10273 réponses à ce sujet

[zazei]

Ch40sFox wrote...

Spartas Husky wrote...

hehehe still is so funny hearing morrigan allistair conversations, and shale lol just shale on her own is funny

ME needs more comic relief

Shale is a he... 

No Shale is a woman so she is definitely a she. Try bringing her to see Caradin if you don't believe it yourself. Her true name is Shayle.

kraidy1117 wrote...

iakus wrote...

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

The story arc was written by Drew to encompass all 3 games. Yes, ME2 had different writers but they didn't re-write the story arc. If you so strongly object to trilogies that have a single story then you can't place the blame on 3rd string writers but blame Drew directly.
Of course, most people have seen these kinds of trilogies before and just roll with it. But I appreciate its not to your taste. If you like your fiction "dumbed down", there is plenty of other fiction for you to enjoy.  

But how much was actually written by the major arc?  Didn't they say in an interview that they have the major arc stuff planned out, but not nearly everything?  I can believe hey haa planned out that organics are somehow needed by Reapers.  But was that...thing...really what they had in mind from the beginning?  And turning it into a boss fight?  Really?

I've said that there's good stuff in ME 2.  But it was terribly executed. 

This. ME2 story had potinal to be amazing, and even out do the ME story, it was done poorly. Too me it feels like the writing team decided to focus more on the characters andt he side stories. 

I don't think the reason it's so poor is because of the side characters. It's probably a main reason for why the main plot is so underdevelopped but mostly I think the poor execution comes from them taking so many shortcuts. My impression when playing the game was that the devs just ignored all issues that was inconvinent for the direction they wanted the story to go in rather then confronting them. Solve Survivor background talking about Azure with Miranda without even mentioning Cerberus being one example but it's not just Cerberus either. The whole game feels like it rather force something down our throat rather then make it work and because of that arguments and fights that had the potential to be great just ends up falling flat instead. Also ME2 is the only Bioware RPG so far I think where Shepard sometimes respond on her own without giving us a input.

To me the whole thing just feel so cheap because they limit our responses so much even though it wouldn't have changed the overall story if we had a chance to have a real conversation or verbal fight with someone before we agree to move on with the plot. The devs just seems to have taken shortcuts when it comes to the dialog in the game.

[bjdbwea]

zazei wrote...

Also ME2 is the only Bioware RPG so far I think where Shepard sometimes respond on her own without giving us a input.

Yeah, that annoys me too. To be fair, it happened in ME 1 too, but only perhaps 5 times, and it usually was only one rather unimportant sentence. In ME 2, it happens too often. And each time we can't choose an answer, is one more loss of immersion and one less chance to give our Shepard personality.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 28 août 2010 - 01:46 .

[Il Divo]

bjdbwea wrote...

Yeah, that annoys me too. To be fair, it happened in ME 1 too, but only perhaps 5 times, and it usually was only one rather unimportant sentence. In ME 2, it happens too often. And each time we can't choose an answer, is one more loss of immersion and one less chance to give our Shepard personality.

So wait a minute. You didn't mind Bioware adding voice-acting and the dialogue wheel in the first place which prevents you from knowing exactly what your Shepard will say, but you suddenly have a problem with Shepard saying a few lines on his own to make a scene flow better? Tell me, how much loss of immersion do you feel because Shepard says "I can't believe it's you Joker!" No more I would think than having to listen to the terrible voice-acting from Mark Meer.

Modifié par Il Divo, 28 août 2010 - 02:09 .

[bjdbwea]

Il Divo wrote...

So wait a minute. You didn't mind Bioware adding voice-acting and the dialogue wheel in the first place which prevents you from knowing exactly what your Shepard will say, but you suddenly have a problem with Shepard saying a few lines on his own to make a scene flow better?

Yes.

Il Divo wrote...

Tell me, how much loss of immersion do you feel because Shepard says "I can't believe it's you Joker!"

