10273 réponses à ce sujet

[tonnactus]

Lumikki wrote...

Mass Effect 2's story telling was worst, because it was way too much about squad members, what did left the main story weak. I ques like Terror_K wrote, it was also so repeatable, the main formula with squad members was same. When there is like 10-12 squad members and you do allmost with all of them two missions. Recruit and loyalty, it's alot of missios about squad members. If you compare it to amouth of main story missions.

I think all recruitment should have happen in the way like it did with kasumi and zaeed.
Not killing billions of mercs just to speak with a person,instead meet them,find out what favour you could do them to join.
12 boring missions could be cut in this way and leave room for the main story,squad banter,things that are more important then "pew pew".

[bjdbwea]

Yes, the game should have had only about half the companions. Maintain the loyalty quests, but give each of the companions more dialogue and depth as well, and a real role in the story, which can in turn be made longer and more detailed too.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 24 août 2010 - 12:54 .

[Kappa Neko]

I thought recruiting squad mates was the best part of the game... the game IS about the people on your mission, the plot just functions as a framework. Yes, it's an easy way to make a game. BUT regardless of the stupid main mission, BW did a great job making the Mass Effect universe come to life. I loved the epic and dark atmosphere of ME1 but I loved exploring the universe and talking to tons of aliens and being introduced to new species in ME2, too.

I was so disappointed with Zaeed. No recruiting. He's just standing there on Omega at the entrance. His loyal mission takes about 20 minutes or something. His personality is awful....I'm so glad I got this guy for free. Wouldn't pay a cent for him! Never bothered getting Kasumi.



Things I'm disappointed with are:

- Yes, the main mission. But as I said, they focused on character development and that's fine. But for ME3 I want a real kiss-ass story!

- Choices in the game: I missed real dramatic decisions like on Vermire. You can do tons of stuff one way or the other but nothing has a significant impact on the story arch. Some do without you being aware of it, such as getting your crew killed if you wait too long for the final attack on the collector base.

- Some of your squad mates don't talk that much to you. Garrus is one of them. I kept coming back to him but all he has to say is he needs to do some calibrations.... when you romance him, he keeps saying the same line over and over about doing research on blowing off steam. Because I did his mission very early, he had nothing to say to me for about 20 hours of the game............. Jacob doesn't like talking, either. I thought it was because I turned him down but he doesn't talk to my male Shep, either. Joker should talk more! I know, you can listen to his funny comments when you keep looking over his shoulder. But I want to talk WITH him!

- What's the point of being able to continue the game after the suicide mission when your people still think it's before the mission....

- Jacob being the only human romance for us ladies. Even sweet Garrus can't make up for this disappointment.

- I thought the ending was rather unspectacular. Not much drama. Just this one jump and an explosion *jawns* Best ending is the one in which everybody dies. This can't be right.

[Terror_K]

The thing is the recruitment is half the main mission too in a way, since that's part of the focus. I think the issue was more the fact that even once recruited the companions were just so isolated from the rest of the main plot and each other, with the exception of Mordin, Jacob and Miranda. As has been stated, instead of simply having the upgrade that each squaddie comes with pop into your research station it should have been integrated as a mission in some way, similar to the loyalty ones where you need to take whoever is involved with you. On top of that all the squaddies needed to be at mission briefings (like the ME1 ones always were) and we needed more interaction between them and more integration with the Collectors plot and them overall.



The problem, IMO, wasn't that you needed to recruit them and do loyalty missions for them: it was that they mostly all just existed within their own little bubble and only briefly and occasionally popped out of it. Compare this to ME1 where every so often when you talk to your squaddies they'll bring up chasing Saren and the mission at some point, just in casual conversation. And in ME1 they're not even part of the main plot like the suicide squad in ME2 are supposed to be, and there's simply not enough of what should be the main plot to make up for it. With 10-12 squaddies what we have is a case of what should be the B-plot taking precedence and what should be the A-plot being constantly pushed back. The issue isn't so much that there's too much B-plot but that there's not enough A-plot to the point where priorities seem to have totally reversed.

[Whatever42]

For the most part, I thought the character missions were brilliant. Jacob's was meh. But for the most part, compared to the cookie cutter missions in ME1, Bioware delivered.



That said, I do agree the pacing really suffered in the 2nd part of the game. I think we could have done with a couple less characters, most conversation depth with the remaining characters, and another collector mission or two to keep some intensity going, If this were a movie, I would say it suffered from some poor editing.



And more party banter definitely. Its amazing how big a difference these little fluffy items can make.

