10273 réponses à ce sujet

[finnithe]

tonnactus wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...
Those open worlds were the easy way out, 

No,most planets in the galaxy would exactly look like they did in the first game.Barren and lifeless. Maybee bioware thought that science fiction fans would now that,but they were obviously wrong.

Would we watch Star Trek if every planet Captain Kirk visited was a barren piece of rock with no one living on it? You're right in that most planets would be like this, but we never got to saw the other ones outside of the main story missions. 

bjdbwea wrote...

Orchomene wrote...

False choices.
TIM : "Shepard, go there, kill the enemies and report. Or do nothing if you want."
Shepard : "Ok, I'd rather do nothing, thus."
TIM : "Wait ! You really should do it nonetheless, it's important"
Shepard : "Ok, then. I think I should then do it. Anyway, I don't have anything else to do, so..."
TIM : "Good, don't forget to report."

To be fair, if you want to tell a good story, you have to enforce some developments, for example missions the player has to do. Freedom and exploration are great (and both severely missing in ME 2), but a good main story needs some linearity. Not saying the ME 2 main story is good, it isn't, but that's at least the theory. Even the Bethesda games do this by making important NPCs invulnerable.

That said, I totally agree that ME 2 lacks choices. Especially during the missions. During the side quests obviously, which are not only very dumb, but also completely linear. But also during the main story missions.

There are choices in ME2, but they are mostly limited to the characters you interact with, specifically your party members. Some of the side quests do have choices (i.e. the Batarian terrorist one), and I wonder if not doing a quest counts as a choice that will be carried over into Mass Effect 3, but other than that there's not too many. 

[AlanC9]

bjdbwea wrote...
 Even the Bethesda games do this by making important NPCs invulnerable.

IIRC Morrowind didn't -- you just got text saying the main quest was unwinnable but no further consequences.

[bjdbwea]

cachx wrote...

Oh and since most people ignored the link (due to allergy to truth, probably) I posted earlier here's a little part:

Casey Hudson wrote...

If much of what you're doing in the game is recruiting a team and making them loyal to you and getting them equipped, then you have lots of missions, but every one of them will change whether or not someone's loyal to you in the end, or if they're even there or not. So something like helping Miranda find her sister, which is more emotional, kind of atouchy-feely story, ties back into this suicide mission in a way that makes sense because her mind is clear and she's totally loyal to you.

Yeah, right. See, that's exactly the problem. There's nothing wrong with a story that's about the characters. Just that ME 2 is anything but. Every companion lives in their own universe, with no involvement in the developing story or any connection to any character beyond Shepard. They have their hour of glory during the loyalty mission, but for the rest of the travel they're not much more than decoration.

And the "loyalty" is the biggest joke of all. So because "her mind is clear and she's totally loyal to you", Miranda survives the falling debris. Otherwise it kills her. So that's the definition of loyalty. Whatever you say, Mr. Hudson, whatever you say.

Oh wait, we also get a different outfit retexture for their loyalty.

But, to be constructive too: There would be obvious ways to make loyalty more meaningful. First, no "switch" mission. Provide a proper influence system. Second, give loyalty a real meaning. For example, a companion refuses an order. Or, someone loses their nerves. This, with well done, emotionally engaging cutscenes, would be the right way to do it. Or just let it be. There was never any need for such a "complicated" final mission anyway. The game certainly could've used the invested resources elsewhere.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 17 juin 2010 - 07:13 .

[Mx_CN3]

bjdbwea wrote...

Yeah, right. See, that's exactly the problem. There's nothing wrong with a story that's about the characters. Just that ME 2 is anything but. Every companion lives in their own universe, with no involvement in the developing story or any connection to any character beyond Shepard. They have their hour of glory during the loyalty mission, but for the rest of the travel they're not much more than decoration.

For the most part I'll grant you that.  They still do have interactions, however, and a lot more of them than I remember in ME1.

bjdbwea wrote...

And the "loyalty" is the biggest joke of all. So because "her mind is clear and she's totally loyal to you", Miranda survives the falling debris. Otherwise it kills her. So that's the definition of loyalty. Whatever you say, Mr. Hudson, whatever you say.

