10273 réponses à ce sujet

[tonnactus]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

You can side with doing a loyalty mission for an ME2 squadmate deciding if they die escorting the crew, or when the ship is attacked, or if they are doing the biotic bubble, or unlocking the door, or fighting the T-800 with you if you want. Youd be wrong, but its still your call.

And what the hell this have to do with the meaning of loyality?? "Concentration on the mission" are the words that fit in this case.

Loyality mission not even matter with the miranda and jack confrontation or legion and tali. Because your charm and renegade points decide the outcome of those situations and not if did some "loyality missions" or not.

Like i wrote, lame and senselessly.

Modifié par tonnactus, 04 juin 2010 - 06:33 .

[IoCaster]

Ecael wrote...

IoCaster wrote...

Ecael wrote...

So, to use your analogy, Mass Effect 2 is just two shots of the same whiskey that is Mass Effect 1. Same content, same taste, but some people just can't handle their liquor.

I don't usually get caught up in debates about the comparative differences between ME and ME2, but to claim that there aren't any doesn't make much sense. Is that the point you're trying to make?

Differences worth mulling over? No, there aren't.

Whether or not you decide to 'mull' over the differences isn't nor should it be of consequence to anyone else. It's a simple matter of perception and opinion. Why would you take it upon yourself to try to convince anyone otherwise?

Ecael wrote...
Differences in storyline? They're part of the same storyline.

They're part of a fractured storyline in that the player character is killed off then immediately resurrected. To what purpose? The obvious answer would be that they wanted to reset the character and give new players a blank slate. The other reason that comes to mind is to enable them to force the player to assume the role of TIM/Cerberus lackey. I'm disappointed that they chose to do this because it takes on the appearance of a convenient contrivance. Why would this not be considered a legitimate complaint by those of us that played ME and hate the way that Cerberus has been retconned so blatantly.  

Ecael wrote...
The games may be standalone, but the writers purposefully made the connections between the stories. Most people wouldn't judge a book by separating its chapters.

What most people choose to do isn't relevant to me. I can and do judge whatever I want, whenever I want and for whatever reason I choose. Obviously, that doesn't mean that I have the power or authority to change things that are beyond my control to suit my preferences. As far as, the story progression ME->ME2 I thought it was mediocre at best. That's my opinion. I'm not interested in trying to convince anyone that my opinion is the only valid one.

It's readily become apparent to me that you are trying to convince people that their perception or opinion of the differences between ME and ME2 are wrong. You have gone out of your way to count lines of dialogue, post the aggregate critical score of each game and number crunched a bunch of meaningless data. As if to say that your tabulated results trump my subjective criteria in judging whether or not I'm satisfied with the various component parts of ME2. Here's a serious and not rhetorical question. Why are you attempting to do this and what's the point?

Modifié par IoCaster, 04 juin 2010 - 06:35 .

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

tonnactus wrote...

And what the hell this have to do with the meaning of loyality?? "Concentration on the mission" are the words that fit in this case.

Loyality mission no even matter with the miranda and jack confrontation or legion and tali. Because your charm and renegade points decide the outcome of those situations and not iof did some "loyality missions" or not.

Like i wrote, lame and senselessly.

Exactly. Wrexs confrontation is the kind of situation decided by loyalty.

Whether or not the squad leader was a ****** and picked the wrong specialist is a matter of competance.

Whether or not the squadmate leading the survivors back to the ship runs into an ambush, or squadmates get killed by stray bullets, falling debris, or ship explosions is a matter of luck.

In my humble opinion, in terms of ME2s story, Bioware were mostly concerned about side stepping, and at best sitting on the big issues/characters for ME3, and "resetting" them so that when ME3 comes around, newbies can understand them as well.

In terms of ME2s gameplay, from Christina Normans own presentation, massive amounts of the development was focusing on crafting a third person shooter that stood on its own. The RPG side was thrown in afterwards. This shows in the way the game is paced and structured, where its all mostly one off combat mission and the entire game is segmented into linear, cover filled shooting galleries, that dont feel like natural locations, but artifical gameplay arenas. All of them seperated by immersion destroying loading and mission complete screens.

