10273 réponses à ce sujet

[Solaris Paradox]

LOLgarrusLOL wrote...

The person who voices femshep is bad at doing it. She sounds bored all the way through the game.

...No, she doesn't.

Not even arguing opinion here--she just doesn't.

She does, however, do much better at voicing Paragon dialogue than Renegade dialogue. If you played a Renegade run, you might be getting that impression because of that. MaleShep sounds blander overall, but does a better job at a lot of the Renegade lines than FemShep does.

There's a sexist stereotype in there somewhere...

Modifié par Solaris Paradox, 23 août 2010 - 11:44 .

[bjdbwea]

Lumikki wrote...

I ques there is no point to even try if you people don't listen. Story related dialogs or back ground related dialogs are two different thing. I can listen story related dialogs for next 30 minutes and like it. That doesn't mean I want to listen 5 minutes some weather talk what has nothing to do anything.

Point is don't assume everyone likes same than you do.

And that's fine. You don't have to play a game. If you don't like "pointless" dialogue even though that is a part of RPGs, then don't buy and play RPGs. Simple, no?

Besides, where is the "weather talk" in the ME games? I don't even see it in ME 2, and I am very critical of that game. If anything, the game has too little dialogue, especially in some important scenes.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 23 août 2010 - 11:50 .

[tonnactus]

Lumikki wrote...

I ques people don't seem to understand what long talking means. Okey let put you in this extreme situation.

You start to play ME1 and are going to first mission. Now two squad members starts to talk planets weather for next one hour and you can't do anything about it.

This is nonsense.They only talk about weather when you click on them.And its not the only line.Wrex for example told some "background story" when he worked as a bounty hunter on noveria.
They gave even comments when shepardt talk with lorik qeen and that asari that wants shepardt to upload a virus.

[Lumikki]

Oh, sorry I did not explain what weather talk is. It was metaform for sertain type of talks.

With "weather talk" I meaned back ground atmosphere talk or history of someting or behavior explanation of characters. Talking what is NOT related to story, but learning about gameworld or characters pasts or behaviors or just trying to improve games general atmosphere.

Modifié par Lumikki, 23 août 2010 - 12:11 .

[bjdbwea]

So you would prefer not to learn about the gameworld or characters? You would prefer a game that doesn't try to create atmosphere? I don't get it.

[Sidney]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...


Of course cover can exist in an RPG. A whack-a-mole cover system designed to make the player pop and shoot enemies? No, that cant, because thats a shooter cover system, and implementing it into games and FORCING the player to use it makes the game into a shooter.

Keep it optional, and it doesnt transform the game as much - like in ME1. Its a shooter aspect of the game, not a core element. Your second comparison failed.

Its part of that important aspect of RPGs again: choice. I choose to play a sentinel and an adept, and Bioware were gracious enough to ruin the power system in ME2 and force an assault rifle/shotgun/sinper onto what was supposed to be a power based class.

Listen, clearly youve taken offence to people calling out ME2 for being a dumbed down mass appeal shooter designed for idiots. My advice is, dont be offended. Just because we can see that ME2 was designed for a certain type of idiot doesnt mean "if you like ME2 youre obviously someone with a low intelligence".

Christ, its no different to most TV. Thats all designed for idiots too.

Regardless, youve completely failed to contest the claim that ME2 is 90% about being a bog standard shooter.

Wow are you one pretentious soul aren't you? Lovely but also blithely wrong about, well, everything here so let you begin.

A game can have a cover system but a game can't force you to use a cover system? Well, you do not have to use cover anymore that I have to use magic in BG2 or repair guns in FO. It makes life a LOT easier but there's nothing mandatory about cover. It does seem to be the thing to do when people are shooting at you - hide. A lot better than KoTOR's system although in fairness to KoTOR that ws based on the stupid combat that SW actually uses. Now, I guess based on your last argument that "cover" makes a game a shooter and that good ol' RPG's don't use such a thing. They haven't but then again most RPG's have combat system so bad they make me cringe. Jagged Alliance and XCOM both have cover system and no one would dare call those a shooter. They have what has been missing in tactical combat in most RPG's for 2 decades. In fact in ME1 and ME2 you have the only decent gun combat pieces for an RPG because things like movement, cover, direction of fire and what not actually matter. That's not a shooter, that's just good game design. Shooters though don't allow you to pause and aim - I mean really how non-shooterish can you get - but yet you still claim 90% shooter.

