10273 réponses à ce sujet

[Chuvvy]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Slidell505 wrote...

I'm disappointing that BW went in assuming the player hadn't played ME1.

As am I. And popular opinion around here is that Bioware SHOULD market ME3 to get even more buyers even if they haven't played 1 or 2.

Goddamn it....

Modifié par Slidell505, 06 mai 2010 - 01:29 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

Slidell505 wrote...


Goddamn it....

<_<
Was that directed at me?

[uberdowzen]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

80 bucks

Hmm. Just out of interest, are you an Aussie? Totally cool if you don't want to answer, just wonderin'.

[SkullandBonesmember]

uberdowzen wrote...

Hmm. Just out of interest, are you an Aussie? Totally cool if you don't want to answer, just wonderin'.

American. Do Aussies even have the same currency?

[Dudeman315]

Yeah some of expected to like ME2 based on ME1 and bought the collector's edition of ME2. Some like me are NOT going to even pre-order ME3.

[uberdowzen]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

Hmm. Just out of interest, are you an Aussie? Totally cool if you don't want to answer, just wonderin'.

American. Do Aussies even have the same currency?

Yeah, they use dollars. I just realised that you have the 360 version of ME2 which is why it cost $80. I was just confused as to why you'd payed so much. My bad.

[Terror_K]

uberdowzen wrote...

All they did was remove the flab. You say there's heaps of options in ME1 but honestly, how much depth did they add to the game? You're talking as if this is the first step towards the death of RPGs but it's not. ME is one franchise and the story is a lot faster paced than some other RPGs (like DAO for instance). BW simply slimmed down the elements that didn't add anything to the game so that you could get into the plot quicker.

It's your opinion that these elements didn't add anything to the game, not a fact. If it wasn't I and many others wouldn't be complaining about these elements being missing. We complain because we miss these elements and found them to be factors that we enjoyed about ME1 and expected to be in ME2, at least in some form. Stuff like customising the colour of your armour and your quarters on the Normandy is far more "flab" than any of the stuff they removed from ME1 for the sequel.

And you're just being ridiculous with the whole what if they removed dialogue thing. The dialogue is one of the two things that people loved about ME1 (the other being the combat). I don't remember many people saying "Oh I had this great experience in Mass Effect last night, while I was clearing out the inventory I found a weapon which causes 20 extra damage than my current one, that's gotta be one of the greatest gaming experiences ever." I do recall people saying how awesome things like discovering what's going on at Feros were.

People also talk about how much they like planet exploration, and yet that still went down the toilet though. I personally thought some of the aspects that BioWare removed from ME1 were ridiculous too, and some of the things they added such as the "Mission Complete" screens and that evil cyborg Terminator Shepard Renegade BS. Same goes with Thermal Clips. Didn't stop them getting put in.

Yeah, but when your character is in their mid 50s they've pretty much got all their talents (usually bar 1 that is almost complete) maxed out. Those just sound like classes you didn't have time to level up entirely. And bonus talents don't count because in ME1 they're useless.

For one, I only listed ONE bonus talent there. Secondly, one has to play through either twice or do a completionist playthrough to get to their mid-50's, so for the majority of the game these are each very different play styles (I know... I've played them).

So, if they printed out the stats on the screen for each weapon (and the stats are there they just don't tell you what they are) it suddenly becomes an RPG system? Sorry, I don't really get that.

It becomes more akin to an RPG system, yes. It would need some other things, like more items of the same types. But, yeah, just having the stats there and visible would have at least made a difference. Why BioWare didn't have them visible is beyond me unless they really were scared that it would scare shooter fanboys who don't like numbers that aren't a frag count.

And the stats are no more there now than the "stats" on a weapon in Doom or Quake are there. Unless they're there to see, they're not stats.

1) mods don't count. 2) You're saying that ME1 is a deeper RPG than Oblivion? That's insane.

Well, then you're talking about games that weren't designed with companions in mind (except for Diablo and Fallout 3 which did have mercs you could take, and you could equip them, so I don't know why you listed them when they do allow you to equip your followers) so the point is entirely moot.