[Mister Mida]

Maybe Bioware should have taken a look at how Obsidian handled the NPC's in KotOR 2. Almost every time you enter the ship two of the ten characters are interacting with each other in same way or another. I always enjoy watching those scenes.

[Solaris Paradox]

tonnactus wrote...

I think all recruitment should have happen in the way like it did with kasumi and zaeed.
Not killing billions of mercs just to speak with a person,instead meet them,find out what favour you could do them to join.
12 boring missions could be cut in this way and leave room for the main story,squad banter,things that are more important then "pew pew".

Look, I know this is a genre that places more emphasis on story, and all that, but shut up with this snobbish "pew pew" stuff. Games are about gameplay, first and foremost. Even RPGs. There *is* nothing more important than "pew pew." At best there are things that are almost as important or just as important.

[tonnactus]

bjdbwea wrote...

Yes, the game should have had only about half the companions. Maintain the loyalty quests, but give each of the companions more dialogue and depth as well, and a real role in the story, which can in turn be made longer and more detailed too.

And "recruitment" doesnt have necessary to mean shooting your way to your future squadmate. Talk with them,convince them and did them a favor after that.

Modifié par tonnactus, 24 août 2010 - 01:45 .

[Il Divo]

Terror_K wrote...

If that's the case, then I can't see the balance ever being found: I can't see shooter fans being pleased without the RPG ones being disappointed.

Well, someone is always going to be disappointed somewhere, whenever you make a hybrid. That's just human nature. But it can be done. Bioshock is heavily inspired by rpg mechanics, yet it's all seemless. And that's really how it should function when blending the genres. Use rpg elements for the rpg (choosing your abilities). Use shooter elements for the shooter (fighting with your abilities). Mass Effect 2 does this. Unfortunately, there isn't enough variety in the rpg elements (level up abilities, upgrades) versus Bioshock (weapon upgrades, choose plasmids, combat/tech tonics, plasmid upgrades, etc). Each rpg element in Bioshock is not incredibly complex, but there are enough of them to feel that you are customizing.

Deus Ex is alot like Bioshock (or rather the other way around). The main problem with Deus Ex in comparison really is that the combat elements themselves are clunky. I can believe that a shooter fan might wrap his head around Bioshock. He won't notice the rpg influence but he'll find the fps gameplay very enjoyable. I can't say the same for Deus Ex which suffers from clunky mechanics and bad AI in comparison to other shooters.

To me Deus Ex got the blend pretty much dead-on, and Alpha Protocol and ME1 got pretty close as well. If you go and start making the game too action-oriented and simple then you start alienating the RPG nuts, and that's kind of what ME2 did, IMO. Sure... there are some RPG fans out there who aren't alienated much at all, but even then they fully admit that the game has become less an RPG when it comes to mechanics and more of a shooter and they merely think that the changes, while admittedly shallow, were improvements simply because they made the gameplay tighter and things less awkward and they don't really care that the game became more of a shooter for it.

Deus Ex got the blend. It just didn't get the gameplay, imo. Mass Effect however doesn't quite get the blend or the gameplay (which is very clunky). The inventory really is the worst offender in this regard for multiple reasons, such as pacing. Fps/tps genres are generally fast-paced (contrary to the rpg genre). On the other hand, Mass Effect's inventory does not please me as an rpg fan (since it's only an omni-gel machine imo) and it ruins the game's pacing for me as a tps fan. It doesn't please in either respect, so I don't see its purpose. 

There's also the issue of why a highly advanced super soldier is looting weak pistols off mercenaries?  

[Il Divo]

Solaris Paradox wrote...

Look, I know this is a genre that places more emphasis on story, and all that, but shut up with this snobbish "pew pew" stuff. Games are about gameplay, first and foremost. Even RPGs. There *is* nothing more important than "pew pew." At best there are things that are almost as important or just as important.

You have a point, except that Bioware rpgs feature interactive dialogue which is presented through the story and the characters, rather than cut-scenes where you are a passive observer (Ex: Halo). In this way the "story" is just as much a part of the gameplay as the shooter elements, if not more.  

Modifié par Il Divo, 24 août 2010 - 01:51 .

[tonnactus]

Solaris Paradox wrote...


Look, I know this is a genre that places more emphasis on story, and all that, but shut up with this snobbish "pew pew"

First,no one tell me to shut up,and second,i use quotation marks for a reason.

[bjdbwea]

Solaris Paradox wrote...

Look, I know this is a genre that places more emphasis on story, and all that, but shut up with this snobbish "pew pew" stuff. Games are about gameplay, first and foremost. Even RPGs. There *is* nothing more important than "pew pew." At best there are things that are almost as important or just as important.