As for guns you whine on about choice and then ask to reduce choice in the game - this is really clever. You want to play as a power based character and don't like Sniper Rifles.....don't use them. That's a choice. See how happy everyone can be. I never touched a Sniper Rifle playing as my adept, no real reason other than I'm so bad shooting that I can't ever aim in that zoomed in mode, to but why in the heck should you tell other people how their characters should play their games when it is perfectly possible for you to play yours however you want. Yes the SR is on your back but you don't have to use it. Smart people who aren't shooter idiots should be able to figure that out.

I think the problem is less on my end and 100% on yours. The RPG fundamentalists are so limited of mind that they can't accept anything other than one form of RPG which is bizarre since RPG's have always had a flexible relationship to their game systems. The AD&D system is nothing like SPECIAL which was nothing like the Jade Empire system which was nothing like the Oblivion system. Some games had more interactive combat elements - Jade and Oblivion required user "skill" while AD&D on the IE was all point n' click. SPECIAL was point n' click until FO3 when it got a hybrid of elements similar to ME2. The point being that RPG's aren't one thing because the core of them is character-centric choice. That's something that doesn't exist in shooters or adventure games. ME2 is loaded with choice moments - from saving the people at the refinery to punching a reporter on the Citadel - and that alone makes it not 90% a shooter.

There's nothing more combat grindish about ME2 than DAO or BG2. In all of those games if you measure time you'll spend a lot more time grinding through dungeons than talking to people. The Deep Roads aren't some deep role playing experience for 99% of the drive through them. Most of the time it is slaughtering nameless/faceless foes in vast heaps.

You might not like ME2 and that is fine. It has it's flaws. The story structure might have been uncomfortable for you since you might want something more linear. That's fine. You might like playing with tons of vendor trash. That's fine. There are plenty of legit gripes about ME2 what isn't a legit gripe is that they've dumbed the thing down or it is just a shooter because neither of those is true other than the fact that you just want to say them over and over and make it feel true.

[Lumikki]

bjdbwea wrote...

So you would prefer not to learn about the gameworld or characters? You would prefer a game that doesn't try to create atmosphere? I don't get it.

No, I prefer that it's not forced to player, but player can choose to know more if they want. This has become better in Biowares newer games, but there is still possiblities to improve situation.

Example Kotor 1 had major problem with this, forced players to argumes of team members. ME1 did this alot better. DAO improved it more when it made some atmosphere talk as totaly back ground. Meaning player passing could hear npcs talking, if player wanted to get involved, player could go to npcs and start dialogs about subject. Also many dialogs choise alowed to player learn more about game world history, if they wanted. In ME2 dialogs where fine, but a lot of the back gound talk  was missing.

Meaning, I don't mind to have many "weather talk" options or hear it as back ground, but I don't what it to be forced to player, like it use to be in earlye Bioware games. Meaning also don't force me to learn why my team members behave like they do, let me to ask it, if I'm interested.

Modifié par Lumikki, 23 août 2010 - 12:28 .

[LOLgarrusLOL]

Solaris Paradox wrote...

LOLgarrusLOL wrote...

The person who voices femshep is bad at doing it. She sounds bored all the way through the game.

...No, she doesn't.

Not even arguing opinion here--she just doesn't.

She does, however, do much better at voicing Paragon dialogue than Renegade dialogue. If you played a Renegade run, you might be getting that impression because of that. MaleShep sounds blander overall, but does a better job at a lot of the Renegade lines than FemShep does.

There's a sexist stereotype in there somewhere...

[bjdbwea]

Lumikki wrote...

Meaning, I don't mind to have many "weather talk" options or hear it as back ground, but I don't what it to be forced to player, like it use to be in earlye Bioware games. Meaning also don't force me to learn why my team members behave like they do, let me to ask it, if I'm interested.