Is ME1 a deeper RPG than Oblivion? Not really, no. But again, Oblivion wasn't built for companions to follow you. They're also rather different styles of RPG. ME1 does some things better, and Oblivion does some things better... it depends.

How is it a common misconception?

Because a lot of people think its true when its not. This is something that never came up back in the days of Baldur's Gate or even NWN and the original KotOR. Gamers back then used to know what an RPG was and wasn't. It's only recently that this BS misconception about RPG's being defined by playing a role and choices and consequences have come up, just because most modern CRPG's focus more on those aspects now than they used to (thanks mostly to jumps in technology and being able to make more cinematic games as well as the popularity of choice/consequences gameplay).

In old school pen and paper RPGs, the complicated battle rules and armor and weapons etc took second place to creating stories. People don't remember when they found that AC 10 piece of armor, they remember the great stories they came up with together. That's the problem people have with DnD v4, that it encourages combat over creative story telling.

As somebody who plays pen and paper RPGs on a weekly basis and has played AD&D, Vampire: The Masquerade, Star Wars Saga Edition and several others I can tell you that I and all those I've played with care just as much about building their characters well and planning them out and earning XP to level up and increase their abilities as they do about the adventures we have. And even if they do take second place as you say, second comes right after first, and these elements are still just as crucial to the experience as the story is. It doesn't matter how good the story is if the mechanics you're using suck and lack any depth, and ME2's mechanics suck and lack any depth.

Yeah, but this isn't school, it's a game. It's meant to be fun. Most RPGs are balanced so that you get the same amount of XP no matter how you do something (e.g. sneaking past enemies will get you as much XP as killing them) and getting more XP for exploring etc, usually means you've found an exploit. Like you find you can double your XP for completing a quest twice.

Newsflash: some people find these RPG elements fun. Some people feel like exploring things and some feel that they should be adequately rewarded for doing so. If the original game gave the same amount of XP on the UNC worlds for just doing the main quest only and returning, would you bother searching the rest of the planet? Would you bother finding a Thresher Maw nest and perhaps even killing it on foot? On Noveria, if you got the same amount of XP for simply giving Anoleis the info on Opold as you did for doing things the long way and if you got the same amount of XP for just going through the back past the sentry guns to get to Benezia as you did for helping Dr. Cohen and running back and forth would you bother to do these things? Shouldn't players who do extra steps, kill extra enemies and find extra things be suitably rewarded for it?

I'm pretty sure the amount of XP you get from each mission is pre set. In fact if you go to the Mass Effect wiki, it's got how much XP you earn for each mission.

So how come I level up exactly right if I do Mordin's quest first and I also level up exactly right if I do Grunt's first, as well as leveling up exactly right if I do them last (out of the first four)? Seems a little coincidentally convenient. And if I do an import character and am Level 7 when I start the quest I level up to Level 8 pretty much perfectly when I'm done, and if I start a new game and I'm Level 3 when I start it I go up to Level 4 perfectly too?

You're just listing side quests for the most part. All the optional stuff on Feros are side quests. And you're implying there are no choices like this in ME2. On Legions Loyalty mission for example, how that is resolved is a choice, as is what happens on Zaeeds, Mordins, Mirandas (?), and many others.

They may be sidequests, but they are sidequests that effect the main quest and are linked to it (and gassing the colonists or not is part of the main quest, and depends on you talking with Dr. Bayhnam and Jeong). Aside from helping Daniel on Mordin's recruitment quest or not, this didn't really happen in ME2. The things you listed have choices, but they're all pretty much just the choices at the end you make. There's no real alternate ways there, and even when there are multiple dialogue choices they're all just different ways of doing the same thing rather than really being alternate methods of getting there.

[SkullandBonesmember]

Dudeman315 wrote...

Yeah some of expected to like ME2 based on ME1 and bought the collector's edition of ME2. Some like me are NOT going to even pre-order ME3.