A lot, actually. A good example you chose there. Joker is the guy who got Shepard killed in the first place. First, perhaps he could have avoided the attack. But more importantly, he didn't follow orders and acted stupidly. So my Shepard wasn't exactly happy with Joker. Yet the game forces my Shepard to act quite happy upen the reunion and doesn't allow me to criticize him at all. So yeah, I would say that's a pretty big loss of immersion. Not only does the game often withhold very obvious replies, in this and several other cases it doesn't even allow any choices at all.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

bjdbwea wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

So wait a minute. You didn't mind Bioware adding voice-acting and the dialogue wheel in the first place which prevents you from knowing exactly what your Shepard will say, but you suddenly have a problem with Shepard saying a few lines on his own to make a scene flow better?

Yes.

Il Divo wrote...

Tell me, how much loss of immersion do you feel because Shepard says "I can't believe it's you Joker!"

A lot, actually. A good example you chose there. Joker is the guy who got Shepard killed in the first place. First, perhaps he could have avoided the attack. But more importantly, he didn't follow orders and acted stupidly. So my Shepard wasn't exactly happy with Joker. Yet the game forces my Shepard to act quite happy upen the reunion and doesn't allow me to criticize him at all. So yeah, I would say that's a pretty big loss of immersion. Not only does the game often withhold very obvious replies, in this and several other cases it doesn't even allow any choices at all.

I agree it's bad you can't get angry at Joker. But still I don't mind Shepard saying one or two things on his own, as long as it makes a conversation flow better and it doesn't dictate how my Shepard is (like forcing you to be happy to meet Joker again).

[Whatever42]

tonnactus wrote...

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...
I believe that the Reaper sentience is made up of the millions of minds ascended to create it (hence the requirement for organic tissue). I believe that the indoctrination field is used to keep all those minds borg-like in service the the hive mind.

That doesnt make sense because indoctrination is a degenerative process and the reapers would become dumb and mindless after some time.But wait...
That could be the reason why harbinger repeats his dumb sentences time after time and build a gigantic terminator.

Saren said that the stronger the influence of the indoctrination that the less free will the victim had and less useful it was - but that would be less useful as an autonomous agent outside of the Reaper. If each Reaper is a nation, the last thing you would want was each individual mind to have free will. The hive mind has free will, not each individual consciousness within the Reaper. it would be chaos if that were the case. Which is why countering indoctrination might tear a Reaper apart.

Modifié par Whatever666343431431654324, 28 août 2010 - 02:38 .

[Whatever42]

bjdbwea wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

So wait a minute. You didn't mind Bioware adding voice-acting and the dialogue wheel in the first place which prevents you from knowing exactly what your Shepard will say, but you suddenly have a problem with Shepard saying a few lines on his own to make a scene flow better?

Yes.

Il Divo wrote...

Tell me, how much loss of immersion do you feel because Shepard says "I can't believe it's you Joker!"

A lot, actually. A good example you chose there. Joker is the guy who got Shepard killed in the first place. First, perhaps he could have avoided the attack. But more importantly, he didn't follow orders and acted stupidly. So my Shepard wasn't exactly happy with Joker. Yet the game forces my Shepard to act quite happy upen the reunion and doesn't allow me to criticize him at all. So yeah, I would say that's a pretty big loss of immersion. Not only does the game often withhold very obvious replies, in this and several other cases it doesn't even allow any choices at all.

In ME1, I never wanted to return to the Citadel. I never trusted the council and I wanted to go straight to Ilos. Unfortunately, I was never given the choice. Damn, ME1 sucks. I can't believe anyone likes that game.

I appreciate that you are going to point out every minor difference between ME1 and ME2, real or not, and point to it as a catastrophe. But this is long past silly. 

Modifié par Whatever666343431431654324, 28 août 2010 - 02:39 .

[bjdbwea]

And I understand that you want to defend the game no matter what. But you should choose your examples better. The equivalent to not returning to the council would be telling Joker to get lost and finding a new pilot. This choice is obviously impractical and understandably not provided. You could scold the council though. You can't say anything to Joker about his previous behaviour. (And not only during the reunion, but in fact never during the entire game.)