Ah, okay. So basically you don't like if a game forces things on you. I can agree with that.

I didn't like that ME 2 forces me to do missions at certain points instead of letting me decide where and when to go. I especially didn't like that the game forces my Shepard to stand / sit there like during the reunion with the ME 1 LIs. And I didn't like a lot of other things that the game enforces.

But apart from the main story of course, the game never forces you to talk to the companions or other characters. And actually this wasn't very different in previous BioWare games.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 23 août 2010 - 12:34 .

[Lumikki]

bjdbwea wrote...

But apart from the main story of course, the game never forces you to talk to the companions or other characters. And actually this wasn't very different in previous BioWare games.

Okey I make few examples to show differences.

In Kotor 1, when you walked in Taris, you got forced to listen team members arguments, because solving team members personal issues was part of game design. No, you did not have to do them, but it was forced to players face every moment it was possible. You remember those interupts what happen in sertain points. That's forcing team members issues to player. Little same with ME2 loyalty missions, even if it was little better done in as ME2, but not much.

In DAO, you remember when you got with Alistair to Redcliffe. It showed Alistairs past, but it was done story connection. This is good way to bring the personal history to players knowledge. It's story related and it's interesting way to do it. It is still forced too, but interesting way with story connection. Not just interupt player to listen team members arguments.

Other good example in DAO is when you walk in mage tower you over hear two mage talking about mage politics. Now you can just ignore it and continue what ever you did or you could also go to these npcs and start dialogs and learn more about mages in general.  Most of history of world is often left to players to learn by dialogs options.  This could be used also with team members. Example you over hear you team member talking with someone and if you go and start dialog, you could learn more about team members past or even get hole missions about it.

How ever, many team member "problems" are often forced to players. Like Bioware think it's players job to solve every team members personal issues. Like that's the way learn about team members. I think they do this, because they put so much effort to have hole gameplay about team members, but then they expect that player is actually interested about team members past, what isn't allways the case.

My point you can push the main story related stuff to players face, but don't force players to "weather talks".

Modifié par Lumikki, 23 août 2010 - 01:05 .

[Terror_K]

It was never forced though... in either game. If you don't want to talk with them, then just don't do it. Even with the loyalty quests in ME2 you could ignore them, or just do them by noting when Kelly mentions the crewmember wanting to speak with you and don't talk to them beyond that. I personally think it's a little silly and you're playing the wrong game if you're just going to ignore companions, but the option is there. In both games you can just stick to clicking the galaxy map each time you board The Normandy and ignore the people on your ship if you like... it's your call.

[Lumikki]

Yes, I can not to do those personal stuff, but I can not avoid that game is reminds me all the time about them. Every time I pass some invisible "check" point game reminds about those stuff. That's not ability ignore them, that force players avoid again and again as not to do what game wants you to do.

You may not feel they where forced, because you wanted to do them, but I did not. I don't care a mm about team members personal problems.

Modifié par Lumikki, 23 août 2010 - 02:57 .

[Epic777]

Personally I want more RPG elements in me3 however I don't want alot of RPG elements that are there because thats what RPGs do. I want those elements to fit.

[Solaris Paradox]

Lumikki wrote...

Yes, I can not to do those personal stuff, but I can not avoid that game is reminds me all the time about them. Every time I pass some invisible "check" point game reminds about those stuff. That's not ability ignore them, that force players avoid again and again as not to do what game wants you to do.

You may not feel they where forced, because you wanted to do them, but I did not. I don't care a mm about team members personal problems.

Sucks to be you, then.

[bjdbwea]

Lumikki wrote...

Yes, I can not to do those personal stuff, but I can not avoid that game is reminds me all the time about them. Every time I pass some invisible "check" point game reminds about those stuff. That's not ability ignore them, that force players avoid again and again as not to do what game wants you to do.

You may not feel they where forced, because you wanted to do them, but I did not. I don't care a mm about team members personal problems.

And still you seem to like the game so much. If you take the companions and their "personal problems" away, what's left? Do you really enjoy the main story so much? Or is it the pew-pew that makes you like the game?