Are you aware of the fact that this is a game?  In Prince of Persia: Warrior Within, if you pick up the Water Sword, you, for whatever reason, arrive at a few minutes' difference at the final boss and end up with a different ending.  There are probably more and better examples out there, but that's the first one that came to my  mind.  It's a game mechanic, they just used "loyalty" as the term to define whether or not someone survives.

bjdbwea wrote...


Oh wait, we also get a different outfit retexture for their loyalty.

This is what every outfit is.  Every.  Single.  One.  In every RPG that I've ever played.  As a side note, you also left out the loyalty power.

[Lumikki]

cachx wrote...

Oh and since most people ignored the link (due to allergy to truth, probably) I posted earlier here's a little part:

finnithe wrote...

There are choices in ME2, but they are mostly limited to the characters you interact with, specifically your party members.

AlanC9 wrote...

IIRC Morrowind didn't -- you just got text saying the main quest was unwinnable but no further consequences.

What ever you say to them, it will have ZERO affect to those people who you try to explain it. Alot of people are allready tryed it for long time and nothing has happen or change. So, why waste time, why not let them to complain, because this thread is for that. Is it true what they say or not, is irrelevant, because you can't change the outcome. Only what you do is keep the circle of arguments going on for ever, untill you will give up or die on old age. You can not complised anything as trying to make counter arguments. Because they have they own vision and that is they "truth".

Modifié par Lumikki, 17 juin 2010 - 07:38 .

[CroGamer002]

Orchomene wrote...

Kaylord wrote...

Orchomene wrote...

At least about my feelings, you are wrong. I didn't feel ME1 was a very good game. But at least it had some story whereas ME2 is just an accumulation of quests. An action/adventure game with a scenario of the level of command & conquer.
TIM : "Shepard, go there, kill the enemies and report."
Shepard : "Sir, yes sir !"

How wrong. TIM states everytime: It is your decision. Shepard chooses to collaborate on his own rules. The only influence is on the last decision, and even there Shepard can do what she pleases.
 
It is just cheesy that the Alliance´s reaction to Shepard´s reappearance is not taken into account at all. I would have liked to choose working for the Alliance with few resources and lots of bureaucracy or for Cerberus with lots resources and free reign on all missions. And a bit more surprises in the mission structure instead of having to go to 10 team-collector missions in a row.

False choices.
TIM : "Shepard, go there, kill the enemies and report. Or do nothing if you want."
Shepard : "Ok, I'd rather do nothing, thus."
TIM : "Wait ! You really should do it nonetheless, it's important"
Shepard : "Ok, then. I think I should then do it. Anyway, I don't have anything else to do, so..."
TIM : "Good, don't forget to report."

Miranda does reports idiot.

[bjdbwea]

Mx_CN3 wrote...

Are you aware of the fact that this is a game?  In Prince of Persia: Warrior Within, if you pick up the Water Sword, you, for whatever reason, arrive at a few minutes' difference at the final boss and end up with a different ending.  There are probably more and better examples out there, but that's the first one that came to my  mind.  It's a game mechanic, they just used "loyalty" as the term to define whether or not someone survives.

Yes, and that's stupid. First, because their loyalty shouldn't depend on a single switch. Second, and most importantly, didn't they just boast about ME 2 being focused on the characters? Now then, why not actually make it so? Why not give every character a truly unique role at least in the final mission? Why are instead random deaths a consequence of missing loyalty? As it is, the whole "suicide mission" is a gimmick without substance. It would better have been left out. Go with a decent, normal final mission and instead invest some more effort into the in-game roles for the different characters.

Mx_CN3 wrote...

This is what every outfit is.  Every.  Single.  One.  In every RPG that I've ever played.  As a side note, you also left out the loyalty power.

You haven't played many RPGs, I take it?

Modifié par bjdbwea, 17 juin 2010 - 07:41 .

[Mx_CN3]

bjdbwea wrote...

Yes, and that's stupid. First, because their loyalty shouldn't depend on a single switch. Second, and most importantly, didn't they just boast about ME 2 being focused on the characters? Now then, why not actually make it so? Why not give every character a truly unique role at least in the final mission? Why are instead random deaths a consequence of missing loyalty? As it is, the whole "suicide mission" is a gimmick without substance. It would better have been left out. Go with a decent, normal final mission and instead invest some more effort into the in-game roles for the different characters.

That being "stupid" is your opinion.  You're welcome to it, but I disagree.  A little more depth would be nice, but it is nothing that I can't live without.  I'm sorry for enjoying the game and its mechanics as is, my bad.

bjdbwea wrote...