There are lot of things in a good RPG that are equally important or even more important than the combat, which you call gameplay. But actually, gameplay in an RPG consists of more than combat anyway.

If we say "pew-pew", we mean the usual mindless mowing down of waves of cannon fodder that many shooters consist of. An RPG should be better and more diverse, and it's unfortunate that ME 2 doesn't really try to be.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 24 août 2010 - 02:06 .

[Fhaileas]

Awwww...I think "pew! pew! pew!" is adorably cute!

[Il Divo]

bjdbwea wrote...

If we say "pew-pew", we mean the usual mindless mowing down of waves of cannon fodder that many shooters consist of. An RPG should be better and more diverse, and it's unfortunate that ME 2 doesn't really try to be.

But to be fair, alot of RPGs do feature the same exact issue. Pretty much every DA: O dungeon does the same: Deep Roads, Mage Tower, Urn of Sacred Ashes. All feature extraordinarily long dungeons and respectively you are mowing down Darkspawn, evil Mages, and drakes for extended periods of time, far more time than I comparatively spend shooting enemies in ME2.

[bjdbwea]

Il Divo wrote...

But to be fair, alot of RPGs do feature the same exact issue. Pretty much every DA: O dungeon does the same: Deep Roads, Mage Tower, Urn of Sacred Ashes. All feature extraordinarily long dungeons and respectively you are mowing down Darkspawn, evil Mages, and drakes for extended periods of time, far more time than I comparatively spend shooting enemies in ME2.

You have a point, but at least the level design in DA is a bit more believable and less linear and less railroaded. Plus, the game requires - or at least allows - more tactics and team work than mindless shooters do. And I can also use different weapons and armor, and build my party differently. It's far from being a BG 3 in these regards of course, but still. I for one find it much more entertaining than the pew-pew in conveniently designed arenas in ME 2.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 24 août 2010 - 02:27 .

[Il Divo]

I have to be honest in saying that your post caught me entirely off guard. I didn't see this approach coming at all. Having thought about it for a while, I have come up with a counter-argument. But regardless: well played, Sir.

Xeranx wrote...

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.

You bring up a good point. Most of your squad members have dealt with life or death circumstances before. Horizon was dangerous. The Derelict Reaper was dangerous. Most of their pasts were dangerous. But I think it's also important to consider that it is possible to have varying levels of danger available. Yes, it is possible that Garrus could take a bullet to the chest at any point while fighting mercenaries and the same can be said for any other party member.

But these sorts of things become relatively standard fare. Mercenaries no longer pose a "challenge" to our deadly band of brothers.  And they are comparatively less dangerous than the Derelict Reaper or Collector Ship which in turn are comparatively less dangerous than assaulting the Omega IV Relay (which would be considered suicidal based on comments). Combine this with the Normandy's crash-landing directly into the Collector Base unable to move and suddenly our perception of events has changed. There is no way out, no rescue. We have reached a definitive "point of no return".

Focused or not, all your party members can perform their roles competently. The problem is they've now progressed beyond the realms of what I call "usual danger". The entire point of their joining together was for this moment. It is possible to think that professionals such as these could put aside their personal issues and focus in life or death, but that's still not always the case. Questions start springing to mind, not the least of which are friends and family. Thane may be the greatest assassin in the world, but his back story shows us that he can let personal feelings get in the way (which can be said for all our party members to different degrees). To go on a suicide mission never having resolved your business with your son? Issues like this (I feel) could have an impact on one's ability to perform even in life or death circumstances, which results in less than optimal performance.   

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.

This reminds me heavily of Serenity.

Wash: I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I -- *stab*.

RIP Wash.

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.

I definitely think that we agree on this. If we are going to go the method where our squad members convey their "lack of focus" it should not come in the instance they are expected to perform, but rather before the mission. When traveling through the vents, Tali probably is not thinking about her potential exile from the Flotilla if you did not complete her loyalty mission. It should manifest itself in the squad member doubting their own capabilities at the time of their selection. I do like your method.

Ex: Select Tali as your tech expert. She doubts her ability to make it to the door in time. Tali successfully does, but door jams. She fixes it, has a brief moment of triumph, then takes a rocket to the face.

The only problem I see with this approach is that it might become cliche` if used multiple times for the tech, biotic, and squad leader portions of the suicide mission. But it is a good idea regardless.

Modifié par Il Divo, 24 août 2010 - 02:48 .

[Il Divo]

bjdbwea wrote...