You are absolutely right about the constant reminding though. It's one of many occasions of dumbing down the game to the lowest common denominator. Just because some players of the new target audience supposedly have very short attention spans and can't / won't remember anything, the game constantly has to remind everyone which companion to speak to or which key to press to end the mission.

To the extent that the message even appears during dialogue. As if the game was saying: "Why are you still here, talking to that boring NPC! Just press that button already and let's get to the next pew-pew! See, I'm a totally cool shooter, oh yeah!" <_<

Modifié par bjdbwea, 23 août 2010 - 03:09 .

[Solaris Paradox]

They could just be laboring under the delusion that there are a number of players who don't play their games in sixteen-hour servings, you know.

[bjdbwea]

Solaris Paradox wrote...

They could just be laboring under the delusion that there are a number of players who don't play their games in sixteen-hour servings, you know.

They could of course also be laboring under the delusion that players of an RPG use to check back with their companions anyway from time to time, if they're interested. And they could be laboring under the delusion that everyone who forgot which button to press could just look it up when needed.

Or they could be laboring under the delusion that some players might appreciate a simple option to disable these messages. If only it was as easy to turn on / off the other occasions of dumbing down.

[Lumikki]

bjdbwea wrote...

And still you seem to like the game so much. If you take the companions and their "personal problems" away, what's left? Do you really enjoy the main story so much? Or is it the pew-pew that makes you like the game?

I have no idea what this pew-pew is, but it made me laugh, thanks.

What I would want more, is like what it was in first half the Kasumi loyalty mission, you know little more direction to "James Bond" style. Than just shoot all enemies in this tunel like rail road missions maps or solving personal issues. Oh and that about 95% missions

Modifié par Lumikki, 23 août 2010 - 03:29 .

[Il Divo]

[quote]iakus wrote...

I'm saying that there's little to show.  A five second clip of Shepard bending over a body?  Okay that would work.  But I'm not upset that it wasn't shown.  Not saying the text is good or bad, just that it's a valid way to go. [/quote]

But I think you're missing my point. I'm not just saying to take that little paragraph of text and literally convert it to cut-scene form. I'm saying they should have done something with it. We were originally talking about side quests in relation to how we can convey depth. I don't just want Shepard standing over Kahoku's body. If I'm supposed to feel emotion through this, then I want some effort to be made at expressing emotion. No comment from Shepard? No opportunity to create my own desire for revenge? Instead, a journal entry is telling me how I'm supposed to feel and we call that emotional depth? 

[quote]
They feel very much useless.  They took enough care to do a cinematic cutscene of Shepard using an omnitool, but couldn't get Liara and Tali to say hello to each other? [/quote]

I'm not saying it's perfect. Hell, I'd scrap all of Mass Effect 2's side quests if I could and just have more in the style of Overlord or Bringing Down the Sky. But I feel that Bioware underestimates the value of "less is more" in some cases which is why they insist on piling so many useless side quests on us.  

[quote]
I don't mean that all the choices I made in ME 1 should be meaningful.  Most should in fact be quietly forgotten. 
[/quote]

At least we agree on this.

[quote]
But the ones that do carry over in ME 2 should be in a meaninful way.  I hold the Parassini meeting as one of the few well-done decision carryovers.  In ME 1 Parassini said she owed me a beer  In ME 2, she buys me a beer, we have a nice chat, she gives some foreshadowing into what is likely to be an ME 3 plot point.  Good stuff.

Unless Samesh Bhatia's restauant is going to be my base of operation s in ME 3, I really don't see how that message was relevant.  [/quote]

Hmm, so just to be clear, is your issue that you wanted more of those emails to become better implemented, or you just want the emails dropped altogether? I personally was comfortable with how my choices became involved, but then I wasn't following Mass Effect 2 every step of the way. I know alot of people were discontented with the Council's role. I looked at it like this: I'm operating in the Terminus Systems. The Council simply doesn't matter out here, so why should my decision to save them matter? On the other hand, if I spent most of the game in Citadel Space, I could see why the lack of carryover is an issue.  
 