You haven't played many RPGs, I take it?

At the time I wasn't thinking correctly of what textures were (I mixed "mesh" with "texture," don't ask why or how), and I do stand corrected.

[tonnactus]

finnithe wrote...


Would we watch Star Trek if every planet Captain Kirk visited was a barren piece of rock with no one living on it? You're right in that most planets would be like this, but we never got to saw the other ones outside of the main story missions. 

It depends if he still could find interesting things there. Some sidequests have actually dialog and spoken debriefing. That is better for me then small combat levels with mission completed screens.

[tonnactus]

bjdbwea wrote...

And the "loyalty" is the biggest joke of all. So because "her mind is clear and she's totally loyal to you", Miranda survives the falling debris. Otherwise it kills her. So that's the definition of loyalty. Whatever you say, Mr. Hudson, whatever you say.

Its really funny that the only loyality mission worth to call her that way was wrex mission in the first game.

When the miranda and jack confrontation comes up,did it play a role that shepardt did their "loyality missions". Obviously not, because not this but the amount of paragon or renegade points decide if this confrontation could be solved in a way without taking the side of one of them.

What a bad joke.

[tonnactus]

Mesina2 wrote...


Miranda does reports idiot.

Nice,insults.And how could miranda wrote reports when shepardt dont take her everywhere or just leave her on the ship?

[Iakus]

cachx wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...
The worst part is that most of these lines that they say are practically exactly the same ones used over and over regardless of who you take. Its like the writers just didn’t give a crap to go that extra mile to do anything out of the norm. 

Dunno if the list is complete, but go check here.

Every squadmate will have a couple of quips per mission. I know where you are coming from, as you want more "team bonding". However that is very difficult if not impossible due to time/budget/technical constraints (wich most gamers ignore to get moar moar moar! of whatever they like best).
As I said before, the only way to get that is to 100% railroad everything, forego choices and consequences and do a Final Fantasy-esque game. I would rather have ME2 faults and all, thank you.

Then there's dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Dialogue a game that doesn't even focus on teambuilding or earning trust/loyalty, but is a more typical "Star Map" Bioware rpg.  Even the dog gets a few lines!

If the focus of the game is building a team and earning the trust of the members, there needs to be more dialogue focusing on that than is in a typical game where your team mates just fall in your lap.  So in this particular case, yeah "moar moar moar"

cachx wrote...

Oh and since most people ignored the link (due to allergy to truth, probably) I posted earlier here's a little part:

Casey Hudson wrote...
Mass Effect 2 has an untraditional structure, "building the team" as your narrative thrust rather than just being relegated to the first act like in many games. Was there a worry that people wouldn't get it or would be waiting for the "real game" to start?

We knew it was a risk and something different. You're right, the story of Mass Effect 2 is very much about how you get ready for a mission by building a team and understanding who they are, and about learning the magnitude of what you're facing. The funny thing is that people will say "other than gathering your crew and building your team and getting ready for this mission, there's not much story there." But that is the story. In other
media, you find stories that are about so many different kinds of things, different structures. In movies you find there are stories about how someone gathers a team and makes them well equipped and well trained.

Part of what's great about a role playing game is that you have the choice of going off and doing other side stories, but that can be a problem, and that was one of the pieces of feedback we had about Mass Effect 1, that because the core story had so much intensity and pressure around it, when you would go off and do a side mission, it didn't have that kind of intensity and it wasn't directly linked as part of the story. That's where that Dirty Dozen team building structure addressed a lot of that on a fundamental level. If much of what you're doing in the game is recruiting a team and making them loyal to you and getting them equipped, then you have lots of missions, but every one of them will change whether or not someone's loyal to you in the end, or if they're even there or not. So something like helping Miranda find her sister, which is more emotional, kind of atouchy-feely story, ties back into this suicide mission in a way that makes sense because her mind is clear and she's totally loyal to you.

I read it.  I believe I even responded to it before.  But let me do so again:

"That's where that Dirty Dozen team building structure addressed a lot of that on a fundamental level. If much of what you're doing in the game is recruiting a team and making them loyal to you and getting them equipped, then you have lots of missions, but every one of them will change whether or not someone's loyal to you in the end, or if they're even there or not"

Once again, the Dirty Dozen (and other groups) have to work as a team.  This is not Shepard's Warband where they only owe loyalty to Shep and Shep alone.  Loyalty in a vacuum is illogical and yeah, immersion breaking.  One mission and suddenly Loyalty's in the "on" position is way too...video gamey...