I won't completely write doing so off for ME3 but this time Bioware is really going to have to work for my pre order. And after ME2 it will be an uphill battle for THEM. My decision is going to be based heavily on the marketing tone and whether they go the same route as ME2.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Modifié par SkullandBonesmember, 06 mai 2010 - 03:44 .

[KalosCast]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Dudeman315 wrote...

Yeah some of expected to like ME2 based on ME1 and bought the collector's edition of ME2. Some like me are NOT going to even pre-order ME3.

I won't completely write doing so off for ME3 but this time Bioware is really going to have to work for my pre order. And after ME2 it will be an uphill battle for THEM. My decision is going to be based heavily on the marketing tone and whether they go the same route as ME2.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Bioware (presumably) could care less if you pre-order, pre-ordering is mostly for the benefit of the game retailer than it is for the developer. Places like Steam get to start getting return on their investment before the game even ships, and in the case of Gamestop/EB Games (same company, different sides of the mall), they can always count on a few people not picking up their copies and getting a free $5.

However, not buying their game on the other hand...

[incinerator950]

The more you Pre-order, the more orders get shipped out to stores.



My issue right now is Planet Scanning, somewhere around my 7th game, and I'm mostly avoiding it now.



That being said, I remember almost having an argument in this topic a long time ago :/.

[SkullandBonesmember]

KalosCast wrote...

However, not buying their game on the other hand...

If it's obviously the same kind of game as ME2, I'll either pay for a used one, or borrow a copy from a friend.

[uberdowzen]

[quote]Terror_K wrote...

It's your opinion that these elements didn't add anything to the game, not a fact. If it wasn't I and many others wouldn't be complaining about these elements being missing. We complain because we miss these elements and found them to be factors that we enjoyed about ME1 and expected to be in ME2, at least in some form. Stuff like customising the colour of your armour and your quarters on the Normandy is far more "flab" than any of the stuff they removed from ME1 for the sequel.[/quote]

Yes, it is my opinion, although it is a majority opinion.

[quote]
People also talk about how much they like planet exploration, and yet that still went down the toilet though. I personally thought some of the aspects that BioWare removed from ME1 were ridiculous too, and some of the things they added such as the "Mission Complete" screens and that evil cyborg Terminator Shepard Renegade BS. Same goes with Thermal Clips. Didn't stop them getting put in.[/quote]

I do hate the mission complete screens (they break immersion and tell you nothing), but the evil glowing scars are awesome and the thermal clips did make your shots seem more important. The thing about thermal clips is that you should just think about them within the scope of each encounter, not over a whole mission.

[quote]
For one, I only listed ONE bonus talent there. Secondly, one has to play through either twice or do a completionist playthrough to get to their mid-50's, so for the majority of the game these are each very different play styles (I know... I've played them).[/quote]

I did forget about the XP bonuses you get from achievements, but that means that you probably only end up with 2 builds, your limited first time one and your maxed out second time one. It depends whether your're looking at it from the number of playthroughs or the max level. All characters who reach 60 are pretty similar, although I admit there is some variation for 1 playthrough characters.

[quote]
It becomes more akin to an RPG system, yes. It would need some other things, like more items of the same types. But, yeah, just having the stats there and visible would have at least made a difference. Why BioWare didn't have them visible is beyond me unless they really were scared that it would scare shooter fanboys who don't like numbers that aren't a frag count.

And the stats are no more there now than the "stats" on a weapon in Doom or Quake are there. Unless they're there to see, they're not stats.[/quote]

The weapons in doom and quake have stats (probably bad examples because those games will have weapons which are even more staty than modern day FPSs). Bioware actually said that they thought the number of weapons they had became more special when you had to go by the feel of them rather than by points.

[quote]
Well, then you're talking about games that weren't designed with companions in mind (except for Diablo and Fallout 3 which did have mercs you could take, and you could equip them, so I don't know why you listed them when they do allow you to equip your followers) so the point is entirely moot.[/quote]

I haven't played much Diablo, but I'm pretty sure outside of multiplayer that that game had no companions. Did F3s companions have customizable inventories? I don't remember.