[quote]

I agree.  The Shiala cameo felt forced.  As did Helena Blake.  I'm not saying I want more than the emails, I'm saying I wasnt less.  But what does appear should be more, if that makes any sense.  I don't want to get emails from every random NPC I had a conversation with in ME 1, but I do want the decision regarding to Council to have a greater impact.  I want more divergence based on whether Ashley or Kaiden lived.  Greater consequencees for who is the human Councilor.  Wrex living or dying.  Who the LI was, if any.  These were the Big Choices in the last game, either for Shepard personally or for the galaxy as a whole. But in the end they only had slightly more impact than the emails that flooded my Shepard's mailbox. [/quote]

And I would agree that these should have been hugely relevant, especially given how much Bioware hyped the import utility. But as someone who didn't really pay attention to Mass Effect 2's development until about two days before release, I missed most of that hype. All I knew was "Import Shepard, you die somehow, and evil space bugs called the Collectors".

As it was, I thought the idea of killing Shepard did serve as a good way of separating him from his life and actions. You're not the "Hero of the Citadel" anymore, so it makes sense that the Alliance doesn't care about you. Sure, some things should have been done better. The Ashley sequence on Horizon was absolutely terrible, for example. Emails were idiotic. That sort of thing.

I also know alot of people were disappointed by how Shepard's death didn't really affect him at all, but I'd say Chakwas did a great job of lampshading this fact "What you've been through would change most people. But not you." Sure, Shepard's reactions might be considered 'unrealistic', but any more than some of his other reactions? If you discovered a race of evil sentient machines capable of galactic destruction every 50k yeras, would you really take that in stride? We just go along with it because we need to move things along. But as it is, Shepard should be in an institution given some of the things he's experienced.  

Edit: Just noticed I went off on a bit of a tangent. Apologies. XD

[quote]

I dunno, I guess I just notice distinct people or objects more than places.  Rooms and walls are just background to me. [/quote]

That's fine. I feel mostly the same. But let me strawman your argument for a moment; let's say you went to 'fight Cerberus' in their base and instead of the generic four walled room, you found a Jade Empire-style environment. Same enemies, different look. Wouldn't you say that there is something seriously wrong here, despite it being a place?

You probably see where I'm going with this. Environments obviously shouldn't be the developers' first concern, but they still are an aspect of the world which you interact with. I could understand if the side quests themselves really felt fleshed out, but they were lacking in most respects especially compared to past Bioware games.  

[quote]
I can state with complete honesty that the thought never once entered my head. [/quote]

Fair enough, but you can understand how the thought crossed my mind many times.

[quote]
Perhaps it's because my first playthrough in ME 1 was Sole Survivor, but the Kahoku quest chain pretty much sealed my distaste for Cerberus.  Could the descrition have been better?  Certainly.  But the implications of the needle marks pretty much sold me on just how nasty Cerberus was. [/quote]

Well, I'm not saying I loved Cerberus. Obviously there are issues that Shepard needed to resolve. But quite simply, the delivery on Admiral Kahoku's death was terrible.

[quote]
Yup, you can talk Wrex down using regular dialogue if you got him his armor. [/quote]

Ah, thanks for the clarification.

[quote]
Picking the wrong specialist is Shepard's mistake, for not choosing someone with the correct skillset.  What I'm talking about is choosing somone who is strong enough, or skilled enough, but isn't focused enough. For example, how is choosing a non-loyal Jack (a superpowerful biotic) any different than choosing Thane (who is not)?  We know Jack's strong enough, but if she's not loyal, she fails identically to Thane.  Why? [/quote]

Here's how I take it (perhaps you feel differently). If someone is distracted or 'unfocused', this is going to manifest itself in a variety of different ways, one of which is not performing as well as one could. Here's an example:

Let's say I were to go to work tomorrow and find out that my boss was firing me because of performance issues. I'm probably not going to be jumping with joy; I'm probably going to be upset, wallow in my misery, wonder what to do, etc. Now let's say my best friend were to call me up and ask me to play Basketball for a few hours. So, I play basketball. Now I may be distracted by the game (focusing on the action), but deep down I'm not playing to the best of my ability because I know something feels wrong. I'm not actively thinking about unemployment, but it's expressed through my body's performance and a lack of ability.