I also queston the "equipping" them bit, given I would NOT want to go to a gunfight in most of the outfits they wear.  Gimme some good solid armor anytime:)

Modifié par iakus, 17 juin 2010 - 11:24 .

[Terror_K]

cachx wrote...

Every squadmate will have a couple of quips per mission. I know where you are coming from, as you want more "team bonding". However that is very difficult if not impossible due to time/budget/technical constraints (wich most gamers ignore to get moar moar moar! of whatever they like best).
As I said before, the only way to get that is to 100% railroad everything, forego choices and consequences and do a Final Fantasy-esque game. I would rather have ME2 faults and all, thank you.

It definitely is possible though.

The original game had elevator banter for one.

KotOR is pretty old now and it had moments where you'd wander along and suddenly there'd be a moment between your two companions which would vary depending on your variations. It even had sidequests that would only open up with certain companions with you in certain places.

KotOR II had moments where you'd return to the ship after a mission and you'd get little cutscenes between various characters completely independent of your main character which showed a bit more of them interacting with each other.

More recently Dragon Age Origins had points that would initiate banter when you walked through them in larger areas, the odd moments where you'd return to camp and see two party members interacting first in similar vein to KotoR II's ship returns and on top of that characters weighing far more in on conversations and major situations, which would sometimes even include back and forth banter where they didn't just react to you but reacted specifically to the other characters depending on who they were (e.g. you'd do or say something, Leliana would weigh in Alistair would agree with Leliana, Morrigan would make some kind of sarcastic quip about Alistair's opinion then give her own, Leliana would act as a voice of reason, etc.) and they had an extra character for you to work with meaning an added layer of complexity that ME2 doesn't have.

So, yeah... its been done before several times, even by BioWare themselves, so is very possible.

[Pocketgb]

Pretty much all of Bioware's games have had quests tied to certain companions. What they haven't attempted, though, is the larger emphasis on their sidequests and the amount of party members coupled with the amount of conversation they contain (at least for some. Lookin' at you from a MaleShep perspective, Garrus) - and both of these are quite apparent in ME2.

I would've definitely enjoyed a bit more party-member interaction - it would've been very interesting to see potential LI's duke-it-out :3 - but greatly appreciated what we were given.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 18 juin 2010 - 01:49 .

[cachx]

Oh... when the topic reached page 2 I kinda hoped for it to stay dead:wizard:

Terror_K wrote...
It definitely is possible though.

The original game had elevator banter for one.

KotOR is pretty old now and it had moments where you'd wander along and suddenly there'd be a moment between your two companions which would vary depending on your variations. It even had sidequests that would only open up with certain companions with you in certain places.

KotOR II had moments where you'd return to the ship after a mission and you'd get little cutscenes between various characters completely independent of your main character which showed a bit more of them interacting with each other.

More recently Dragon Age Origins had points that would initiate banter when you walked through them in larger areas, the odd moments where you'd return to camp and see two party members interacting first in similar vein to KotoR II's ship returns and on top of that characters weighing far more in on conversations and major situations, which would sometimes even include back and forth banter where they didn't just react to you but reacted specifically to the other characters depending on who they were (e.g. you'd do or say something, Leliana would weigh in Alistair would agree with Leliana, Morrigan would make some kind of sarcastic quip about Alistair's opinion then give her own, Leliana would act as a voice of reason, etc.) and they had an extra character for you to work with meaning an added layer of complexity that ME2 doesn't have.

So, yeah... its been done before several times, even by BioWare themselves, so is very possible.

Please note that I'm not opposed to it, but there are limits on what can be achievable (pretty good suggestion thread here).

You do get in-party moments, but they are few and far between. I agree on that.

Also to consider. Dragon Age has no voiced protagonists, ME has two. DAO also relies a little bit more on text.The Kotor games also can cut corners thanks to 'robospeak' and 'alienspeak' (just garbled sounds that repeat over and over). ME2 is already bigger than those, and I imagine ME3 will be even bigger (it has to piggy back on all the outcomes of ME1 and 2, after all).

