10273 réponses à ce sujet

[TJSolo]

AlanC9 wrote...

TJSolo wrote...
 Like I stated Kotor1 it appeared that after the hands were dealt the pot cards were put into an array and the pc oppenent seemed aware of the array and played accordingly. 

I didn't see any sign of this. It isn't subject to an actual test without a lot more data than I'm willing to collect, but  I find it hard to imagine that the programmers would go out of their way to have the opponent cheat.  Programmers never write code unless they have to, and I don't see the point of it.

This is why I said it seemed that way. I was not saying it was a fact that the code was written that way.  I just said it seemed the pc opponent was peaking at the array while I could have said it seemed like the pc opponent was cheating.

When it comes to pazaak I found that I won more in Kotor2 then 1. Kotor1 always feels like the pc opponent is not playing by the same rules.

[TJSolo]

uberdowzen wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

Seems you are getting me wrong. I noted what put the planet scanning in a class by itself, the mandatory nature of it. I got most of my UNC minerals from surveying, which is a lot faster than planet scanning. Gathering minerals while in the Mako was just extra and not needed for me.
Then you try and dredge the Mako into this; which is not a mini game in and of itself. The reasons to gather minerals but it in the completely optional class while gather resources is in a mandatory class if you want a good ending Let's not even go into how performance is effected if resource gathering is skipped.

Oh how I wish pazaak was blackjack, it is not.. Like I stated Kotor1 it appeared that after the hands were dealt the pot cards were put into an array and the pc oppenent seemed aware of the array and played accordingly. In Kotor2 it felt better and seemed that the pc opponent was not peaking into the array and was playing by the rules.

Actually, I don't think the outcome of the suicide mission would be that bad if you didn't do any upgrades. You'd lose more people, but Shepherd would survive. I suspect that just doing upgrades with the starting resources and maybe quarter of an hour of planet scanning could get most of your team through.

I've always kind of thought of the Mako as a minigame, and I will give you that the resources aren't required, it's still really tedious for a completionist playthrough. And if the resources weren't needed to do well in the mission, would you have as big a problem with the planet scanning?

I'm not totally sure what you mean about Pazaak. Are you saying that you think the computer looks at the cards that it's going to be dealt and then "randomly" chooses special cards accordingly? Or do you think it's just because the computer seems to win a lot? Anyway, Pazaak basically is black jack, minus all the extra rules like splitting etc and with 20 instead of 21 and special cards. Otherwise it's the same.

Why are you now being dismissive to the point of not caring if people die due to missed upgrades? Not that bad, right. The point still stands that gathering getting a good ending is hinged to upgrades which is in turn makes planet scanning mandatory to an extent. What you "Think" a bad ending is or not isn't the point as the getting the good ending still makes scanning mandatory.
I don't enjoy conversations with people that are obviously being dense or playing devil's advocate just for the hell of it.

The Mako is a vehicle. The minigame would be the button presses when you find a locker/computer/mineral node. Serious that things you "think" seem to only suit your arguments, even if they are completely untrue. I have already stated in this thread what if planet scanning was not mandatory it would just rank for me as a bad optional mini-game, not the worst classification for me now. I also mention if a sell feature was in the game it would improve the overall implementation of planent scanning and ME2 economy.

I made no mention of special cards. I am trying to keep this off-topic pazaak discussion simple and focus on how the pc opponent seems to know what cards will be played and plays accordingly in kotor1. 
Pazaak is not blackjack, without your convoluting. Based on it, maybe but it is not blackjack.

Modifié par TJSolo, 09 mai 2010 - 05:59 .

[AlanC9]

Right. That's the problem with the human brain. We see patterns regardless of whether there's actually a pattern there.



But of course you win more in KotOR 2. You alternate who plays first, which was the major advantage the opponent had in K1.

[SkullandBonesmember]

SithLordExarKun wrote...

Story isn't everything, if i want a pure story based game with a great story i would go play the classical Final fantasies, watch a movie or read a bloody book.

*Enters the Zen state once again*
Must I remind you?



3-4 minute mark.

BOOKS AREN'T INTERACTIVE AND classIC FINAL FANTASY TITLES, EVEN MODERN ONES ARE VERY DATED. DO WE UNDERSTAND THAT A GAME THAT ALLOWS THE PLAYER TO CHOOSE WHAT TO SAY AND HAVE MULTIPLE ENDINGS IS ON A BETTER TRACK WHEN COMPARING TO GAMES FROM 15 YEARS AGO?

