10273 réponses à ce sujet

[KitsuneRommel]

tonnactus wrote...

iakus wrote...


Tuian Councilor:  "Ah, yes, 'Reapers'..."

The asari coucelor is even more dumber.Saren was charismatic and that is the reason machines accept his command.Yes,sure. What a piece of crap.

After replaying ME1 just recently I can't say they were any different there either. Turian Councilor was second guessing every decision you made and the Salarian Councilor was convinced that everything was simply made up by the 'master manipulator' Saren. I often wondered why I even bothered with those clowns.

[Bhatair]

I was kinda disappointed with the dialogue in ME2.

It felt like there were more opportunities to choose between paragon/renegade, more choices in which way to take the conversation. It may have been 'illusion of choice' but it still helped feel like you were directing the conversation.



ME2's dialogue felt 'railrodaed' by comparison. It often felt like the dialogue wheel was pointless, some conversations led you down a predictable path with little choice of how you wanted Shep to react. There were also far more instances where Shepard spoke without the player input. This wasn't too bad, most of the time it was pretty neutral and somewhat tolerable, but I don't remember many (if any) times it happened in ME1.



The charm/intimidate options seemed a little castrated as well. In ME1 there were a couple of times you had to pass multiple checks in order for one to work. I can't think of any situations in ME2 that went past one check. I also liked having to spend points in a skill to be able to unlock those options. It made it more rewarding when you could pass one, and made sense when you couldn't. It also made it easier to play a 'paragade' Shep, one that has good intentions and harsh methods. The system in ME2 works against this style, as the more points you miss in a certain alignment, the harder it gets to choose those options in the future.



Anyway, I still love both of these games (played many hours through both and still going) just wanted to voice my opinion and get it out there.



Wow, this turned out a lot longer than I expected >.>

[SkullandBonesmember]

Bhatair wrote...

There were also far more instances where Shepard spoke without the player input. This wasn't too bad, most of the time it was pretty neutral and somewhat tolerable, but I don't remember many (if any) times it happened in ME1.

I'm noticing that myself going through my 2nd playthrough.

[Terror_K]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Bhatair wrote...

There were also far more instances where Shepard spoke without the player input. This wasn't too bad, most of the time it was pretty neutral and somewhat tolerable, but I don't remember many (if any) times it happened in ME1.

I'm noticing that myself going through my 2nd playthrough.

Yeah. This is particularly annoying for Paragon Shepards who want to go against TIM.

Modifié par Terror_K, 12 juin 2010 - 09:20 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

^Spoiler TK.

But many don't put a high priority on dialogue so it won't bother them. *shrugs*

Modifié par SkullandBonesmember, 12 juin 2010 - 08:36 .

[Pocketgb]

It never bothered me because I never really felt in "control" of Shepard, anyways. The whole series just feels like a lot of nudges and slight recommendations.



It's far from bad, of course, because the way things work out are entertaining to see. And even though your is miniscule you do have a feeling of guidance.

[Bhatair]

Pocketgb wrote...

It never bothered me because I never really felt in "control" of Shepard, anyways. The whole series just feels like a lot of nudges and slight recommendations.

It's far from bad, of course, because the way things work out are entertaining to see. And even though your is miniscule you do have a feeling of guidance.

Yeh, like I mentioned most of the times Shep speaks on his/her own they feel natural, as if they're just continuations of the dialogue choice you picked. My point was mainly that I felt it was a huge departure from the system in ME1 which felt more lenient.

[SkullandBonesmember]

Bhatair wrote...

Yeh, like I mentioned most of the times Shep speaks on his/her own they feel natural, as if they're just continuations of the dialogue choice you picked. My point was mainly that I felt it was a huge departure from the system in ME1 which felt more lenient.

Except it doesn't vary depending on your previous dialogue choices. So no, it doesn't feel natural.

[spacehamsterZH]

There are tons of instances in ME1 where Shepard says the exact same thing no matter which of the dialogue options you choose and/or the NPCs respond to every dialogue option the same way, possibly with one sentence interjected as a segue.