[quote]
Is ME1 a deeper RPG than Oblivion? Not really, no. But again, Oblivion wasn't built for companions to follow you. They're also rather different styles of RPG. ME1 does some things better, and Oblivion does some things better... it depends.[/quote]

See, the way I see it, the only thing RPG wise that ME1 did was the storytelling and combat. Everything else Oblivion did better.

[quote]
Because a lot of people think its true when its not. This is something that never came up back in the days of Baldur's Gate or even NWN and the original KotOR. Gamers back then used to know what an RPG was and wasn't. It's only recently that this BS misconception about RPG's being defined by playing a role and choices and consequences have come up, just because most modern CRPG's focus more on those aspects now than they used to (thanks mostly to jumps in technology and being able to make more cinematic games as well as the popularity of choice/consequences gameplay).[/quote]

From Wikipedia:

A role-playing game (RPG) is a broad family of games in which
players assume the roles of characters, or take control of one or more avatars, in a fictional setting. Actions
taken within the game succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and
guidelines.

[quote]
As somebody who plays pen and paper RPGs on a weekly basis and has played AD&D, Vampire: The Masquerade, Star Wars Saga Edition and several others I can tell you that I and all those I've played with care just as much about building their characters well and planning them out and earning XP to level up and increase their abilities as they do about the adventures we have. And even if they do take second place as you say, second comes right after first, and these elements are still just as crucial to the experience as the story is. It doesn't matter how good the story is if the mechanics you're using suck and lack any depth, and ME2's mechanics suck and lack any depth.[/quote]

Firstly, ME2s mechanics do not suck. On no level do they suck. Ask any shooter player and they'll say that ME2 mechanics are good. Ask most CRPG players and they'll say they're good. I'll concede the pen and paper point (having played very little pen and paper roleplaying games) but in most CRPGS I've played I remember the story more than the roleplaying mechanics.

[quote]
Newsflash: some people find these RPG elements fun. Some people feel like exploring things and some feel that they should be adequately rewarded for doing so. If the original game gave the same amount of XP on the UNC worlds for just doing the main quest only and returning, would you bother searching the rest of the planet? Would you bother finding a Thresher Maw nest and perhaps even killing it on foot? On Noveria, if you got the same amount of XP for simply giving Anoleis the info on Opold as you did for doing things the long way and if you got the same amount of XP for just going through the back past the sentry guns to get to Benezia as you did for helping Dr. Cohen and running back and forth would you bother to do these things? Shouldn't players who do extra steps, kill extra enemies and find extra things be suitably rewarded for it?[/quote]

I'm talking about exploits. Where, say, you give a magical do whatsit to one person who takes it and rewards you (giving you XP) and then going to someone else and giving them the same magical item and then being rewarded again (giving you an undeserved XP bonus). Those parts aren't even meant to be in the game. On Noveria, I'm pretty sure you actually get the same amount of XP no matter how you resolve that, although I've never checked. And yes I would do those things on later playthroughs because I want to see the content, not because I'm rewarded to. If you think about it, getting more XP for doing something one way is actually a disincentive to do it any other way.

[quote]
So how come I level up exactly right if I do Mordin's quest first and I also level up exactly right if I do Grunt's first, as well as leveling up exactly right if I do them last (out of the first four)? Seems a little coincidentally convenient. And if I do an import character and am Level 7 when I start the quest I level up to Level 8 pretty much perfectly when I'm done, and if I start a new game and I'm Level 3 when I start it I go up to Level 4 perfectly too?[/quote]

Huh? Most of the missions give the same amount of XP so you would level up in the same way no matter which you do.