Whoops. Lost Zen composure.

Modifié par SkullandBonesmember, 09 mai 2010 - 06:25 .

[TJSolo]

AlanC9 wrote...

Right. That's the problem with the human brain. We see patterns regardless of whether there's actually a pattern there.

But of course you win more in KotOR 2. You alternate who plays first, which was the major advantage the opponent had in K1.

I really don't feel like installing those games again just to create empirical evidence on this matter. We are all consumers sharing general opinons. Don't chalk my feelings or experience on this to some general case study.
I like the topic as it stands.

Modifié par TJSolo, 09 mai 2010 - 06:32 .

[AlanC9]

How'd we get onto this anyway?



But you should just take my world for it about the K2 rules change.

[SithLordExarKun]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

SithLordExarKun wrote...

Story isn't everything, if i want a pure story based game with a great story i would go play the classical Final fantasies, watch a movie or read a bloody book.

*Enters the Zen state once again*
Must I remind you?



3-4 minute mark.

BOOKS AREN'T INTERACTIVE AND classIC FINAL FANTASY TITLES, EVEN MODERN ONES ARE VERY DATED. DO WE UNDERSTAND THAT A GAME THAT ALLOWS THE PLAYER TO CHOOSE WHAT TO SAY AND HAVE MULTIPLE ENDINGS IS ON A BETTER TRACK WHEN COMPARING TO GAMES FROM 15 YEARS AGO?

Whoops. Lost Zen composure.

You missed my point entirely. I am saying that a great story doesn't make a great game as many ME1 fanboys with raging testosterone keeps insisting.

GTA franchise
Fallout 3
Dragon age
Knights of the old republic

and many other games had incredibly generic story lines . But did that stop the games from being good? Let me save you the trouble by answering: No

Just because Mass effect 2 had a generic story line doesn't make the game bad, hell mass effect 1's story line isn't award winning either(just how many times have we had this ancient evil crap coming back to kill and destroy everybody?). Like i already said, ME2 like other games and certain movies is more of  a character driven story than an actual plot story.

There was absolutely nothing that fantastic about ME1's story either(yeah investigate planets X and Y to look for geth activity and plant Z to pick up some blue alien and the last 2 planets having the big major revelation and then a race in time to stop the evil and save the day!!). That doesn't make ME1 bad either, i still like the game and think its a great game, i just don't like it as much as DAO or ME2.

Modifié par SithLordExarKun, 09 mai 2010 - 08:03 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

SithLordExarKun wrote...

You missed my point entirely. I am saying that a great story doesn't make a great game as many ME1 fanboys with raging testosterone keeps insisting.

GTA4
Fallout 3
Dragon age
Knights of the old republic

and many other games had incredibly generic story lines, did that stop the game from being good? Let me save you the trouble by answering: No

You brought up the bullsh** of how if story driven fans want plot to read a book. Many games of practically every genre have their gems that can appeal to a broad spectrum of people, same goes for movies. Certainly the quality of a video game is dependent on many different factors. But when an interactive experience that is marketed as having such deep story when it in fact, focuses on combat at the expense of supposed story, that is an absolute FAIL.

[incinerator950]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

SithLordExarKun wrote...

You missed my point entirely. I am saying that a great story doesn't make a great game as many ME1 fanboys with raging testosterone keeps insisting.

GTA4
Fallout 3
Dragon age
Knights of the old republic

and many other games had incredibly generic story lines, did that stop the game from being good? Let me save you the trouble by answering: No

You brought up the bullsh** of how if story driven fans want plot to read a book. Many games of practically every genre have their gems that can appeal to a broad spectrum of people, same goes for movies. Certainly the quality of a video game is dependent on many different factors. But when an interactive experience that is marketed as having such deep story when it in fact, focuses on combat at the expense of supposed story, that is an absolute FAIL.

Cool story bro

[SithLordExarKun]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...


You brought up the bullsh** of how if story driven fans want plot to read a book. Many games of practically every genre have their gems that can appeal to a broad spectrum of people, same goes for movies. Certainly the quality of a video game is dependent on many different factors. But when an interactive experience that is marketed as having such deep story when it in fact, focuses on combat at the expense of supposed story, that is an absolute FAIL.

