but not just that. You did two thing, showed possible plot holes what you did not understand or you did not like story or you feeled like there is no locig on story. How ever, you also put you personal feelings as hate to it. Basicly unable to make neutral analys of situations. Also you make assumption that ME1 story will continue in ME2. It could have been seperated story what is bring to conclusion on ME3 as connecting the two stories or be totally new separed story.

Now you did bring alot of plot holes to open, even in the first video (1/6).

1. How it's possible bring dead person back to life?
2. How did Shepard survey from planets gravity?
3. Why Wilson betray Miranda and tryed to kill Shepard?
4. Why Cerberus choose Shepard in the first place?
5. Why hire these squad members?
6. Why collectors are the new bad guy?
7. How is the ME2 story connected to ME1?

This where your first videos main questios. In my opinion some of them are really good questions, but some of them where answered in the game. You just did not like the answer, because it did not fit you conspet how it should be.

Now can anyone answer to these question as possible logical answer?
Did You try to figure out what happen and why or just deside why bother?
There are answer in some of these question even in the game.

Let me ask questions.
1. Why you assume that Shepards body did fall in planet? All they talked was about space affecting to it, so it is logical assume that it was found in space?
2. How many of these squad members would be join, if the leader would have been John Smith?
3. How many places you got in because You where Shepard (The Hero fame)?
4. Why You assume that ME2 is continuing ME1's story?
5. Why you assume that people behave allways logical, when they don't do that even our real life?
6. Do You know technology level of ME as what it can do and what not? Are you comparing it to our real life?

When I played ME2 first time, yes some of your question where in my mind too. How ever, not all of them. Example I did not understand why Wilson would behave like that, if it was Wilson even behind the situation on the first place. Again assumption. It's hard to trying to figure other possibilities in story, because the story doesn't tell us the hole story, just part of it. Problem is that we can make wrong assumptions, because lack of information.

Modifié par Lumikki, 23 mai 2010 - 08:30 .

[uberdowzen]

Page 100. Wow, we really should've given up 50 pages ago.

[KitsuneRommel]

Mass Effect 1 plays like Doom.
Mass Effect 2 plays like... ?

[SkullandBonesmember]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

How?

Because, put simply, as I've explained in depth in this thread before at least twice, most recently a few days ago, there is hardly any breather from combat. It's monotonous. Even when you're "delving into your squadmates lives/history" it's smack dab in the middle of combat.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Cyberdemon was such a pain in the ass. Especially in the Ultimate Doom expansion...

[Onyx Jaguar]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

How?

Because, put simply, as I've explained in depth in this thread before at least twice, most recently a few days ago, there is hardly any breather from combat. It's monotonous. Even when you're "delving into your squadmates lives/history" it's smack dab in the middle of combat.

But how is that different from the first game?

Both also have the onboard ship segments...

[SkullandBonesmember]

uberdowzen wrote...

You said earlier that games like Mass Effect 1 and Heavy Rain were the future of gaming.

The future of story driven games, yes. And ME1's combat was not only fun, but not monotonous.

[SkullandBonesmember]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

But how is that different from the first game?

Both also have the onboard ship segments...

I'm at a loss on how to get it through to you. Many times I've gone into detail in this thread about how in my opinion, as is the consensus of other story driven game fans, ME1 is superior and I'm seriously sick and tired of repeating myself. Maybe you just don't get it because you think combat is just as important, if not more, than story and especially character interaction in any and all games.

[Onyx Jaguar]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

But how is that different from the first game?

Both also have the onboard ship segments...

I'm at a loss on how to get it through to you. Many times I've gone into detail in this thread about how in my opinion, as is the consensus of other story driven game fans, ME1 is superior and I'm seriously sick and tired of repeating myself. Maybe you just don't get it because you think combat is just as important, if not more, than story and especially character interaction in any and all games.

And I do not see how they are any different.  