Modifié par bjdbwea, 28 août 2010 - 03:05 .

[tonnactus]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...



Saren said that the stronger the influence of the indoctrination that the less free will the victim had and less useful it was - but that would be less useful as an autonomous agent outside of the Reaper.

Remember what rana thanoptis said about her predecessor and that the heavily indoctrinated salarians not even react  to flee if shepardt free them. The more time a person is affected by a indoctrinitation field,the more it lost not only will,but also intelligence and knowledge.They become mindless husks.

[Kronner]

What I disliked in ME2:

- The fact that in most cutscenes Shepard uses freaking Avenger AR despite the fact (s)he does not have AR training. This is easy to fix, how could they miss this. I really hate this stuff.
- Lack of party banter
- Very small, linear environment. Crates everywhere.
- Pathetic upgrade system - weapons, biotics, tech and cybernetics, you have 5/5 upgrades, congratulations :/
- Armor has absolutely NO impact on the game..are you kidding me? This is true for most armor pieces.
- Hubworlds feel like Hubmalls, very few sidequests, very small areas, nothing to do
- Mission completed screen - wtf did they think
- Pointless leveling system, no rewards for leveling up, no motivation, no better gear, unlocking weapons etc.
- Really bad AI - both enemies and squadmates
- Lots of random, minor graphic glitches - flickering in some places etc.

Modifié par Kronner, 28 août 2010 - 03:13 .

[Whatever42]

I have plenty of criticisms for ME2. Only a couple pages ago, I hacked on the final fight. I have criticized the narrow level design and the pacing of the second half of the game. I have seen zero balance from you. Every minor perceived change between ME1 and ME2 to you is an outrage.



And you end up going to Ilos alone anyway. You get nothing from the council. I hung up on them every single time and on my first play through had no desire to go back. But no choice. Not saying that similar things didn't happen in ME2, of course. Bioware at times pushes the story to where they need it to go. If this were Bethesda, I could have executed by whole crew and went pirate. But generally, you're along for the ride in Bioware stories.

[lazuli]

bjdbwea wrote...

Not only is ME 2 as a whole a lesser game, it doesn't even feel as if the developers tried. Inventory was clunky? Remove it. Vehicle wasn't perfect? Remove it.

The purpose of an inventory system is largely character customization in terms of combat effectiveness and looks, right?  The loadout system provides this.  It's still an inventory, just not one you get to fiddle with in the middle of a mission (usually).  It's different.  It's new.  It works.

But what was the purpose of the MAKO?  A sense of exploration and wonder?  That's a little harder to tack down.

Also, endlessly recycled interiors refute your claim of ME2 being a lesser game than its predecessor.

[Giggles_Manically]

The fact that there are:

Way to many plotholes

A vehicle that takes three rockets and dies (Hammerhead)

No real Charachter progression from anyone.

No real interaction (Forced Romances or Calibration land for you)



Also the inventory system is only different, not better.

OOH! LOOK I Can make my armour PINK! Fascinating.



Overall ME2 is a better action game over ME1.

Its a worse RPG than ME1 however.

[Whatever42]

tonnactus wrote...

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...



Saren said that the stronger the influence of the indoctrination that the less free will the victim had and less useful it was - but that would be less useful as an autonomous agent outside of the Reaper.

Remember what rana thanoptis said about her predecessor and that the heavily indoctrinated salarians not even react  to flee if shepardt free them. The more time a person is affected by a indoctrinitation field,the more it lost not only will,but also intelligence and knowledge.They become mindless husks.

Their lack of response didn't mean that their brains degenerated. There was no mention of that. They simply became unresponsive. I contend that actually is a point in favour of my argument. As part of the Reaper hive mind, you wouldn't want any individual consciousnesses making any of their own decisions. The organics exposed to the field that were outside of the Reaper, not part of the hive mind, eventually lost their own will but had no will to replace - they weren't linked to the Reaper super-consciousness -  it so they  became unresponsive.