Kool story bro. Learn to read, I said if I wanted a truly phenominel story, i would read a book. I didn't speak for the other gamers behalf.
You know its cute you accuse ME2 players of being brainless idiots only wanting "pew pew pew" but yet you lack the capabilities to properly read ones written sentance, i guess the only one being a moron here is you.

Secondly in response to the sentance i underlined, i already responded to this in several earlier posts, a generic story line does not make a game a failure, more importantly, you do not define the game as a fail  as a universal fact. Time to deal with it hun. The "deep story" in ME2 was the character driven plot, not the actual main plot itself. I keep bringing this up but you keep ignoring it, how was ME1's story any deeper when more than half the game its about investigating planets for geth activity?

How is DAO's story any deeper when its about gathering a bloody army to kill off darkspawn? How is KOTOR's story any deeper when its about finding some ancient superfactory that threatens the entire galaxy?

All these games were marketted towards having a "deep story", but alot of the times this "deep story" isn't the actual main plot(where most of them are generic) but the journy ,characters and interaction.

Modifié par SithLordExarKun, 09 mai 2010 - 09:15 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

SithLordExarKun wrote...

Kool story bro. Learn to read, I said if I wanted a truly phenominel story, i would read a book. I didn't speak for the other games behalf.
You know its cute you accuse ME2 players of being brainless idiots only wanting "pew pew pew" but yet you lack the capabilities to properly read ones written sentance, i guess the only one being a moron here is you.

Secondly in response to the sentance i underlined, i already responded to this in several earlier posts, a generic story line does not make a game a failure, more importantly, you do not define the game as a fail  as a universal fact. Time to deal with it hun. The "deep story" in ME2 was the character driven plot, not the actual main plot itself. I keep bringing this up but you keep ignoring it, how was ME1's story any deeper when more than half the game its about investigating planets for geth activity?

How is DAO's story any deeper when its about gathering a bloody army to kill off darkspawn? How is KOTOR's story any deeper when its about finding some ancient superfactory that threatens the entire galaxy?

All these games were marketted towards having a "deep story", but alot of the times this "deep story" isn't the actual main plot(where most of them are generic) but the journy ,characters and integration.

True or false, many times when one speaks in the first person online, consciously or unconsciously, they are speaking in broad terms, not solely from a personal stance.

Never played DAO or KOTOR and I don't intend to. But when it comes to ME1 and ME2, the combat/story ratio makes all the difference for the better, as we saw in 1, or for the worse, as we saw in 2.

[SithLordExarKun]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...


True or false, many times when one speaks in the first person online, consciously or unconsciously, they are speaking in broad terms, not solely from a personal stance.

Yeah, like how you missed the word "I" in my sentance wich solely referred to me, its just too bad you aren't smart enough to see the little "I" in my sentance.

SkullandBonesmember wrote...
Never played DAO or KOTOR and I don't intend to. But when it comes to ME1 and ME2, the combat/story ratio makes all the difference for the better, as we saw in 1, or for the worse, as we saw in 2.

Yet you call yourself a true RPG fan! Pathetic really if ME1 was the only bioware RPG you played and you constantly call other people "halo tards", namely people who don't agree to your twisted opinions.

And lets talk about the ratio, there were many many UNC missions that were poorly tied to the story in the first game and there were alot of moments of "Pew pew pew" as well with the only difference being the combat being horrible and clunky, ME2 simply handled that poor aspect better and turned it into something much better.

Modifié par SithLordExarKun, 09 mai 2010 - 09:22 .

[Videit]

All the hate floating around here doesnt make a good environment for Bioware to make ME3 a good game.

Whats with people thinking RPG's need to be boring and tedious. The Mass Effect series has and always will be an Action RPG. In MY oppinion if you dont like a little pew pew as you guys call it then play another game, but thats just MY oppinion.

The story in ME2 was weak when you look at the narrative but when you look at the interativity of it then it was far greater than most tedious narrative rpgs. The story was told in a different way and I for one think it was phenomenal. Much more engaging then having some long blown out story dictated to me like I have had in oh lets see.... the thousand RPG's before it.

Bring the new and engaging Bioware and keep moving forward.

Modifié par Videit, 09 mai 2010 - 09:45 .