That's honestly how I perceive the characters reacting. Thane fails the biotic portion because he's not strong enough. Unloyal Samara also fails (exactly the same way). But do you think that while she is in the midst of combat that Samara is actually thinking about Morinth while someone is shooting her in the back? I'd say not. Her lack of focus instead manifests in her physical performance. That's how I look at it.

[quote]

Actually, I was thinking of Aragorn's "For Frodo" line before the Black Gate...

The purpose of the exercise is to find a way to demonstrate that the squadmates are focused, that they have something worth fighting for, or living for.  That doing the mission accomplished more than a costume change and a "don't kill me" flag [/quote]

I'm not saying it's not a good idea, but taking shape in the form of everyone having their own battlecry isn't the best solution, imo. What makes Aragorn's "For Frodo" line so poignant is that with two words it expresses the entire purpose of the battle. Every character doesn't need a supplemental speech to go along with it. I'm not saying Shepard's speech is the equivalent of Caesar here, but I don't quite see how every squadmate needs their own 'focus animation'.

[quote]
Yeah my favorite (imaginary) scene in ME 2 would be if Your Shep had an ME 1 LI to receive a hologrphaic message just before hitting the relay.  There could be a heartfelt message, but Shep couldn't touch him/her (hologram, after all) ending with a look of resolve on Shep's face. 
[/quote]

To be quite honest, this was one of my favorite ideas for how to improve Mass Effect 2. It would have been very emotional. The only idea I remember hearing on the forums that beat this was beginning Mass Effect 3 with a flashback to Shepard's service history (Torfan, Akuze, etc).

Modifié par Il Divo, 23 août 2010 - 04:41 .

[Il Divo]

Terror_K wrote...

Deus Ex works well as both. That's what makes it so great. That's why even 10 years later it's still often taking the top spot in "Greatest Games of All Time" lists.

Don't get me wrong. I hold Deus Ex in the highest regard. It's quite simply an experience. I give it a solid 9.4.

I'm just saying that the gameplay probably isn't going to please someone as a shooter fan, which is why I think that Deus Ex has trouble standing on its own as a shooter (issues such as clunky mechanics). There's simply not enough action elements, even if the game is played with a brute force style. That's not to say that a shooter can't be deep. Bioshock and Half Life 2 are both characterized by a deep plot, well-written script, and memorable characters, but the emphasis of the gameplay is almost entirely on shooting mechanics, with the occasional break for puzzles or dialogue.

I just think that Deus Ex pleases much more as an rpg than it does as a shooter, which is still fine. But of course, as you blend genres, the distinction of what makes  a genre becomes a little blurry.

Modifié par Il Divo, 23 août 2010 - 04:24 .

[tonnactus]

Terror_K wrote...

It was never forced though... in either game. If you don't want to talk with them, then just don't do it. Even with the loyalty quests in ME2 you could ignore them, or just do them by noting when Kelly mentions the crewmember wanting to speak with you and don't talk to them beyond that.

But kelly wouldnt shut her mouth until you talk with them.I would call this forced,even railroaded.
Not that i wouldnt talk,but its annoying when i dont want to do this right now and the secretary got really annoying with
her "reminders".(also considering the emails)

[MrnDvlDg161]

I'm sorry but I consider that whole thing a " boring dialogue complaint" as I mentioned earlier. Those who can' t be bothered to go through choices and 4 to 6 lines of speech.



The narrative in ME2 evolved around the issues of the crew members, if someone didn't give a damn about their crew, then one should be delivered the ending that particular Shepard deserves. Its not a solitary, one man army here -- its a group of diverse individuals that agreed to go on a dangerous mission.



I thought the hints were helpful in a game with many squad members just like how I found the map and their direction tags to be helpful too. You can just imagine if there were no hints what so ever and you had to go through mining and planets to get where you needed to go.



The way your kept in the know is via Kelly Chambers who is the councilor. It made sense and blended in the game.