But wait a second! I must be mad! ME1 and ME2 are EXACTLY the same! Both from a story and gameplay perspective! All they did was remove that "clunky RPG fat"!

Modifié par Dinkamus_Littlelog, 04 juin 2010 - 06:39 .

[Christmas Ape]

Ah, we're back to objective opinions. My witticisms are sadly no match for screaming nonsense, so I'll sit this one out.

[tonnactus]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...


But wait a second! I must be mad! ME1 and ME2 are EXACTLY the same! Both from a story and gameplay perspective! All they did was remove that "clunky RPG fat"!

Oh yes. Black panthers and black bears are the same. Both animals have the same colour.

Like Mass Effect and the sequel is the same.In both games the player use weapons.
How we couldnt see the huge similarities?

Modifié par tonnactus, 04 juin 2010 - 06:49 .

[Pocketgb]

tonnactus wrote...

Pocketgb wrote...

What about all the assignments across Illium, Omega, and the Citadel  in ME2? How much further do we need to split hairs here?

What about them? The difference is, non combat sidequests have a much bigger reward than those in Mass Effect 2.
50 xp per sidequest in the sequel.I gain at least 6 levels with the citadel sidequests alone.

So...Even though ME2 contains around the same amount of side-quests as ME1 (in terms of theme, etc.) ME2 is "bayad" because they don't give as much EXP? What happened to caring about the content and not the reward?

[IoCaster]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

Exactly. Wrexs confrontation is the kind of situation decided by loyalty.

That particular confrontation could be resolved with the requisite paragon/renegade score as well. It was an added benefit that you could make him back down by having done his personal armor quest. That might have been because there wasn't any definite assurance that you'd have the necessary amount of p/r points and BioWare wanted to make sure that you had an out.

[tonnactus]

IoCaster wrote...

That particular confrontation could be resolved with the requisite paragon/renegade score as well.

Yes(8 points in renegade/charm is actually a high requirement).

But that "as well" didnt exists in Mass Effect 2. Not if you do loyality missions solve the confrontation between the psycho and the cheerleader (of course without doing one of them the confrontation never happens), but the amount of your renegade or paragon points. Am i the only one who think that this doesnt make any sense??

Modifié par tonnactus, 04 juin 2010 - 07:07 .

[tonnactus]

Pocketgb wrote...


So...Even though ME2 contains around the same amount of side-quests as ME1 (in terms of theme, etc.) ME2 is "bayad" because they don't give as much EXP? What happened to caring about the content and not the reward?

The content? Some sidequests are even connected with eachother,like scanning the keeper and did the one volus scientists a favor. Squadmembers could give some special comments.(the turian general and wrex)

[Ecael]

IoCaster wrote...

Whether or not you decide to 'mull' over the differences isn't nor should it be of consequence to anyone else. It's a simple matter of perception and opinion. Why would you take it upon yourself to try to convince anyone otherwise?

What most people choose to do isn't relevant to me. I can and do judge whatever I want, whenever I want and for whatever reason I choose. Obviously, that doesn't mean that I have the power or authority to change things that are beyond my control to suit my preferences. As far as, the story progression ME->ME2 I thought it was mediocre at best. That's my opinion. I'm not interested in trying to convince anyone that my opinion is the only valid one.

It's readily become apparent to me that you are trying to convince people that their perception or opinion of the differences between ME and ME2 are wrong. You have gone out of your way to count lines of dialogue, post the aggregate critical score of each game and number crunched a bunch of meaningless data. As if to say that your tabulated results trump my subjective criteria in judging whether or not I'm satisfied with the various component parts of ME2. Here's a serious and not rhetorical question. Why are you attempting to do this and what's the point?

Tabulated results do trump subjective criteria, especially when they are relevant.

Are 25 and twenty-five different from each other just because you perceive them differently?

Is the earth flat because the ground in front of you has a lot of "flat" elements to it?

Is Nintendo targeting the "dumb platformer crowd" by making Super Mario Galaxy 2 but not from making Super Mario Galaxy 1?