If the indoctrination field was designed to simply influence and control organics slaves external to the Reaper mind then you would think that it would be better designed.

Obviously, that's guesswork. It might fit (or not iyo) but its like string theory - simply trying to create a rationale for existing facts. Another guess might be that humans respond better to indoctrination and that's why they were selected. I recall indoctrinated turians, krogan, solarian, and asari from ME1 but humans? Do you recall any? I just remember that the field gave the humans on Eden's Prime a headache.

Modifié par Whatever666343431431654324, 28 août 2010 - 03:27 .

[tonnactus]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...




Their lack of response didn't mean that their brains degenerated. There was no mention of that.

Wrong.Vigil called the reaper agents mindless shells.
"Only their indoctrinated slaves were left behind, abandoned. Mindless
husks, no longer capable of independent thought, the indoctrinated soon
starved or died of exposure."
http://meforums.biow...&forum=123&sp=0
According humans and indoctrination,they were turned into husks as easily as every other race.Like the tech that exposed theirself to the reaper technology or the ones in the Mass Effect 2 sidemission,who wanted to sold the artifact first,but then became manipulated and wanted to keep it.(clearly sign of indoctrination)

Modifié par tonnactus, 28 août 2010 - 04:08 .

[Epic777]

lazuli wrote...

bjdbwea wrote...

Not only is ME 2 as a whole a lesser game, it doesn't even feel as if the developers tried. Inventory was clunky? Remove it. Vehicle wasn't perfect? Remove it.

The purpose of an inventory system is largely character customization in terms of combat effectiveness and looks, right?  The loadout system provides this.  It's still an inventory, just not one you get to fiddle with in the middle of a mission (usually).  It's different.  It's new.  It works.

But what was the purpose of the MAKO?  A sense of exploration and wonder?  That's a little harder to tack down.

Also, endlessly recycled interiors refute your claim of ME2 being a lesser game than its predecessor.

I never understood why people are so upset about the loss of inventory. me1 you had one gun for each type. and ever gun was a small linear upgrade or downgrade from the previous set, same with armor, mods, etc. Now even then the inventory system could have worked, many RPGs have many sets of weapons, armors etc. however unlike me1 they had unique weapons, armors and items. For every bastard sword +1 there are unique item, with unique bonuses meaning the player doesn't just throw items away without considering and managing their inventory. An example is the ageless from DAO, despite the fact a player can get this early because of its unique stats, a player has to consider if they want to keep it , chuck it and when to use it, if they do. 

This is added to by the fact items appear so frequently. The same item many times by the time a player reaches ilos. A player will sell/omi-gel most of items in their inventory with no reason to pause and think, the game gives them no reason to.

[bjdbwea]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

I have seen zero balance from you. Every minor perceived change between ME1 and ME2 to you is an outrage.

Then you should read the posts more closely. My list of improvements in ME 2 currently stands at 5:

1. Graphics: Looks better, runs smoother.
2. Sound: Bug free this time.
3. Interrupt system: A nice addition.
4. AI: Far from perfect still, but definitely improved.
5. DRM: Less intrusive, game starts quicker.

I also like that the levels are all hand crafted and unique this time. But, they are as a result too small, offer no exploration, are completely linear and filled with way too little actual content. So overall, I still prefer the way they did it in ME 1. If BioWare would combine the best features of both ME 1 and ME 2 for ME 3, that'd be perfect.

Especially the first two points are great work from the programmers, no doubt. But yeah, everything else was a step back in my opinion.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 28 août 2010 - 04:32 .

[Il Divo]

bjdbwea wrote...

Yes.