[Xeranx]

Il Divo wrote...

iakus wrote...
Picking the wrong specialist is Shepard's mistake, for not choosing someone with the correct skillset.  What I'm talking about is choosing somone who is strong enough, or skilled enough, but isn't focused enough. For example, how is choosing a non-loyal Jack (a superpowerful biotic) any different than choosing Thane (who is not)?  We know Jack's strong enough, but if she's not loyal, she fails identically to Thane.  Why?

Here's how I take it (perhaps you feel differently). If someone is distracted or 'unfocused', this is going to manifest itself in a variety of different ways, one of which is not performing as well as one could. Here's an example:

Let's say I were to go to work tomorrow and find out that my boss was firing me because of performance issues. I'm probably not going to be jumping with joy; I'm probably going to be upset, wallow in my misery, wonder what to do, etc. Now let's say my best friend were to call me up and ask me to play Basketball for a few hours. So, I play basketball. Now I may be distracted by the game (focusing on the action), but deep down I'm not playing to the best of my ability because I know something feels wrong. I'm not actively thinking about unemployment, but it's expressed through my body's performance and a lack of ability.

That's honestly how I perceive the characters reacting. Thane fails the biotic portion because he's not strong enough. Unloyal Samara also fails (exactly the same way). But do you think that while she is in the midst of combat that Samara is actually thinking about Morinth while someone is shooting her in the back? I'd say not. Her lack of focus instead manifests in her physical performance. That's how I look at it.

This is one of my issues with the suicide mission.  I understand where you're coming from with the job stress analogy and I know you're not putting it up against what is a life or death situation, but I have to stress that in a life or death situation something like the above would be minimal to non-existent because of the inherent need to survive.  Keep in mind that everyone that's on the suicide mission has been in hair raising circumstances (except Grunt).  In fact, Grunt's loyalty mission was the only one that really made any sense to me because of what it meant potentially.  I'll admit that Thane's loyalty mission is understandable....in hindsight and given that we're in no particular rush to do anything about the collectors -- sorry.

My main problem with the suicide mission is highlighted in the bolded part of your response.  In movies many characters, when coming up against something they've never encountered or done, doubt their ability to perform.  Then they resolve to perform whatever task is before them to the best of their ability.  If it's a life or death situation that doubt tends to get pushed away rather quickly.  Of course we usually end up with that person becoming happy at overcoming an obstacle they had and joyously cheering which gets them killed.  That's beside the point as in the case of ME2, the obstacle is performing the job (which is done in the case of the biotic long walk) and surviving so they can complete their personal objectives.

Back on topic: In one critical point during the mission you're supposed to have biotic protection.  Now that biotic protection is being currently provided and you're given time to adjust before you move on.  If there's a chance to fail that sequence there should be some misgivings about it before the long walk.  It should not happen during the instance where it would be deemed vital for the person performing the job to make sure they make it because there's a very likely possibility that should they fail, even if they aren't loyal to Shepard, they could suffer the same fate.

[Whatever42]

tonnactus wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

It was never forced though... in either game. If you don't want to talk with them, then just don't do it. Even with the loyalty quests in ME2 you could ignore them, or just do them by noting when Kelly mentions the crewmember wanting to speak with you and don't talk to them beyond that.

But kelly wouldnt shut her mouth until you talk with them.I would call this forced,even railroaded.
Not that i wouldnt talk,but its annoying when i dont want to do this right now and the secretary got really annoying with
her "reminders".(also considering the emails)

This is actually one reason that I think we're getting most of our squad back in ME3. To get your party killed, you pretty much had to do it deliberately. I do think "forced" is too strong a term. Strongly encouraged, definitely. It was an audio version of a quest log - and many people have serious problems ignoring anything in their quest log.

[ArchDemonXIII]

Sidney wrote...

Cover can't exist in an RPG? I know it typically hasn't because RPG's have terrible combat mechanics but, seriously, you don't want cover? You want the KoTOR world where people with guns stand around like they are in a Napoleonic Army and blast away standing bolt upright?

LMAO. Well played, sir. Nice analogy.

 What I find hilarious is the fact people say cover makes it obvious when a battle is about to start. Y'know, as opposed to the first game where impending combat was cleverly hidden by your squad all pulling their guns and the appearance of red dots or jamming warnings in the lower right corner.....