You have a point, but at least the level design in DA is a bit more believable and less linear and less railroaded. Plus, the game requires - or at least allows - more tactics and team work than mindless shooters do. And I can also use different weapons and armor, and build my party differently. It's far from being a BG 3 in these regards of course, but still. I for one find it much more entertaining than the pew-pew in conveniently designed arenas in ME 2.

True enough. It also doesn't help that I'm personally biased more towards Swords + Sorcery than giant 'splosions so I'm inclined to agree. The Deep Roads also do feel like the Mines of Moria so that's always a plus. I'm just saying this isn't an issue that strictly falls against Mass Effect 2. Although they are much better designed, the DA: O dungeons do begin to feel mindless/repetitive after the first few rooms of enemies, especially when killing so many darkspawn. One poster in the DA:O forums pointed this out to me and I haven't been able to forget about it since.  

[bjdbwea]

Il Divo wrote...

True enough. It also doesn't help that I'm personally biased more towards Swords + Sorcery than giant 'splosions so I'm inclined to agree. The Deep Roads also do feel like the Mines of Moria so that's always a plus. I'm just saying this isn't an issue that strictly falls against Mass Effect 2. Although they are much better designed, the DA: O dungeons do begin to feel mindless/repetitive after the first few rooms of enemies, especially when killing so many darkspawn. One poster in the DA:O forums pointed this out to me and I haven't been able to forget about it since.

I know there were many complaints against the Deep Roads especially on the DA forums, but they never really bothered me. It also helps that you meet other NPCs you can interact with, you have companions giving comments instead of being silent guns, and you can always leave instead of being caged in a strictly linear level that constantly closes doors behind you, as is the case in ME 2. As far as DA is concerned, I'm much more annoyed by the Fade, for obvious reasons.

Come to think of it, ME 2 does feel a bit like the Fade: My player character is pulled out of a story and away from characters I liked, and thrown into a world that looks flashy, but is linear, repetitive and lacks depth.

[tonnactus]

Il Divo wrote...


There's also the issue of why a highly advanced super soldier is looting weak pistols off mercenaries?  

What changed?Its even more absurd now.Some billions for shepardts reviving and the new normandy,but shepardt
still loot upgrades and money in merc bases.Someone could also expect that cerberus theirself have far more advanced
armor,weapon upgrades and weapons then merc bands like eclipse...

Modifié par tonnactus, 24 août 2010 - 06:38 .

[Lumikki]

tonnactus wrote...

Il Divo wrote...
There's also the issue of why a highly advanced super soldier is looting weak pistols off mercenaries?  

What changed?Its even more absurd now.Some billions for shepardts reviving and the new normandy,but shepardt
still loot upgrades and money in merc bases.Someone could also expect that cerberus theirself have far more advanced armor,weapon upgrades and weapons then merc bands like eclipse...

You kiding?

Yes, it's wonder why Shepard loots at all, when there is bilions of money in use. If you how ever look situation on ME1 it wasn't that different. Shepard got ship and big crew  because been Specter. Where did it read in job description, profesional junk looter.

How ever, the point of poster was that Shepard looting has become more reasonable in ME2. In ME1 Shepard looted all, even stuff what had zero use for Shepard. In ME2 Shepard loots, ammos, money and new technology advancements. Those are reasonable looting.

Modifié par Lumikki, 24 août 2010 - 07:23 .

[tonnactus]

Lumikki wrote...

How ever, the point of poster was that Shepard looting has become more reasonable in ME2. In ME1 Shepard looted all, even stuff what had zero use for Shepard. In ME2 Shepard loots, ammos, money and new advancements. Those are reasonable looting.

Not from merc groups.(and look first which post i answered). Cerberus not only money,but also advanced tech.
Some equivalent to spectre gear would make sense that shepardt get from cerberus.Not some crappy damage upgrade
from eclipse for smgs or temptest(funny,quarian ground troops had better weapons then shepardt).

[cachx]

tonnactus wrote...

Lumikki wrote...
How ever, the point of poster was that Shepard looting has become more reasonable in ME2. In ME1 Shepard looted all, even stuff what had zero use for Shepard. In ME2 Shepard loots, ammos, money and new advancements. Those are reasonable looting.

Not from merc groups.(and look first which post i answered). Cerberus not only money,but also advanced tech.
Some equivalent to spectre gear would make sense that shepardt get from cerberus.Not some crappy damage upgrade
from eclipse for smgs or temptest(funny,quarian ground troops had better weapons then shepardt).