[uberdowzen]

TJSolo wrote...

Why are you now being dismissive to the point of not caring if people die due to missed upgrades? Not that bad, right. The point still stands that gathering getting a good ending is hinged to upgrades which is in turn makes planet scanning mandatory to an extent. What you "Think" a bad ending is or not isn't the point as the getting the good ending still makes scanning mandatory.
I don't enjoy conversations with people that are obviously being dense or playing devil's advocate just for the hell of it.

The Mako is a vehicle. The minigame would be the button presses when you find a locker/computer/mineral node. Serious that things you "think" seem to only suit your arguments, even if they are completely untrue. I have already stated in this thread what if planet scanning was not mandatory it would just rank for me as a bad optional mini-game, not the worst classification for me now. I also mention if a sell feature was in the game it would improve the overall implementation of planent scanning and ME2 economy.

I made no mention of special cards. I am trying to keep this off-topic pazaak discussion simple and focus on how the pc opponent seems to know what cards will be played and plays accordingly in kotor1. 
Pazaak is not blackjack, without your convoluting. Based on it, maybe but it is not blackjack.

The planet scanning mini game is just one of hundreds of factors that affect the outcome of the suicide mission. It's part of the games coolness. Do you spend time doing the mini game or do you take the risk?

[AusShep]

Wow, some people like to complain.

My honest opinion... and PLEASE don't flame... is that if you are really that disappointed with ME2, then it is quite simply not your kind of game. This is not meant as an insult to either the game itself or you as a player, just that I believe you should spend more time playing the games that you DO enjoy, whatever they may be.

For my part, I loved every bit of ME2. I came into it (and ME1) with admittedly high expectations but also with an acceptance of the kind of game I would be playing. As such, I found them both to be fantastic. No game can cater to everyone, just as no book of film can appeal to every audience. ME2 is not pretending to be an enormously open world RPG, nor is it trying to fulfill the exact criteria of a traditional roleplaying game. It is unashamedly a character/story driven action/rpg. It chooses a certain experience and executes it nearly flawlessly.



But, as always, haters gonna hate.

[Videit]

uberdowzen wrote...

The planet scanning mini game is just one of hundreds of factors that affect the outcome of the suicide mission. It's part of the games coolness. Do you spend time doing the mini game or do you take the risk?

If you gathered minerals and how you used them was a part of how the story was told.  While it wasnt the most fun thing, it along with deciding which loyalty missions to undertake were a part of how the ME2 story was told.

Maybe im wrong about this but it just seems like most people mined to get all the upgrades and did all the loyalty missions instead of exercising the main focus of the story and that was choice.  Do I like this character and do I wanna spend time getting this character to trust me?  I think that was lost on alot of people and thats where the alot of the Role Play comes in.

[Videit]

AusShep wrote...

Wow, some people like to complain.
My honest opinion... and PLEASE don't flame... is that if you are really that disappointed with ME2, then it is quite simply not your kind of game. This is not meant as an insult to either the game itself or you as a player, just that I believe you should spend more time playing the games that you DO enjoy, whatever they may be.
For my part, I loved every bit of ME2. I came into it (and ME1) with admittedly high expectations but also with an acceptance of the kind of game I would be playing. As such, I found them both to be fantastic. No game can cater to everyone, just as no book of film can appeal to every audience. ME2 is not pretending to be an enormously open world RPG, nor is it trying to fulfill the exact criteria of a traditional roleplaying game. It is unashamedly a character/story driven action/rpg. It chooses a certain experience and executes it nearly flawlessly.

But, as always, haters gonna hate.

 ^This

You sir are a gentlemen and a scholar.

[SkullandBonesmember]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

True or false, many times when one speaks in the first person online, consciously or unconsciously, they are speaking in broad terms, not solely from a personal stance.

SithLordExarKun wrote...

Yeah, like how you missed the word "I" in my sentance wich solely referred to me, its just too bad you aren't smart enough to see the little "I" in my sentance.

Gee. I totally wonder what first person means. Still, if you can't spell sentence, it's not a shock you can't grasp other things.

SithLordExarKun wrote...

Yet you call yourself a true RPG fan! Pathetic really if ME1 was the only bioware RPG you played and you constantly call other people "halo tards", namely people who don't agree to your twisted opinions.