A lot, actually. A good example you chose there. Joker is the guy who got Shepard killed in the first place. First, perhaps he could have avoided the attack. But more importantly, he didn't follow orders and acted stupidly. So my Shepard wasn't exactly happy with Joker. Yet the game forces my Shepard to act quite happy upen the reunion and doesn't allow me to criticize him at all. So yeah, I would say that's a pretty big loss of immersion. Not only does the game often withhold very obvious replies, in this and several other cases it doesn't even allow any choices at all.

Interesting. So you wanted to give your Shepard a personality, but you didn't mind that Bioware took your Shepard and gave him the emotion of a brick wall, as well as weak voice acting, or that you can't even see your full responses on the dialogue wheel. Yes, I can see exactly where you're coming from. Mass Effect 2 obviously stole our immersion away. The fiends! 

And avoid the attack? What exactly did you expect Joker to do against the Collectors? Fire laser beams from his eyes? That's ridiculous.  

Modifié par Il Divo, 28 août 2010 - 05:06 .

[JJ Long]

bjdbwea wrote...

I also like that the levels are all hand crafted and unique this time. But, they are as a result too small, offer no exploration, are completely linear and filled with way too little actual content. So overall, I still prefer the way they did it in ME 1. If BioWare would combine the best features of both ME 1 and ME 2 for ME 3, that'd be perfect.

Really?  I thought there was hardly anything to do in ME 1 on any worlds besides the Citadel.  Maybe Feros, but Noveria, Therum, and Virmire all felt lacking in anything.

Modifié par JJ Long, 28 août 2010 - 05:16 .

[tonnactus]

Il Divo wrote...


And avoid the attack?

Not to avoid,but to leave in time.He somehow thought to rescue the ship,to escape.

[bjdbwea]

Il Divo wrote...

Interesting. So you wanted to give your Shepard a personality, but you didn't mind that Bioware took your Shepard and gave him the emotion of a brick wall, as well as weak voice acting, or that you can't even see your full responses on the dialogue wheel. Yes, I can see exactly where you're coming from. Mass Effect 2 obviously stole our immersion away. The fiends!

Is that sarcasm supposed to replace arguments?

Shepard did not have the emotion of a brick wall in ME 1, but indeed in ME 2 it often feels like it. And I don't need to see the exact response to anticipate what kind of answer Shepard will give.

By the way, I do not find the voice acting weak. Not even in ME 2.

[InvisiShepard]

I think the Overlord DLC mission is like a miniature ME 2. Brilliant beginning and end but shallow core. ME 2 is pretty pointless in the long run and none of the new squad-mates have the potential to make any sort of impact on ME 3 besides Mordin and Legion.



It feels more like an expansion because it's more about the characters than the overall plot

It also makes Shepard look like a complete tool by happily agreeing to work with a bunch of terrorists despite the fact that SOLE SURVIVOR Shep's have a huge bone to pick with Cerberus and there is a complete lack of acknowledgement or confrontation which would have given the husk of a human that is Shepard some GODDAMN EMOTION!



If Mass Effect 2 was the first game in the series or even a spin-off I would consider it great but it's a terrible sequel in terms of plot. Empire Strikes Back? More like Matrix Reloaded.

[Whatever42]

tonnactus wrote...

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...




Their lack of response didn't mean that their brains degenerated. There was no mention of that.

Wrong.Vigil called the reaper agents mindless shells.
"Only their indoctrinated slaves were left behind, abandoned. Mindless
husks, no longer capable of independent thought, the indoctrinated soon
starved or died of exposure."
http://meforums.biow...&forum=123&sp=0
According humans and indoctrination,they were turned into husks as easily as every other race.Like the tech that exposed theirself to the reaper technology or the ones in the Mass Effect 2 sidemission,who wanted to sold the artifact first,but then became manipulated and wanted to keep it.(clearly sign of indoctrination)

hrm... so it does look like humans can be indoctrinated. And on the Reaper ship, obviously it was capable of driving people batty and controlling them enough to get them to impale themselves and become husks. Ah well, it was just a thought.