[quote]
They may be sidequests, but they are sidequests that effect the main quest and are linked to it (and gassing the colonists or not is part of the main quest, and depends on you talking with Dr. Bayhnam and Jeong). Aside from helping Daniel on Mordin's recruitment quest or not, this didn't really happen in ME2. The things you listed have choices, but they're all pretty much just the choices at the end you make. There's no real alternate ways there, and even when there are multiple dialogue choices they're all just different ways of doing the same thing rather than really being alternate methods of getting there.
[/quote]

You're thinking of it in a very singular sense. Sure those decsions don't affect anything now, but what about ME3? Also the things you listed aren't really alternate ways of doing things. For starters, there is no way that you wouldn't go down to see Bayhnam and Jeong, you'd have to be purposely be making a point like you're doing. And wouldn't you also get renegade points for killing them even if you didn't have the gas? That just seems like a "if you're purposely going out of your way to break the game" thing.

[uberdowzen]

incinerator950 wrote...

The more you Pre-order, the more orders get shipped out to stores.

My issue right now is Planet Scanning, somewhere around my 7th game, and I'm mostly avoiding it now.

That being said, I remember almost having an argument in this topic a long time ago :/.

Yep, definitly the way to go. I was OCD about planet scanning up until I realised that I could just go off and mine when I had upgrades to do.

[Chuvvy]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Slidell505 wrote...


Goddamn it....

Was that directed at me?

No. It was directed at the people who want to dumb down ME again.

[SkullandBonesmember]

Slidell505 wrote...

No. It was directed at the people who want to dumb down ME again.

Ahh OK.

But just for the record-

ITS TOTALLY NOT DUMBED DOWN. LIKE WHAT SPECIFICALLY MAKES IT LESS INTELLIGENT WHEN COMPARED WITH ME1? :innocent:

[Schneidend]

Disappointment with Mass Effect 2? Not at all. 'Tis a fine game. Better than the first.

*Casually raises flame shield.*

[Massadonious1]

Better hope it's a big shield, buddy.

[DaringMoosejaw]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Slidell505 wrote...

No. It was directed at the people who want to dumb down ME again.

Ahh OK.

But just for the record-

ITS TOTALLY NOT DUMBED DOWN. LIKE WHAT SPECIFICALLY MAKES IT LESS INTELLIGENT WHEN COMPARED WITH ME1? :innocent:

I have become elitism, destroyer of civil discourse.

Anyhow, I love what bioware did with ME2. I have no problems with it, aside from planet scanning (Which is still less annoying than ARGH MAKO FELL DOWN THE MOUNTAIN AGAIN, repeated about 40 times for several hours every playthrough)...and DLC helmets, of course. Other than those two minor points, I was impressed and am certain I'll be impressed with ME3 no matter what they do with it.

Modifié par DaringMoosejaw, 06 mai 2010 - 08:20 .

[KitsuneRommel]

Slidell505 wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Slidell505 wrote...


Goddamn it....

Was that directed at me?

No. It was directed at the people who want to dumb down ME again.

I'm not satisfied until ME3 has STATS:


REALISM:
If your characters didn't wear warm clothing they could catch cold while traveling!

CITIES:
http://www.dfworksho...erfall_city.jpg

TRAPS:


etc.

[DaringMoosejaw]

REALISM:

If your characters didn't wear warm clothing they could catch cold while traveling!

I demand a blink button like in Alone In The Dark! Left trigger to inhale, right trigger to exhale. Alternate between A and B to digest your lunch, tap X rapidly to evacuate bowels.

[Jebel Krong]

[quote]Terror_K wrote...

[quote]uberdowzen wrote...

All they did was remove the flab. You say there's heaps of options in ME1 but honestly, how much depth did they add to the game? You're talking as if this is the first step towards the death of RPGs but it's not. ME is one franchise and the story is a lot faster paced than some other RPGs (like DAO for instance). BW simply slimmed down the elements that didn't add anything to the game so that you could get into the plot quicker.[/quote]

It's your opinion that these elements didn't add anything to the game, not a fact. If it wasn't I and many others wouldn't be complaining about these elements being missing. We complain because we miss these elements and found them to be factors that we enjoyed about ME1 and expected to be in ME2, at least in some form. Stuff like customising the colour of your armour and your quarters on the Normandy is far more "flab" than any of the stuff they removed from ME1 for the sequel.