Are you going to go off on how "stats&skills" are essential for an RPG? I don't play video games in this day and age that has a silent protagonist.

SithLordExarKun wrote...

And lets talk about the ratio, there were many many UNC missions that were poorly tied to the story in the first game and there were alot of moments of "Pew pew pew" as well with the only difference being the combat being horrible and clunky, ME2 simply handled that poor aspect better and turned it into something much better.

I think you're playing dumb on purpose. Very good. There was combat in ME1. Absolutely did not know that.

The difference between the combat in ME1 and ME2 was ME1 had ENJOYABLE combat and it wasn't overbearing. There was balance between cutscenes/plot, interacting with NPCs, and combat. If anything, sometimes there was MORE plot and NPC interaction over the combat. In ME2 there was a complete 180. Missions were longer, and there was less chatting with other characters.

WAIT A MINUTE! You got to chat with them on their loyalty missions.

WOOHOO! Implementing 'SPLOSHUNS and character interaction. And not just ANY character interaction, but LIMITED character interaction. How genius.

[Videit]

@SkullandBonesmember



Did you even like ME2? Cause you dont like the combat, the character interaction was too sploshuny for you, the story sucked in your oppinion, and it seems you dont even like people who enjoyed the game. Just asking...

[SkullandBonesmember]

[quote]AusShep wrote...

Wow, some people like to complain. 
My honest opinion... and PLEASE don't flame... is that if you are really that disappointed with ME2, then it is quite simply not your kind of game. This is not meant as an insult to either the game itself or you as a player, just that I believe you should spend more time playing the games that you DO enjoy, whatever they may be.
For my part, I loved every bit of ME2. I came into it (and ME1) with admittedly high expectations but also with an acceptance of the kind of game I would be playing. As such, I found them both to be fantastic. No game can cater to everyone, just as no book of film can appeal to every audience. ME2 is not pretending to be an enormously open world RPG, nor is it trying to fulfill the exact criteria of a traditional roleplaying game. It is unashamedly a character/story driven action/rpg. It chooses a certain experience and executes it nearly flawlessly.

But, as always, haters gonna hate.[/quote]

[quote]SkullandBonesmember wrote...

quote]Brako Shepard wrote...

If people feel that let down by Mass Effect 2 and still prefer the original. I don't know why they don't just enjoy the Mass Effect forum instead. It makes no sense to keep taking up a whole page qouting and maoning at people when the game has already been released and is impossible for it to change.[/quote]

Story driven fans aren't just going to lie down and say "Screw it. Do whatever you want Bioware." They say they listen to the fans and are willing to change the direction of the games based on feedback.[/quote]

[quote]SkullandBonesmember wrote...

I mean, what choice do I have but to support Mass Effect? How many games are out there that focus on plot? Not many. How many games are out there that focus on combat at the expense of plot? Too many. And Mass Effect 2 kissed the Halotards assess because they complained the first wasn't ENOUGH OF A SHOOTER. It's not enough that there's a plethora of games that cater to them. It doesn't matter story driven fans barely have anything for them. The shooter fans still had to whine for more emphasis on combat at our expense. And we have to take what they give us, even if it sucks compared to the original.[/quote]

[quote]Vena_86 wrote...

The feedback of those people that are really invested in the series is more valuable than the feedback from random gamers who maybe played through the game once and went on to the next game. People that really care about Mass Effect will most likely be found on these forums.
And feedback matters alot...Mass Effect 2 is proof for that. I rather wished for BioWare to stay their course with reasonable improvements instead of throwing half the game over board because all those people that expected another fast paced shooter (which is many) voiced their disappointment.[/quote]

[quote]Videit wrote...

@SkullandBonesmember

Did you even like ME2? Cause you dont like the combat, the character interaction was too sploshuny for you, the story sucked in your oppinion, and it seems you dont even like people who enjoyed the game. Just asking...[/quote]

See above. I care about Mass Effect as a whole. If I were to give ME2 a grade, I'd say 6 out of 10. The only things I really liked about the game always had to do with the story in one way or another unlike in ME1 where I liked the combat AND story.

You know who crying after speaking with their sister, almost all scenes with Joker, Talimance, Mordin singing and the "implications unpleasant" line, Samara was cool as well as Jack, Garrus and EDI, but besides that? Nothing really.