You can add to that time constraints (only a few companies can afford multiple delays, like Blizzard or Valve), budget (how many lines can Sheen record before asking for more $$?) or simple space (remeber the stink the game got at launch for being in 2 discs on xbox?)

[SithLordExarKun]

cachx wrote...

 all, thank you.

Oh and since most people ignored the link (due to allergy to truth, probably) I posted earlier here's a little part:

Casey Hudson wrote...
Mass Effect 2 has an untraditional structure, "building the team" as your narrative thrust rather than just being relegated to the first act like in many games. Was there a worry that people wouldn't get it or would be waiting for the "real game" to start?

We knew it was a risk and something different. You're right, the story of Mass Effect 2 is very much about how you get ready for a mission by building a team and understanding who they are, and about learning the magnitude of what you're facing. The funny thing is that people will say "other than gathering your crew and building your team and getting ready for this mission, there's not much story there." But that is the story. In other
media, you find stories that are about so many different kinds of things, different structures. In movies you find there are stories about how someone gathers a team and makes them well equipped and well trained.

Part of what's great about a role playing game is that you have the choice of going off and doing other side stories, but that can be a problem, and that was one of the pieces of feedback we had about Mass Effect 1, that because the core story had so much intensity and pressure around it, when you would go off and do a side mission, it didn't have that kind of intensity and it wasn't directly linked as part of the story. That's where that Dirty Dozen team building structure addressed a lot of that on a fundamental level. If much of what you're doing in the game is recruiting a team and making them loyal to you and getting them equipped, then you have lots of missions, but every one of them will change whether or not someone's loyal to you in the end, or if they're even there or not. So something like helping Miranda find her sister, which is more emotional, kind of atouchy-feely story, ties back into this suicide mission in a way that makes sense because her mind is clear and she's totally loyal to you.

^ Exactly what i thought, this wasn't your typical save the day RPG but a character driven story where you get to personally know each and every squadmember.

[SithLordExarKun]

bjdbwea wrote...



Yes, and that's stupid. First, because their loyalty shouldn't depend on a single switch. Second, and most importantly, didn't they just boast about ME 2 being focused on the characters? Now then, why not actually make it so? Why not give every character a truly unique role at least in the final mission? Why are instead random deaths a consequence of missing loyalty? As it is, the whole "suicide mission" is a gimmick without substance. It would better have been left out. Go with a decent, normal final mission and instead invest some more effort into the in-game roles for the different characters.

Its called a gameplay mechanic mr albert einstein, its just as stupid as "pressing x" in a scripted scene to kill a said character.

Seriously, are you losing sleep over a game that didn't please you that came out months ago?

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...
 This is not Shepard's Warband where they only owe loyalty to Shep and Shep alone

Are you saying that it isn't, or that it shouldn't be?

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

iakus wrote...
 This is not Shepard's Warband where they only owe loyalty to Shep and Shep alone

Are you saying that it isn't, or that it shouldn't be?

Shouldn't be. At least, that's not how it we were told it should be.  How it worked out is a different story.

[McHoger]

All I know is that my opinion is fact, and anyone who disagrees opinion can be easily summed up in a casually brushed aside sentence. And all of you jocks(nerds) who are ruining my favorite RPG/TPS (TPS/RPG) with your constant need for mindless shooting(unncessarily spreadsheets) are not true fans.

[Darth Drago]

cachx wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...
The worst part is that most of these lines that they say are practically exactly the same ones used over and over regardless of who you take. Its like the writers just didn’t give a crap to go that extra mile to do anything out of the norm.

Every squadmate will have a couple of quips per mission. I know where you are coming from, as you want more "team bonding". However that is very difficult if not impossible due to time/budget/technical constraints (wich most gamers ignore to get moar moar moar! of whatever they like best).
As I said before, the only way to get that is to 100% railroad everything, forego choices and consequences and do a Final Fantasy-esque game. I would rather have ME2 faults and all, thank you.