[STG]

Bhatair wrote...
There were also far more instances where Shepard spoke without the player input. This wasn't too bad, most of the time it was pretty neutral and somewhat tolerable, but I don't remember many (if any) times it happened in ME1.

During Suicide Mission: "Get in close and finish them off."

Really Shepard? We are about to blow up a ship 10 times larger than our own and you want to be close when it goes off?

[KitsuneRommel]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

There are tons of instances in ME1 where Shepard says the exact same thing no matter which of the dialogue options you choose and/or the NPCs respond to every dialogue option the same way, possibly with one sentence interjected as a segue.

I gave up trying to play my Shepard long time ago and just settled to play a Shepard.

[spacehamsterZH]

KitsuneRommel wrote...
I gave up trying to play my Shepard long time ago and just settled to play a Shepard.

I basically content myself with asking which of the choices is closest to what I would do/say and leave it at that. If you really want to play characters your way, go play PnP RPGs. The choices in CRPGs will always be limited, especially in ones that have full voice acting.

Plus it's not like it really matters for the main plot of either game whether you play Paragon or Renegade. You can be a racist ****** to everyone in ME1, in the end it all still plays out roughly the same. You can go all "raah raah humanity, and all your alien squadmates will still follow you. What bothers me about the dialogue choices in ME2 is that I can't remember a single instance where you can talk your way out of a firefight. That happened a lot in ME1, and I thought it was a good way to actually have your behavior towards NPCs make a difference.

Modifié par spacehamsterZH, 12 juin 2010 - 12:16 .

[Lumikki]

tonnactus wrote...

Renegade players not even get to see the all human council...

Of course not, because you where Specter to Council and let it die. So, now you aren't anymore even Specter for them. So, why to hell they would want to see you? You choose you path with choises you made, so accect also the consequences of those choises.

KitsuneRommel wrote...

I gave up trying to play my Shepard long time ago and just settled to play a Shepard.

You can allways play your Shepard. How ever, you can not change the story and play you Shepard agaist story. Meaning, you have to adjust you Shepard based situation where you are in story. Example you Shepard can't not just think I leave TIM and go back to Alliance, because that's agaist story. How ever, Yoiu can think I'm just gonna use TIM for this job, but I'm still with Allliance. Like working with TIM, not for TIM. So, You never have totall freedom to act you like , because story is allways linear.

Modifié par Lumikki, 12 juin 2010 - 12:35 .

[Chugster]

tonnactus wrote...

Tempest wrote...

2 things bothered me about ME2 and just realized until recently that I can post it here.

2. Biotics completely ineffective when NPC's have shields.

Not only biotics. A lot of tech attacks too like ai-hacking,cyro freeze and neural shock.
The so called "protection system" is plain idiotic. Just imagine a wizard have to use his dagger(smg) to destroy the armor of a warrior and only then could use his spells.That is the case in Mass Effect 2 "improved" combat system.

am i the only person who's Warp completley wipes outs shields/barriers? or who's Singularity holds people in place whilst my bullets strip the shields?

Surely if every biotic/tech attack worked against shields the game would be too easy? Maybe you should stick to the easy modes?

[SkullandBonesmember]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

The choices in CRPGs will always be limited, especially in ones that have full voice acting.

Bull. Look at Tetris and Super Mario. Major leap in video gaming. Look at Super Mario and Ocarina Of Time. Major leap in video gaming. Look at Ocarina Of Time and Final Fantasy X. Major leap in video gaming. Look at Final Fantasy X and Metal Gear Solid. Major leap in video gaming. Look at Metal Gear Solid and Indigo Prophecy. Major leap in gaming.

Video games, LIKE EVERY SINGLE OTHER MEDIA WILL CONTINUE TO FREAKING EVOLVE WITH TECHNOLOGY AND YEARS INTO THE FUTURE. Why the hell can't people see that?

[Tempest]

Chugster wrote...

tonnactus wrote...

Tempest wrote...

2 things bothered me about ME2 and just realized until recently that I can post it here.

2. Biotics completely ineffective when NPC's have shields.

Not only biotics. A lot of tech attacks too like ai-hacking,cyro freeze and neural shock.
The so called "protection system" is plain idiotic. Just imagine a wizard have to use his dagger(smg) to destroy the armor of a warrior and only then could use his spells.That is the case in Mass Effect 2 "improved" combat system.

am i the only person who's Warp completley wipes outs shields/barriers? or who's Singularity holds people in place whilst my bullets strip the shields?

Surely if every biotic/tech attack worked against shields the game would be too easy? Maybe you should stick to the easy modes?

Warp in harder difficulties it takes 2-3 to wipe a shield, but again this is a DPS attack not a Support/CC biotic that most biotic abilities are.   Singularity was a 50/50 when they have shields on.   I have seen them run into into it constantly, but still fire at me or I have seen the smarter NPC's just move away from the singularity.  Now if the enemy is behind cover, it is difficult to make a singularity above their heads because the lock-on system aims for the obstacle infront of them.   So you still have to wear down the shields before it works.

Modifié par Tempest, 12 juin 2010 - 01:37 .

[Lumikki]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Video games, LIKE EVERY SINGLE OTHER MEDIA WILL CONTINUE TO FREAKING EVOLVE WITH TECHNOLOGY AND YEARS INTO THE FUTURE. Why the hell can't people see that?

Everyting can allways evolve, but it's not that easy.

Many times business can cause evolving of stuff, because customers needs. How ever, there is also limits, when it's possible, but it's not gonna happen yet.  Meaning, if it's not profitable to do so, they don't do it. Example there is't really anything stoping creating games with multible stories and endings with alot of freedom, but it is not profitable to do so. The benefits aren't enough for the extra cost. People as customers wants perfect stuff for they needs, but they only get what is cost efficient for they needs.

So, envolving happens only when it's profitable enough to do something.

[SkullandBonesmember]

Lumikki wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Video games, LIKE EVERY SINGLE OTHER MEDIA WILL CONTINUE TO FREAKING EVOLVE WITH TECHNOLOGY AND YEARS INTO THE FUTURE. Why the hell can't people see that?

Everyting can allways evolve, but it's not that easy.

Many times business can cause evolving of stuff, because customers needs. How ever, there is also limits, when it's possible, but it's not gonna happen yet.  Meaning, if it's not profitable to do so, they don't do it. Example there is't really anything stoping creating games with multible stories and endings with alot of freedom, but it is not profitable to do so. The benefits aren't enough for the extra cost. People as customers wants perfect stuff for they needs, but they only get what is cost efficient for they needs.

So, envolving happens only when it's profitable enough to do something.

Easy? No. Inevitable? Yes.

This all goes back to how there's a market for everything. Even though story driven games are very popular, they're not a dime a dozen like shooters. But most developers don't like leaving their comfort zone even if it would mean profit for them. Start releasing the quantity AND quality the same level at shooters, and you've got yourself a whole lot of dough and happy gamers. Win/win for everybody. Now THAT is easy and boils down to common sense.

[Biotic Budah]

Bhatair wrote...

I was kinda disappointed with the dialogue in ME2.
It felt like there were more opportunities to choose between paragon/renegade, more choices in which way to take the conversation. It may have been 'illusion of choice' but it still helped feel like you were directing the conversation.

ME2's dialogue felt 'railrodaed' by comparison. It often felt like the dialogue wheel was pointless, some conversations led you down a predictable path with little choice of how you wanted Shep to react. There were also far more instances where Shepard spoke without the player input. This wasn't too bad, most of the time it was pretty neutral and somewhat tolerable, but I don't remember many (if any) times it happened in ME1.

The charm/intimidate options seemed a little castrated as well. In ME1 there were a couple of times you had to pass multiple checks in order for one to work. I can't think of any situations in ME2 that went past one check. I also liked having to spend points in a skill to be able to unlock those options. It made it more rewarding when you could pass one, and made sense when you couldn't. It also made it easier to play a 'paragade' Shep, one that has good intentions and harsh methods. The system in ME2 works against this style, as the more points you miss in a certain alignment, the harder it gets to choose those options in the future.

Anyway, I still love both of these games (played many hours through both and still going) just wanted to voice my opinion and get it out there.

Wow, this turned out a lot longer than I expected >.>

You hit the nail on the head with the dialogue.

I also feel like the story on ME2 was a little shallow compared to ME1. It was more predictable. I think the problem is that Shepard didn't have a single antagonizer in ME2 like he did with Saren in ME1. Saren was the Darth Vader type and at the end of the game you wanted to see that battle. You just don't have that type of battle at the end of ME2. I think in ME3 they need to have a stand out villain like Saren.

[spacehamsterZH]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...
Video games, LIKE EVERY SINGLE OTHER MEDIA WILL CONTINUE TO FREAKING EVOLVE WITH TECHNOLOGY AND YEARS INTO THE FUTURE. Why the hell can't people see that?

Of course they will. I fail to see how my post didn't allow for that possibility. I'm more interested to know how people like you and all the others who will complain about absolutely freaking everything refuse to see that both of the Mass Effect games are years ahead of the vast majority of the competition when it comes to balancing quality storytelling, cinematic visuals and full voice acting, and interactivity. Instead you hold them to some imaginary standard that NOT A SINGLE GAME IN HISTORY has EVER lived up to and won't until at the very least it's possible to generate voice output without having to record it first that doesn't sound like your Mac reading an e-mail to you.

[SkullandBonesmember]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

The choices in CRPGs will always be limited, especially in ones that have full voice acting.

Well, isn't it safe to assume if video games, up to and including RPGs and/or story driven games will continue to evolve, eventually, and soon, choices won't always be cosmetic and full voice acting won't limit future games?

[spacehamsterZH]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

spacehamsterZH wrote...

The choices in CRPGs will always be limited, especially in ones that have full voice acting.

Well, isn't it safe to assume if video games, up to and including RPGs and/or story driven games will continue to evolve, eventually, and soon, choices won't always be cosmetic and full voice acting won't limit future games?

What? I don't even understand this post anymore. Speak English.

[Terror_K]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...
Video games, LIKE EVERY SINGLE OTHER MEDIA WILL CONTINUE TO FREAKING EVOLVE WITH TECHNOLOGY AND YEARS INTO THE FUTURE. Why the hell can't people see that?

Of course they will. I fail to see how my post didn't allow for that possibility. I'm more interested to know how people like you and all the others who will complain about absolutely freaking everything refuse to see that both of the Mass Effect games are years ahead of the vast majority of the competition when it comes to balancing quality storytelling, cinematic visuals and full voice acting, and interactivity. Instead you hold them to some imaginary standard that NOT A SINGLE GAME IN HISTORY has EVER lived up to and won't until at the very least it's possible to generate voice output without having to record it first that doesn't sound like your Mac reading an e-mail to you.

*cough*The Witcher*cough*

In either case, beyond the presentation, cinematic and interactive movie elements improving, a lot of ME2 was a step backwards, not forwards. Mass Effect was flawed but original and fresh. ME2 was technically less flawed but far more generic and simple.

[spacehamsterZH]

Terror_K wrote...
*cough*The Witcher*cough*

Years ahead of most of the competition is what I said. I've never played the Witcher, so I'll take your word for it or anyone else's who says there are games that do it better. But that still leaves the problem of the retarded standard the game's being held to. Maybe a 100 years from now when videogame NPCs are fully developed AIs, games will be what the Complainer Squad expected ME2 to be.

[tonnactus]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

After replaying ME1 just recently I can't say they were any different there either. Turian Councilor was second guessing every decision you made and the Salarian Councilor was convinced that everything was simply made up by the 'master manipulator' Saren. I often wondered why I even bothered with those clowns.

You dont have too.You can turn them off or not even have to speak with them after main missions.You have the freedom of choice.That is not the case with the smoking ******.