[quote]SkullandBonesmember wrote...

[quote]Massadonious1 wrote...

While we're at it, I want a Mario game where I don't step on Goombas.[/quote]

You would probably be AGAINST the OPTION of a simplified combat to further the plot along faster, wouldn't you?[/quote]

Those are the people I'm not too fond of.

Modifié par SkullandBonesmember, 09 mai 2010 - 11:09 .

[SithLordExarKun]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...



Gee. I totally wonder what first person means. Still, if you can't spell sentence, it's not a shock you can't grasp other things.

Correct, i cannot grasp the sheer scale of your idiocy. OH NOES  typo mistake! My family and friends won't talk to me boo hoo!

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Are you going to go off on how "stats&skills" are essential for an RPG? I don't play video games in this day and age that has a silent protagonist.

No but you're going off how "story" is essential for an RPG and i simply proved that your point was moot, you obviously chose to ignore it because you cannot accept being wrong. That was the whole point of this argument, now you're simply trying to derail it into something else like "balance" etc etc.

SkullandBonesmember wrote...
I think you're playing dumb on purpose. Very good. There was combat in ME1. Absolutely did not know that.

The difference is that I am playing "dumb", you on the other hand actually happen to be "dumb".

SkullandBonesmember wrote...
The difference between the combat in ME1 and ME2 was ME1 had ENJOYABLE combat and it wasn't overbearing.

That is subjected to opinion and ME1's clunky combat is a far cry from being enjoyable, weren't you the dude complaining how overwhelming ME2's combat is on casual and then were promptly smashed to pieces by other forum members because you don't know how to "point and click"?

Its enjoyable in your personal opinion, once again your opnion =/= universal fact. Deal with it and move on with life.

SkullandBonesmember wrote...
There was balance between cutscenes/plot, interacting with NPCs, and combat.

  Right more "balance" when there were plenty of clunky combat moments in ME1 with enemies charging towards you like retarded zombies, forgot about that. ME2 had much more cutscenes to begin with and weren't always shot from a few angles that made it look stagnant.

You do realize that there were several moments that ME1 tried to be a shooter but failed miserably?

SkullandBonesmember wrote...
If anything, sometimes there was MORE plot and NPC interaction over the combat.

Yes, more unnecessary NPC interaction and if anything, many of the sidequests involve storming into a bunker/ship going PEW PEW PEW with a horrible clunky combat mechanic.

You want to know why  you keep accusing people that like ME2 of being idiots? Its because you suck at shooting and need it to be dumbed down because you simply don't know how to point and click without you getting annihilated in the process.

SkullandBonesmember wrote...
In ME2 there was a complete 180. Missions were longer, and there was less chatting with other characters.

Less "unnecessary" chatting, you don't "chat" on a mission that would potentially kill you unless necessary.

SkullandBonesmember wrote...
WOOHOO! Implementing 'SPLOSHUNS and character interaction. And not just ANY character interaction, but LIMITED character interaction. How genius.

Yeah limited, at least the characters aren't walking codex's and boring like the ones in ME1.

SkullandBonesmember wrote...





Story driven fans aren't
just going to lie down and say "Screw it. Do whatever you want Bioware."
They say they listen to the fans and are willing to change the
direction of the games based on feedback.

You DO know ME2 turned out the way it is because of fans in the original forum complaining about the horrible features of ME1?

Right, again with "story", how many times do we have to bring this up? Do you really think bashing people and constantly calling them "halo tards" is going to change anything? Or make you look more idiotic than you already are? Seriously you behave like a red shirt protester in bangkok, just that you are getting over emotional over a video game.

Modifié par SithLordExarKun, 09 mai 2010 - 10:36 .

[bjdbwea]

SithLordExarKun wrote...

Movies like The Terminator, Aliens, Titanic and The Empire strikes back had incredibly generic storylines but that  didn't stop them from being fantastic movies, because sometimes its the journey or the character story that makes it interesting.

I don't know about that. "Incredibly generic"? Not really in my opinion. I wouldn't even call the story in ME 2 "incredibly generic". It's just bad. It lacks memorable moments as well as memorable villains, has major plot holes, several outright laughable ideas, and most importantly it is told in a boring and unimaginative way. In fact, it would probably have been better to go with a "generic" story line than come up with some of the stuff the writers did.