[quote]
And you're just being ridiculous with the whole what if they removed dialogue thing. The dialogue is one of the two things that people loved about ME1 (the other being the combat). I don't remember many people saying "Oh I had this great experience in Mass Effect last night, while I was clearing out the inventory I found a weapon which causes 20 extra damage than my current one, that's gotta be one of the greatest gaming experiences ever." I do recall people saying how awesome things like discovering what's going on at Feros were.[/quote]

People also talk about how much they like planet exploration, and yet that still went down the toilet though. I personally thought some of the aspects that BioWare removed from ME1 were ridiculous too, and some of the things they added such as the "Mission Complete" screens and that evil cyborg Terminator Shepard Renegade BS. Same goes with Thermal Clips. Didn't stop them getting put in.[/quote]

and who's to say they won't be out in #3?

[quote]Terror_K wrote...

For one, I only listed ONE bonus talent there. Secondly, one has to play through either twice or do a completionist playthrough to get to their mid-50's, so for the majority of the game these are each very different play styles (I know... I've played them).[/quote]

so have I, and btw "bonus" talents don't count for anything because you have to play the game 1st time properly without them - that's the same for me1. i get the feeling a lot of you negative types are forgetting that me1 was only so "deep and diverse" because you could get any bonus talent you like once you'd unlocked it, whether it suited the character type or not.

[quote]Terror_K wrote...
[quote]
So, if they printed out the stats on the screen for each weapon (and the stats are there they just don't tell you what they are) it suddenly becomes an RPG system? Sorry, I don't really get that.[/quote]

It becomes more akin to an RPG system, yes. It would need some other things, like more items of the same types. But, yeah, just having the stats there and visible would have at least made a difference. Why BioWare didn't have them visible is beyond me unless they really were scared that it would scare shooter fanboys who don't like numbers that aren't a frag count.

And the stats are no more there now than the "stats" on a weapon in Doom or Quake are there. Unless they're there to see, they're not stats.[/quote]

that's ridiculous. and where was the "frag count" in me2? again with the ridiculous exaggerations and hyperbole to try and justify your opinions.

[quote]Terror_K wrote...
[quote]
How is it a common misconception?[/quote]

Because a lot of people think its true when its not. This is something that never came up back in the days of Baldur's Gate or even NWN and the original KotOR. Gamers back then used to know what an RPG was and wasn't. It's only recently that this BS misconception about RPG's being defined by playing a role and choices and consequences have come up, just because most modern CRPG's focus more on those aspects now than they used to (thanks mostly to jumps in technology and being able to make more cinematic games as well as the popularity of choice/consequences gameplay).[/quote]

so... let me get this straight: games have changed, but your classifications of them are still stuck with the old definitions that don't always apply? particularly in the case of rpgs, which many other genres have assimilated traits from - mass effect series being particularly notable for blurring the lines between the action/TPS/RPG genres, very successfully? hell even Halo: Reach and Gears are thinking about or incorporating light RPG mechanics.
sounds like you have the problem, not the games.

[quote]Terror_K wrote...
[quote]
In old school pen and paper RPGs, the complicated battle rules and armor and weapons etc took second place to creating stories. People don't remember when they found that AC 10 piece of armor, they remember the great stories they came up with together. That's the problem people have with DnD v4, that it encourages combat over creative story telling.[/quote]

As somebody who plays pen and paper RPGs on a weekly basis and has played AD&D, Vampire: The Masquerade, Star Wars Saga Edition and several others I can tell you that I and all those I've played with care just as much about building their characters well and planning them out and earning XP to level up and increase their abilities as they do about the adventures we have. And even if they do take second place as you say, second comes right after first, and these elements are still just as crucial to the experience as the story is. It doesn't matter how good the story is if the mechanics you're using suck and lack any depth, and ME2's mechanics suck and lack any depth.[/quote]

hmmm i still remember your review, and you didn't say that, oh wait: because it isn't true!