Technically speaking, most DLC weaponry comes directly from Cerberus, at no cost for Shep (but at cost to our real wallets ).

Also by the same logic, it was dumb that you had to pay for stuff in ME1, because the Council should provide for you thing like Spctre gear for free. Mordin even takes a jab at this when talking about STG "better founding, no need to purchase own equipment"

[Revan312]

To me it seemed a little more plausible in ME1 as your a specter, which seems like a mercenary position anyway. Your a solo covert agent that's still connected to your own races military, I can see why they didn't just hand you a set of Colossus X as there's quite a number of specters, at least, that's how I saw it. You get basic equipment but since you get paid for the work, you can afford your own advanced weapons/armor.



Your the one and only "savior" in ME2 and Cerberus spent billions bringing you back, it seems like they should just comp everything as your TIM's linchpin... I mean, why can't I have an uber armored gunship, seems any mercenary leader/billionaire criminal with a bad accent gets one...

[VanTesla]

disappointed that the Data transfer from ME1 to ME2 has not been fixed yet.

[Iakus]

[quote]KotOREffecT wrote...

[quote]iakus wrote...

I thought it was awful, cliched, and hamfistted.  (but that's just me)  Much better would have been to destroy Shepard's reputation, turn him or her into a laughingstock or an embaressment the Council would be glad to see gone. 

Agree 110% on Ashley and emails[/quote]

[quote]
Oh cmon, the Ash thing was not that terrible at all,
[/quote]
 
The very thought of running Horizon again kills any desire I have to play ME 2.  Followed closely behind by "Ah, yes, 'Reapers'" and the final boss.

[quote]
She had a reason to act like that, yea it was a bit akward, but can you blame her. And Shep, what did you expect? The man has been through hell and Ash expects the world from him, like he's some damn emotional teddy bear for her, newsflash, the mans a soldier. He's been brought back from the dead and is now is the clucthes of Cerberus and has no one else nor the people he thought were always gonna be there for him. The man is pratically a heartless emo at this point, he has to be. So yea that scene was a bit akward because of the that, but it was for the best how it happened, esp how the game went. Hopefully we get Sheploo emo tears in ME 3 and it better damn not be akward! [/quote]

Ash is opinionated, but not an idiot,  nor in need of "an emotional teddybear".  She acts that way because the writers decided to do that to seperate her from Shepard (perhaps part of the "We can do whatever we want to our characters and you can't stop us.  Neener-neener!" bit)  Shepard saved Ash's life at least twice,  Shep saved the entire frakking galaxy galaxy at least once.  Enough trust to take ten minutes to listen to Shep's story is not too much to ask.  And having the proper dialogue options to do so is not too much for us to ask.  Stoic Shepard is fine.  Brick Shepard, not so much.

And that's just Ashley.  Kaiden's attitude is even more bizzare.  Different character, different persality, but near-identical lnes.

[quote]
Which is why I think the whole kill Shep and take away everything from him that he loved(being the spectre hero,love interest, friends, alliance and anderson whom he kinda looks up to), and introduce him to the darker aspects which was what ME 2 was about worked well. ME 3 will clear a lot of things up no doubt, all the akward bs, the plot issues, everything, and hopefully the email system as well, not that it was all bad(Ash's email was actually pretty heartfelt. Hopefully all choices and relationships come to fruition.
[/quote]

Shep goes darkside because the villains are the only ones willing to help is cool.  Shep goes darkside because he's been dead for two years and everyone's written him off is like something out of a soap opera.  Or maybe a heavy-handed method of providing Shepard as a blank slate for new players.  This makes me oh-so excited to see what they come up with for ME 3.  A time machine, maybe?

Taking away everything that Shepard had could have been done so much more dramatically and so much more logically by simply discrediting him.  No further evidence of Reapers is found.  Signs of previous culling cycles are inconclusive at best.  Allies are called away on other matters.  The Council (either one) is convinced that with Sovereign's death and the Keepers reprogrammed, the galaxy is safe from Reapers forever.  Shepard's "obsession " with the Reapers becomes a sad joke.  No one except Anderson pays attention anymore.  It would be politically inconvenient to revoke his Spectre status because of his/her heroic past.  So as long as Shep stays on the fringes of space and doesn't do anything blatantly treasonous, the Council and Alliance are willing to let Shep play around on the frontier.  Finally, out of funding and resources, SHep is approached by jacob and Miranda on behalf of the Illusive Man, and a dark bargain is struck.

Or we could kill Shep off with bug-eyed monsters...

Modifié par iakus, 24 août 2010 - 10:40 .