The main story, that is. Some character missions are nice enough, but that's just not enough. If ME 1 is a fantastic Hollywood movie (you may call it "generic", but it works), then ME 2 is like a TV series: Some good episodes and a lot of average junk. I expect more from BioWare, they were the best story tellers in the industry, but they are going into the wrong direction.

[exxxed]

I think you're playing dumb on purpose. Very good. There was combat in ME1. Absolutely did not know that.

The difference between the combat in ME1 and ME2 was ME1 had ENJOYABLE combat and it wasn't overbearing. There was balance between cutscenes/plot, interacting with NPCs, and combat. If anything, sometimes there was MORE plot and NPC interaction over the combat. In ME2 there was a complete 180. Missions were longer, and there was less chatting with other characters.

WAIT A MINUTE! You got to chat with them on their loyalty missions.

WOOHOO! Implementing 'SPLOSHUNS and character interaction. And not just ANY character interaction, but LIMITED character interaction. How genius.

 You have a point, but you went a little overboard there .

 There were times in ME 1 when i deliberately went searching for UNC missions just for blowing crap up, because of all the character interaction and lack of action at some point, and i liked it that way, after that they released Pinnacle Station for trigger happy people which was fine by me. 

 Now coming to ME2 , which has my old pals Wrex and Garrus who don't speak to each other for some stupid reason ... hell Garrus would probably  calibrate the rest of his life if he'd spend it on the SR 2,   with all the shooting, chest-high walls and crates, it's becoming tedious after a while, hell, everyone states the combat has been improved... how? One button do all? Or the fact that i have to take cover to jump up a crate... it looks stupid ( Climbing the pile of boxes to get to Harkin), they even removed the falling animation, yea the cover system works better, but I personally didn't find anything wrong with the first one either and the objects used for cover weren't that obvious.

 The only thing i could find wrong with the first one were the weapons and the economy system... weapons improved, economy removed job done *sigh*

 Take care!

  

[SithLordExarKun]

bjdbwea wrote...


I don't know about that. "Incredibly generic"? Not really in my opinion. I wouldn't even call the story in ME 2 "incredibly generic". It's just bad. It lacks memorable moments as well as memorable villains, has major plot holes, several outright laughable ideas, and most importantly it is told in a boring and unimaginative way. In fact, it would probably have been better to go with a "generic" story line than come up with some of the stuff the writers did.

Its bad in your opinion, you think ME1 is free from plot holes? You think the idea of machines that come back every 50 000 years is not laughable? You don't think ME1's story isn't badly told as well?(Investigate planets for geth activity bla bla).

I found the idea of a machine coming back in time to kill a women carrying a child that represents humanities hope laughable along with the massive time paradox plothole it brought with it, did it stop the movie from being great? No it didn't.

I also found the idea of broodmothers giving birth to certain species of darkspawn based on the mothers species utterly hilarious, did it stop DAO from being a fanastic RPG?

bjdbwea wrote...

The main story, that is. Some character missions are nice enough, but that's just not enough. If ME 1 is a fantastic Hollywood movie (you may call it "generic", but it works), then ME 2 is like a TV series: Some good episodes and a lot of average junk. I expect more from BioWare, they were the best story tellers in the industry, but they are going into the wrong direction.

In my opinion, ME1 is a far cry from a hollywood movie, ME2 feels more lika a hollywood movie down the line of Aliens, TESB and the terminator.

And no, bioware is far from the best story tellers in the industry, if you think they are thats your opinion but i disagree, i already listed how generic their stories are(gather an army to save the day in DAO).

Modifié par SithLordExarKun, 09 mai 2010 - 11:04 .

[Videit]

bjdbwea wrote...

I expect more from BioWare, they were the best story tellers in the industry, but they are going into the wrong direction.

Going in the wrong direction... I think not.  So you didnt like the storytelling in one game that doesnt mean the whole company is f'ed.  I loved the story and the way they told it in ME2 so to me thats a little much especially since ME2 is the more popular and better reviewed of the two ME games.  The plot and the narrative werent huge in ME2 but thats cause they were concentrating on a different form of storytelling.  Just cause some people dont get that doesnt mean failure. 

The way I see ME3 playing out is either a much larger plot or an even larger more choice driven story like ME2.  Either way I just hope its bigger and badder.