[quote]Terror_K wrote...
[quote]
I'm pretty sure the amount of XP you get from each mission is pre set. In fact if you go to the Mass Effect wiki, it's got how much XP you earn for each mission.[/quote]

So how come I level up exactly right if I do Mordin's quest first and I also level up exactly right if I do Grunt's first, as well as leveling up exactly right if I do them last (out of the first four)? Seems a little coincidentally convenient. And if I do an import character and am Level 7 when I start the quest I level up to Level 8 pretty much perfectly when I'm done, and if I start a new game and I'm Level 3 when I start it I go up to Level 4 perfectly too?[/quote]

because the game auto-levels the difficulty based on yours? and the xp as a result? it's called balance, y'know for gameplay. oh yes, but you count gameplay as spending hours omni-gelling 50-types of armour....

[quote]Terror_K wrote...
[quote]
You're just listing side quests for the most part. All the optional stuff on Feros are side quests. And you're implying there are no choices like this in ME2. On Legions Loyalty mission for example, how that is resolved is a choice, as is what happens on Zaeeds, Mordins, Mirandas (?), and many others.[/quote]

They may be sidequests, but they are sidequests that effect the main quest and are linked to it (and gassing the colonists or not is part of the main quest, and depends on you talking with Dr. Bayhnam and Jeong). Aside from helping Daniel on Mordin's recruitment quest or not, this didn't really happen in ME2. The things you listed have choices, but they're all pretty much just the choices at the end you make. There's no real alternate ways there, and even when there are multiple dialogue choices they're all just different ways of doing the same thing rather than really being alternate methods of getting there.
[/quote]

in mass effect 2 you have the main plot plus all the extra "side-quests" that are actual proper missions for your squad-mates, that's pretty much doubled the proper-game content right there. the other side-quests, the N7 missions, are little extras for exploring the other worlds, they don't have to be tied to the main plot because they are rewards for doing the extra bit - something you lauded me1 for. sure you don't have to drive the dodgy tank around the same barren mountains with a different skybox for hours on end, but i consider that an improvement. (and just to point out: i still loved the exploration element to the first game, despite the shortcomings, but none of the UNC planets had anything to do with the main game).

[Jebel Krong]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Dudeman315 wrote...

Yeah some of expected to like ME2 based on ME1 and bought the collector's edition of ME2. Some like me are NOT going to even pre-order ME3.

I won't completely write doing so off for ME3 but this time Bioware is really going to have to work for my pre order. And after ME2 it will be an uphill battle for THEM. My decision is going to be based heavily on the marketing tone and whether they go the same route as ME2.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

ok see you, bye - we don't need you. nor does BW. see they try and cater for gamers who want a rewarding experience, incorporating all their series traits: story, characters, combat, role-playing etc. not those few people who want mass effect to regress to something it never was in the first place, a clunky rpg-only game. the fact that mass effect 2 has sold more than double mass effect 1, kinda tells us they're going in the right (and natural) direction.

Modifié par Jebel Krong, 06 mai 2010 - 08:49 .

[tonnactus]

uberdowzen wrote...


For starters, Vanguards shouldn't have an offensive biotic ability, they'd be over powered. Vanguards are meant to suppress enemies and then move in on them with the shotgun. Having Warp would just turn them into an adept with a shotgun.

Also class abilites aren't always the most effective. How is addrenaline rush for example the soldiers best ability?
.

Its hard to take you serious after this post.Adrenaline Rush improves weapon damage til +140 percent if you dont know that.

[tonnactus]

uberdowzen wrote...


1) Feros can be the first world you do, and lift isn't a power you get early on.

Alone through all citadel quests i got acess to lift(level 10-12).So i dont know what you are talking about.

[tonnactus]

Jebel Krong wrote...
 the fact that mass effect 2 has sold more than double mass effect 1, kinda tells us they're going in the right (and natural) direction.

What fact?? I still miss a seriuos source for this claim.