However, it doesn't mean that human consciousness is not incorporated into the Reaper. Nor does it mean that long term exposure to the indoctrination field turns them mindless. The humans are driven to turn themselves into husks, we see the spikes. That is an aside, though. I was wondering if humans responded differently to indoctrination and perhaps that's why they were candidates for ascension. There still might be something there, but you're right that I have no real evidence for it so I'll drop it. I do wonder why humans weren't simply used as indoctrinated slaves, though, instead of always driven to huskify themselves.

But vigil was wrong about those left behind. Some obviously survived and were not husks.

None of this, though, obstructs my theory that human consciousness is incorporated into a Reaper hive mind, kept in line by the indoctrination field. Those minds would not be left undirected but would both be providing and recieving direction from the hive mind. They would be inside it, not outside it like those we've seen indoctrinated. I think the only question is that if you could somehow counter the field, would they rebel or would they become mindless?

[kalle90]

InvisiShepard wrote...

I think the Overlord DLC mission is like a miniature ME 2. Brilliant beginning and end but shallow core. ME 2 is pretty pointless in the long run and none of the new squad-mates have the potential to make any sort of impact on ME 3 besides Mordin and Legion.

It feels more like an expansion because it's more about the characters than the overall plot
It also makes Shepard look like a complete tool by happily agreeing to work with a bunch of terrorists despite the fact that SOLE SURVIVOR Shep's have a huge bone to pick with Cerberus and there is a complete lack of acknowledgement or confrontation which would have given the husk of a human that is Shepard some GODDAMN EMOTION!

If Mass Effect 2 was the first game in the series or even a spin-off I would consider it great but it's a terrible sequel in terms of plot. Empire Strikes Back? More like Matrix Reloaded.

Well you could make "I don't work for Cerberus" comments thorough the game. Sure it would have been nice to be able to tell them go to hell and go ask council/alliance for a job, but the situation is exactly the same as in the first game. On some playthroughs I wanted to tell council to go to hell, but no such luck.

As for teammates: I can't really blame ME2 for introducing more people. In the end it made the world more believable and that probably adds some options for ME3. The game had to have returning characters, new LIs and frankly I rather have Jack than Ashley in "the most dangerous and important battle we've ever fought"

I do fear ME3 will be like Matrix Revolutions though. After a short introduction the machines attack and the result is a huge gamelasting battle (to add the hours a game needs you need to visit every important world and help them much like how you recruited people in ME2). In the end you notice you have to go to their territory with Normandy and sacrifice yourself to save the others. All the elements are there.

[tonnactus]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...


However, it doesn't mean that human consciousness is not incorporated into the Reaper.

Like it happen with the thorian.Culture,knowledge and language by "eating" them.Just essence that couldnt be learned.A collective mind controlled by the reaper.I dont think so.

But vigil was wrong about those left behind. Some obviously survived and were not husks.

Then you dont listen to mordin carefully/long enough.The collectors are not more then husks("no culture,no soul,
not working parts(indoctrination) replaced by tech).

"While studying Collector data in the lab aboard the Normandy SR-2, Mordin Solus determines that the Reapers indoctrinated
the Protheans and compensated for their growing lack of ability due to
prolonged indoctrination through cybernetic modifications. The
modifications are beyond any form of repair, each Collector drone being
little more than a clone—it's unknown if they even still possess any
form of gender—riddled with cybernetics, lacking glands or digestive
system, and having any form of intelligence or self-awareness completely
eradicated by indoctrination.

http://masseffect.wi.../wiki/Collector

Collectors=Husks with weapons,that it.

They would be inside it, not outside it like those we've seen indoctrinated.

How it could make sense that persons outside of the reaper are damaged more then inside it?

I think the only question is that if you could somehow counter the field, would they rebel or would they become mindless?

As great it could be if the minds,free of indoctrination, would destroy themselves in collective suicide to escape their slave existence (and the reaper with the overload/explosion),it doesnt fit with the facts provided by both games. But its a nice idea.

Modifié par tonnactus, 28 août 2010 - 06:42 .