I get about as much character interactions in both games. 

[masterthehero]

I posted in the wrong thread, here are some thoughts I had for this discussion.



From playing through the game a few times, I feel that one of it's big problems is flow. Ever since they ditched the elevators for loading screens the entire game and how it was segmented became more obvious. For instance, in ME 1 you knew that with every new planet you found there would be a civilian hub, a mako sequence, a mission in enemy territory, and a return to the hub. All of this flowed together and wasn't as OVERT in saying "Hey... combat is about to start over here." Driving in the Mako you felt like you were exploring to find this enemy base and when you did find the enemy base it felt more like trouble could catch you by surprise, rather than... oh look at all the crates must mean a battle sequence.



You could go on planets and explore abandoned pre-fabs only to realize that it was a Geth ambush and now the prefabs are your casket.



What also negatively seems to have impacted ME 2 was the fact that NO ONE TALKS ANYMORE! The only time a squadmate would talk was when there was a cut scene or just some random moment out of the blue.



At least in ME 1 you could go up to Garrus on Noveria and he would say, "Did I mention Turians hate the cold?" Or talk to Wrex and he would say, "I need to get my blood pumping, I hate the cold!"



Try to do that in ME 2 and you get NOTHING! Which is ironic, because according to some interviews there is so much dialogue recorded that it would take you a full day to get through. Yet, somehow it doesn't feel like that much dialogue was recorded.



This leads me to believe that they focused more on dialogue in the environment rather than between squadmates. The only time you can talk to squaddies was at designated points in different locations, but that didn't feel the same as clicking and talking to them. For instance, in Illium I can go to the "vista" and have Jack say how everyone is easy to pick pocket. That's it, no more dialogue period.



Compared to ME 1 where it could be like "Great place to pick pocket" "I wonder if I should settle down here, HA! Yeah right!" "You going to keep bugging me the whole time we're here Shepard?"



What was also disappointing was how quickly you could get through everyone's dialogue on the ship. At least with ME, when you completed each MAIN mission the squaddies would have something different to say. However, since there really aren't any MAIN missions that you can choose to go to at your leisure, your squaddies end up babbling about the same crap. Then they won't talk to you ANYMORE unless you do the loyalty mission, then when you DO the loyalty mission. You can wrap up their entire arc in two conversations or less.





So what is the problem that seems to really be negatively impacting ME 2? This is my opinion but reading everyone's responses I think it's valid.



1.) Pacing - The game forces you to speed through certain parts of the game. I.E. Horizon, Collector Ship. Yet, once those missions are done you can once again go at your leisure. This unfortunately, has a negative impact on squad interaction.



2.) Flow - The constant load screens and the feeling of the world becoming more compacted has also damaged the game. The Citadel in ME was expansive and had a huge presidium, wards, casino's, markets, a tower, embassies etc. ME 2 you are relegated to three floors which do not even come close to matching main floor of the wards. Also, everytime you travelled to different locations it would be an animated load screen, rather than something that keeps you in the game and in the moment.



You knew when combat was coming, there was no vehicle exploration, and it made the entire game feel as though it was being played in chunks rather than a seamless narrative. Even the N7 missions felt like segments, compared to ME where you were landing on a planet and had to DISCOVER where your mission is supposed to start.



3.) Not enough depth between characters, meaning that there was just not enough dialogue with each character. In ME 1 I would go visit my squaddies in rounds and Ashley would tell me first, thanks for saving my ass back there. Then I go back and she has an opinion on aliens, go back again and she asks me to drink with her, go back and she talks about religion, go back and she talks poetry, go back and she's talking to her sister who says I'm cute.



Where as with Miranda it went something like:

"I'm really busy Commander, let's talk later."

"You should join Cerberus."

"Can you help me with my sister?"

"I'm no good, what you think I'm pretty? I love you."

"I'm still thinking about what you said to me, maybe we'll talk later."



But the dialogue I was MOST disappointed with as male Shep was speaking with Garrus.

"I'm busy with the cannons maybe later."

"My squad got killed by me, take me to the citadel!"

"I had the reach, she had the flexibility."

"I'm busy with the cannons maybe later."



Garrus! We freaking destroyed a reaper, killed a Thorian, fought a matriarch, and you don't want to talk about anything!? You don't want to tell me how other people reacted to me leaving? You don't want to talk about some funny things that happened in ME? You don't want to TALK TO TALI who was your squaddie or even say ANYTHING when I bring you with me to see Liara!? All you make is a comment about elevators in the Citadel when talking to Tali and THAT'S IT!?"



Unbelievable! Bioware spent so much time putting in, environmental dialogue that they completed neglected the squadmates. Some of what makes Bioware games so memorable is really getting to know characters, Bioware utterly failed in this department and I think has hurt the game the most. People would be able to bear the fragmentation of the game if you were able to actually talk to your squaddies more.



I still love ME 2 and think that they improved gameplay at least, but the sacrificed story and pacing to make it more action friendly. I wouldn't want it to go back to the slow ME system, but at the same time I need my characters to make me get attached to them, so that when Jacob gets a rocket to the head, I'm not saying to myself "Good, I'm glad your boring personality got shot."

[KitsuneRommel]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Cyberdemon was such a pain in the ass. Especially in the Ultimate Doom expansion...

It's a lot harder in maps where you don't have so much room. You only had to worry about occasional rocket splash damage.

I didn't remember that you could run so fast in Doom.

[Iakus]

uberdowzen wrote...

iakus wrote...

Actually, a lot does happen, and they make great plots.  Just not for this particular story.  A whole novel or  even a seperate game could have been made about Garrus in Omega.  A whole series could have been done about Samara's 400 year search for Morinth.  I'd actually like to hear more about Miranda's past.  But none of it is relevent to this  story.  Mass Effect 2, second volume of Commander Shepard's story.  his quest against the Reapers.  The "Fight for the Lost".  As sidequests, I think it's fine to stick them in the game, visit another story briefly, but they cannot and should not carry the entire game. 

So, what ME2 has to be exactly the same as ME1 only with a new villain and some improved game mechanics? That would have been the cheap way out.

Actually, what I expected ME 2 to be was a more X-Files type mystery.  Why are the colonies disappearing?  Is it the geth?  Who are these Collectors?  Are they responsible, or do they know who is?  

I expected to run down clues "Hey, you think the Collectors might be involved?"  "I dunno, but there's an enclave of batarians who have had dealings with them, let's ask them!"

I expected some organizations to show concern for these disappearances, others to care not so much, maybe a couple who see humans disapearing to be a good thing.  Maybe a little political manevering would be required, as well as some head-busting to get the job done.  Apathy I  was not expecting.

I expected to learn more about the Reapers, what alternate plans they had, what other servants they may employ.  I expected somehow this would all work into the Reaper's inevitable return They are, after all, the ultimate villains of the series.

 I expected to recruit squadmates who had a personal stake in uncovering the answers, rather than semirandom mercs I'm keeping on standby for some hypotetical mission tat never even reaches the planning stage.  I expected backstories that tie in at least tangentally to the main story behind ME 2 'Fight for the Lost"

 If I was going to be fighting mercenaries, i expected them to be after me because either A)  I was doing a clear side mission or I was getting close to finding answers and the villains were siccing them on me, not because i have to wade through an ocean of them to give a super-assasin a job offer.

So to answer the question, no I was not expecting a clone of ME 1.  ME 1 was a nice intro to an action rpg.    I figured the 2nd one would be a continuation of that story.  Not the same game, but an extention of what came before. I expected a sequel and got an entirely different game.  More accurately, I got a demo of about a dozen different games, all set in the ME universe.  Some look interesting enough to play, but none were the game I expected to play right now.