There sure are a lot of whiners on the GameFAQ forums for Super Mario Galaxy 2, comparing it to Super Mario Galaxy 1:
http://www.gamefaqs....galaxy-2?page=1

"Oh boy, I just LOVE doing the exact same thing I just did over AGAIN!!"
"Is anyone else disappointed the hardest end world boss is in World 1?"
"The death theme SUCKS"
"This game is a step backward in the direction mario should go..."
"SMG2 is way too overhyped right now and overrated.... (LONG POST)"
"If garbage like Red Dead Redemption is what passes for 8-9/10 material these days, then something at least competently developed that's actually somewhat enjoyable to play is practically a masterpiece in comparison."
"The final boss in this game is awful (spoilers)"
"Super Mario Sunshine and Super Mario 64 are superior."
"why'd the levels suddenly get bad"

Just a few of the many complaints from people comparing Super Mario Galaxy 1 to Super Mario Galaxy 2.

Apparently Super Mario Galaxy 1 had tons and tons of exploration, a really good final boss, extremely good level design, no repetitiveness, and an open-ended world. But when Nintendo tries to keep the same core gameplay, same level structure (and same core story, of course) people start whining incessantly about how "different" Super Mario Galaxy 2 has become without realizing those complaints could be applied to both games.

I don't need to convince you or anyone who frequently posts in this thread that your opinion is wrong. However, I can prove to everyone else reading (but not posting here) that those opinions really are wrong - and that there's no point in complaining unless you can figure out a solution on how to change it.

And before anyone mentions that it's "BioWare's job to come up with a solution", then what follows is that it's also only a game critic's job to criticize the game. BioWare seems to listen to them more often than the forum, anyway.

Modifié par Ecael, 04 juin 2010 - 07:23 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

tonnactus wrote...

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...


But wait a second! I must be mad! ME1 and ME2 are EXACTLY the same! Both from a story and gameplay perspective! All they did was remove that "clunky RPG fat"!

Oh yes. Black panthers and black bears are the same. Both animals have the same colour.

Like Mass Effect and the sequel is the same.In both games the player use weapons.
How we couldnt see the huge similarities?

[Pocketgb]

tonnactus wrote...

The
content? Some sidequests are even connected with eachother,like
scanning the keeper and did the one volus scientists a favor.
Squadmembers could give some special comments.(the turian general and
wrex)

I don't see how "connectedness" really ups the amount of content, but I can see how party banter can attribute.
To which I say, there was more emphasis on the squadmates. To which you say, there was less overall conversation between each squadmate - and on and on and on, where we have to even further split hairs, which is overall strengthening what Ecael said.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 04 juin 2010 - 07:27 .

[Ecael]

tonnactus wrote...

Oh yes. Black panthers and black bears are the same. Both animals have the same colour.

Like Mass Effect and the sequel is the same.In both games the player use weapons.
How we couldnt see the huge similarities?

Did both animals come from the same parents?

[SkullandBonesmember]

Ecael wrote...

Did both animals come from the same parents?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liger

Modifié par SkullandBonesmember, 04 juin 2010 - 08:18 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiglon

And that.

Modifié par SkullandBonesmember, 04 juin 2010 - 08:22 .

[Ecael]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Ecael wrote...

Did both animals come from the same parents?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liger

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiglon

And that.

So we're comparing two Liger siblings now? Or are we comparing two Tiglon siblings?

A Liger and a Tiglon can be cousins (or double first cousins), but not siblings. Neither will come from the same parents.

Modifié par Ecael, 04 juin 2010 - 08:24 .

[Orchomene]

RyuGuitarFreak wrote...

Good for you. Then tell me something. Why should anyone, I for example, looking for games trust more the articles you sent than a metacritcs score? Why should anyone trust more ONE guy, supposedly a formal or not-critic from a whatever blog/website sending 10 reasons why a considered mediocre game be better than considered AAA game, and not a 100 telling the contrary? What does that article have that it puts more credibility than IGN reviews (a good source IMO),for example?

Assuming that the product is "market-tailored" is not an answer to this question. And if it pleases you is not some kind of "point" why is a critic better than any other, or a product better than any other. It's just what mostly every critic and person has: an opinion. Now, put that on a large number, than you have something different. It becomes an statistic.