-Time constraints? It wouldn’t take an experienced writer no more than a few days to a week to write the lines for each squad mate to use before main production even began.
-Budget constraint? How so? Everyone is still getting paid to write, voice acting and facial dialog animation already.
-Technical constraint? Again how? If they already say a line whats the difference of adding actual original lines in place of the same generic ones? They already are doing the dialog animation so there really isn’t any technical issues to deal with.
Like its been mentioned already in Dragon Age and a bunch of OLDER games your companions will have actual conversations with each other. Having a few original lines and a bunch of generic reused lines per loyalty mission instead of all original dialog is nothing but laziness as I see it.

cachx wrote...
Oh and since most people ignored the link (due to allergy to truth, probably) I posted earlier here's a little part:

-Cute, an allergy to truth. Yea right. Its nothing but a interview. Sorry but every time I see or hear an interview or something with one of the BioWare Mass Effect team it just makes me nauseous.

Casey Hudson wrote...
That's where that Dirty Dozen team building structure addressed a lot of that on a fundamental level. If much of what you're doing in the game is recruiting a team and making them loyal to you and getting them equipped, then you have lots of missions, but every one of them will change whether or not someone's loyal to you in the end, or if they're even there or not. So something like helping Miranda find her sister, which is more emotional, kind of a touchy-feely story, ties back into this suicide mission in a way that makes sense because her mind is clear and she's totally loyal to you.

-Getting them equipped? What ME2 game is he playing? What changes do we even see in any of our squad mates? Last I checked doing a renegade or paragon outcome for any loyalty mission doesn’t actually change that person at all.
It’s a shame no one on the development team actually watched The Dirty Dozen (or read the book), they would have known that a good part of it was about the team working together through all their differences. There is as we know, very little actual interaction between any of your squad mates. For the most part the game is entirely a bunch if individuals from start to end, no team at all.

Casey Hudson wrote...
With Mass Effect 2 we tried to do literally every single one of them, and there were basically 40 different categories of things we wanted to add or improve or change. But I think mostly we wanted to create an experience that was less about being a game and more about being an experience. That might be the theme behind everything. I'm not saying make the systems thinner or anything specific like that, but let the game get out of the way of the player having an experience. I think that's the goal of any artist in any medium, to get out of the way of what the game is trying to be. To make it less mechanical and let people interact with it in a more natural way.

-In other words improve and change by removing them completely. I would say that removing a lot of things from ME1 and overly streamlining ME2 would be considered thinning the game would you? Got to especially love the “we wanted to create an experience that was less about being a game and more about being an experience.” bit. Yea, so that’s why this so called experience plays like typical shooter game right?

Modifié par Darth Drago, 18 juin 2010 - 06:41 .

[Orchomene]

[quote]Casey Hudson wrote...
Mass Effect 2 has an untraditional structure, "building the team" as your narrative thrust rather than just being relegated to the first act like in many games. Was there a worry that people wouldn't get it or would be waiting for the "real game" to start?

We knew it was a risk and something different. You're right, the story of Mass Effect 2 is very much about how you get ready for a mission by building a team and understanding who they are, and about learning the magnitude of what you're facing. The funny thing is that people will say "other than gathering your crew and building your team and getting ready for this mission, there's not much story there." But that is the story. In other
media, you find stories that are about so many different kinds of things, different structures. In movies you find there are stories about how someone gathers a team and makes them well equipped and well trained.

Part of what's great about a role playing game is that you have the choice of going off and doing other side stories, but that can be a problem, and that was one of the pieces of feedback we had about Mass Effect 1, that because the core story had so much intensity and pressure around it, when you would go off and do a side mission, it didn't have that kind of intensity and it wasn't directly linked as part of the story. That's where that Dirty Dozen team building structure addressed a lot of that on a fundamental level. If much of what you're doing in the game is recruiting a team and making them loyal to you and getting them equipped, then you have lots of missions, but every one of them will change whether or not someone's loyal to you in the end, or if they're even there or not. So something like helping Miranda find her sister, which is more emotional, kind of atouchy-feely story, ties back into this suicide mission in a way that makes sense because her mind is clear and she's totally loyal to you.[/quote]
[/quote]

This part is pretty funny. It can be said differently : ME1 was a game with an interesting main story and side quests that where too poor and too little linked to the main story. Thus, they corrected it in ME2 with a poor, flat and uninteresting story. Then, the side quests would be at the same level.

Now, Mr Hudson use the twisted communication trick consisting on dismissing the counter arguments saying that would be the arguments of those that didn't understand. How brilliant. Yeah, sorry, I must be some kind of retarded to not see that the game was all about recruiting and daddy issues. I've seen it and I can appreciate the concept. But only if this is consistent and interesting. In ME2, recruiting and loyalty missions where deconnected from the story. It's just an accumulation of quests. Discontinuity, lack of originality in most of those quests, pityful and snivelling psychological traits, caricatural personnalities.