I've never asked anybody to trust critics, just to read and see by itself if points highlighted in the critic seem accurate or not. I strongly believe that anybody should be able to forge its own opinion. Yet it's interesting to have a look at the opinion of other people.
On the other hand, a "score" gives not many information, just an evaluation of appreciation without much detail. The information given by metacritic score is "ME2 is a game much appreciated by critics". That's almost all.
Statistics are just, you know, statistics...  I don't mind that 90% of the world think that Harry Potter books are wonderful whereas only a very small percentage have read books from Victor Hugo or Marcel Proust. The quantity of people appreciating an artistic creation is not at all correlated to the artistic value of such creation. Take music as an example if you like. How many people here has even heard about Dvorjak ? Compare his artistic creativity and the one of Michael Jackson.

[finnithe]

Darth Drago wrote...

finnithe wrote...
Also, for the proponents of weapon cooldown, why would I use my pistol if waiting with my Sniper RIfle will make it regenerate bullets. Why would I use powers if my Sniper Rifle could just cooldown? Why are you so bothered by looting of thermal clips when you have to loot bodies in other RPGs like Dragon Age?

-Consider if Dragon Age had no ammo system for its bows and crossbows and in Dragon Age 2 they suddenly added them in the game. Not only do they add them but now your total carrying capacity is limited depending on the bow type, 40 for a cross bow, 65 for a short bow and 99 for long bow. To top things off they decorate every location you will have a fight in with little dropping of ammo.

The thermal clips in ME2 are not even doing what they should do, add extended firing without overheating as fast. They are nothing but an ammo system. Toss in the fact that you also find them in places where they shouldn’t be even found like in the Collector ship and base or on a planet that’s been isolated from anyone for about 10 years (Jacob’s loyalty mission).
 

You are still avoiding the crux of my argument, that reverting to Mass Effect 1's system will encourage dependency on your most powerful gun, i.e. a Sniper Rifle. 

You could probably justify how carrying capacity is varied by looking at how much heat each gun generates. Obviously the Sniper Rifle generates more heat than the pistol per shot, so maybe it takes up more thermal clips. Are the thermal clips pre-inserted into weapons? Maybe that's why they're not transferable. 

[SkullandBonesmember]

Ecael wrote...

So we're comparing two Liger siblings now? Or are we comparing two Tiglon siblings?

A Liger and a Tiglon can be cousins (or double first cousins), but not siblings. Neither will come from the same parents.

ME1's parent was Bioware.

ME2's parent was EA.

[Ecael]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Ecael wrote...

So we're comparing two Liger siblings now? Or are we comparing two Tiglon siblings?

A Liger and a Tiglon can be cousins (or double first cousins), but not siblings. Neither will come from the same parents.

ME1's parent was Bioware.

ME2's parent was EA.

BioWare published Mass Effect 1 on their own too?

And the PC version was delayed not because some company wanted temporary exclusivity for their console, but because BioWare decided to save it to release later?

And that company still doesn't have a contract with BioWare making that game still exclusive to one console?

[Pocketgb]

This thread sure is going places...

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

Its funny that the people complaining about this thread and taking their supposed arrogant moral high ground are the same deluded fanboys who cant accept that people who buy the game have a right to criticise it.

Just take a deep breath and accept that the very real discontent with ME2 isnt going away, and its being voiced by people who have every right to do so. This is not some claim that we are the majority. But of course, there was no majority clamouring for "more shooter, less story" after ME1 was released. It was changed in an attempt to reel in more fans of Gears of War and Modern Warfare 2 (admitted by Bioware themselves in the marketing for ME2, which was about 80% oriented around the fact that "its a much better shooter now, and shooter fans will love this game").

There is no guarantee Bioware will listen to people who were dissatisfied with ME2. Since there are at least some hopeful signs they might (with the suggestion of attempting to "improve RPG elements" and the fact that ME2 isnt sitting on sales the likes of 4 million or such that they can sweep it all away now that they are drowning in "new fans"), we have got nothing to lose by making our voices heard.

Modifié par Dinkamus_Littlelog, 04 juin 2010 - 08:53 .

[Orchomene]

Ecael wrote...

Tabulated results do trump subjective criteria, especially when they are relevant.

Are 25 and twenty-five different from each other just because you perceive them differently?

Is the earth flat because the ground in front of you has a lot of "flat" elements to it?

Is Nintendo targeting the "dumb platformer crowd" by making Super Mario Galaxy 2 but not from making Super Mario Galaxy 1?

I don't need to convince you or anyone who frequently posts in this thread that your opinion is wrong. However, I can prove to everyone else reading (but not posting here) that those opinions really are wrong - and that there's no point in complaining unless you can figure out a solution on how to change it.

And before anyone mentions that it's "BioWare's job to come up with a solution", then what follows is that it's also only a game critic's job to criticize the game. BioWare seems to listen to them more often than the forum, anyway.

Well, 25 and twenty-five may be very different depending on the context. I could say that the first one is "vingt-cinq" and the second one remains "twenty-five" : the first one is a universal in arabic numbers representation of the natural integer that is twenty-five. It's not just a matter of perception, it's a matter of representation. Another angle can give two concatenated to five like when spelling a phone number. A third difference if you want is that 25 is also thirty-seven (hexadecimal basis). You know, taking numbers and mathematical representations are not very good to do when you want to argument with a researcher in mathematics. But I get your idea even if I don't agree in the context of ME2 and ME1.

Well, Metacritic had existed in Middle Ages, they would have given the score of 90% or 95% that the Earth is flat, you know ? Because it was at the time a "well known fact". Just be careful with what people call "facts" or things "proven".

Sorry, but you can't "prove" that an opinion of someone having payed a game is wrong because everyone has his/her own valid opinion based on his/her appreciation of a game. There are of course reasons to complain even without a solution : let know that some persons do not appreciate the game as it has been built and give their feelings about the product, giving hypothesis on the reasons. Only people that say nothing are wrong if they don't appreciate the game because by default, if nobody disagrees, then everybody agrees.

For the solutions, some have been explicitly given, others are just implicitly given, you just have to read. I can give you a very small sample : give opportunity to solve quests in different ways (fight or not fight), give more character to Shepard in taking position more assertively and caring, put less disconnected missions, having less discontinuities from places to places, avoiding to give the impression that the game takes place in prisons and corridors.

I never had any Nintendo nor played any Mario Bros game. I played on Amstrad/Atari/Thomson/Sega/Apple/PC only. I thus can't say anything about your example.

Modifié par Orchomene, 04 juin 2010 - 08:55 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

Ecael wrote...

BioWare published Mass Effect 1 on their own too?

And the PC version was delayed not because some company wanted temporary exclusivity for their console, but because BioWare decided to save it to release later?

And that company still doesn't have a contract with BioWare making that game still exclusive to one console?

Bioware had more control over ME1 compared to ME2. That doesn't excuse them selling out, but still.

Nobody knows how a new franchise will fare with critics or its targeted audience. ME1 didn't go the length of marketing to shooter fans, if at all, as they did with ME2. Even though ME1 was popular, as I said before, shooter fans saw the trailer and said "Guns? IT'S A SHOOTER GIMMIE!" only for them to complain it wasn't anywhere near "shootery" enough. The amount of those who complained about the combat was on par with those who were upset that Tali wasn't a romance option. So with all the shooter fans who purchased ME1 and were disappointed, EA said "we need to mainstream this, make it more accessible to other fans. RPG fans are acceptable causalities because let's face it, which has a bigger following, shooters or RPGs?", as Casey Hudson even admitted. EA had no idea the shooter fans would want to take over the Mass Effect, but when they saw the profit potential, they took control of the reins and gave shooter fans what they asked for.

Modifié par SkullandBonesmember, 04 juin 2010 - 08:57 .

[Orchomene]

I think that from a company perspective, going to the shooter fan market is a very valid strategy. But I think it's a mistake to do it in a sequel of a game that is not a shooter. IMHO, they would have made another game in the universe of ME, something like when Turians and humans where at war as an example, it would have been a better result. Now, with this hybrid, they had to do some acrobatics to introduce new players in a sequel of a game they didnt' play. On the other hand, they would have avoided to disgust part of the RPG players that don't like the way the sequel of ME has evolved in.