About dialogues and NPC/NPC or NPC/PC interactions. I'm currently replaying for the nth time Kotor2 (this time with the restored content mod, happy to see that the Kotor 2 fanbase is still active after five years). In this game, ,the interactions are very natural, appear following the story. Kreia has a very high number of lines just only in the spaceship. Even the brutal Hanharr has a lot of lines and a very special personnality. Yet, there are 12 potential NPCs (only ten at most in a single playthrough, choice depending on sex and light/dark). Some pretty weak, but some having interesting personalities. You could influence the NPC and change their point of view. And this game is five year old. So don't say that they couldn't do it in ME2. No, they just didn't want to do it and rather focus on "pew pew" and earning money.

[Massadonious1]

They couldn't do it based off KoTOR 2 because they didn't make KoTOR 2.

[Mister Mida]

[quote]Orchomene wrote...

[quote]Casey Hudson wrote...
Mass Effect 2 has an untraditional structure, "building the team" as your narrative thrust rather than just being relegated to the first act like in many games. Was there a worry that people wouldn't get it or would be waiting for the "real game" to start?

We knew it was a risk and something different. You're right, the story of Mass Effect 2 is very much about how you get ready for a mission by building a team and understanding who they are, and about learning the magnitude of what you're facing. The funny thing is that people will say "other than gathering your crew and building your team and getting ready for this mission, there's not much story there." But that is the story. In other
media, you find stories that are about so many different kinds of things, different structures. In movies you find there are stories about how someone gathers a team and makes them well equipped and well trained.

Part of what's great about a role playing game is that you have the choice of going off and doing other side stories, but that can be a problem, and that was one of the pieces of feedback we had about Mass Effect 1, that because the core story had so much intensity and pressure around it, when you would go off and do a side mission, it didn't have that kind of intensity and it wasn't directly linked as part of the story. That's where that Dirty Dozen team building structure addressed a lot of that on a fundamental level. If much of what you're doing in the game is recruiting a team and making them loyal to you and getting them equipped, then you have lots of missions, but every one of them will change whether or not someone's loyal to you in the end, or if they're even there or not. So something like helping Miranda find her sister, which is more emotional, kind of atouchy-feely story, ties back into this suicide mission in a way that makes sense because her mind is clear and she's totally loyal to you.[/quote]
[/quote]

This part is pretty funny. It can be said differently : ME1 was a game with an interesting main story and side quests that where too poor and too little linked to the main story. Thus, they corrected it in ME2 with a poor, flat and uninteresting story. Then, the side quests would be at the same level.

Now, Mr Hudson use the twisted communication trick consisting on dismissing the counter arguments saying that would be the arguments of those that didn't understand. How brilliant. Yeah, sorry, I must be some kind of retarded to not see that the game was all about recruiting and daddy issues. I've seen it and I can appreciate the concept. But only if this is consistent and interesting. In ME2, recruiting and loyalty missions where deconnected from the story. It's just an accumulation of quests. Discontinuity, lack of originality in most of those quests, pityful and snivelling psychological traits, caricatural personnalities.

About dialogues and NPC/NPC or NPC/PC interactions. I'm currently replaying for the nth time Kotor2 (this time with the restored content mod, happy to see that the Kotor 2 fanbase is still active after five years). In this game, ,the interactions are very natural, appear following the story. Kreia has a very high number of lines just only in the spaceship. Even the brutal Hanharr has a lot of lines and a very special personnality. Yet, there are 12 potential NPCs (only ten at most in a single playthrough, choice depending on sex and light/dark). Some pretty weak, but some having interesting personalities. You could influence the NPC and change their point of view. And this game is five year old. So don't say that they couldn't do it in ME2. No, they just didn't want to do it and rather focus on "pew pew" and earning money.
[/quote]
So they finally finished  the restoration mod? Excellent. Too bad I don't have KotOR 2 on PC but on XBox.

Modifié par Mister Mida, 18 juin 2010 - 07:45 .

[Terror_K]

Darth Drago wrote...

Casey Hudson wrote...
But I think mostly we wanted to create an experience that was less about being a game and more about being an experience.

*LOL* :lol::lol: