10273 réponses à ce sujet

[brfritos]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

brfritos wrote...

I think you're confusing the Kodiak (the shuttle) with the Hammerhead.
The Hammerhead indeed use a VI for guidance, but the shuttle has a cockpit and a pilot.

Which reminds me... is it just me or are the APCs really tiny considering Mako can carry you, Ashley and Wrex in heavy armors and one NPC. M29 Grizzly is even worse. It's flat as a pancake!

But in this game they really pay attention to this, since in the Codex is stated that the Kodiak can carry twelve crew members plus the pilots.

APCs in general are weak vehicles, used mainly for safe transportation of troops in the battlefield, among other uses.
They can sustained fire from assault rifles and sometimes grenades (depends where they hit), but anything above this really put them out of work.

And the Hammerhead armor is made of paper.

Ecael wrote...
Plot holes can't be fixed or avoided entirely, but they can be patched up at a later date.

Listing plot holes is wasting time because nothing is accomplished. The writers gain nothing from someone pointing them out.

Yes, some plots can be fixed by patchs, specially someones like in the Codex.
Reading that I saved the Council when I really left them to die is not good.

But appointing huge plot holes, like Legion telling me the first time I talked to Soverign was on Ilos (not Virmire), make the writers and QA pay more attention to their work.

The problem is not really plot holes, but "continuity".
In the first ME you don't see this kind of thing very often, ME2 has much more errors in this department.
I think this damage the story even more than a plot hole.

Heck, Aliens, Star Wars, Star Trek, all of them have plot holes, but the continuity is exemplary.

[ ]'s

[SithLordExarKun]

Plotholes happen all the time. And so does retcons.

[Ecael]

brfritos wrote...

Ecael wrote...
Plot holes can't be fixed or avoided entirely, but they can be patched up at a later date.

Listing plot holes is wasting time because nothing is accomplished. The writers gain nothing from someone pointing them out.

Yes, some plots can be fixed by patchs, specially someones like in the Codex.
Reading that I saved the Council when I really left them to die is not good.

But appointing huge plot holes, like Legion telling me the first time I talked to Soverign was on Ilos (not Virmire), make the writers and QA pay more attention to their work.

The problem is not really plot holes, but "continuity".
In the first ME you don't see this kind of thing very often, ME2 has much more errors in this department.
I think this damage the story even more than a plot holes

That could have been a mishap done by someone typing up the dialogue script for D.C. Douglas, and not a plot hole by anyone's standards.

But like I said, why bother listing what appears to be a plot hole without any explanation for it? Even plot-wise, you could just say that the geth were present on both Ilos and Virmire (which is true), and they believed Shepard talked to (spoiler) on Ilos instead of the VI (spoiler).

You don't see problems with continuity in Mass Effect 1 because it's not continuing from anything. Star Trek, Star Wars and Aliens all have more than 2 episodes of content available right now to compare with each other and tie up loose ends.

[LimberRain]

iakus wrote...

LimberRain wrote...

Why are a lot of people attacking the final boss? They made it a VERY BIG point in ME1 to point out that the logic of the reapers is seriously warped/unknowable by our standards. How can we expect to understand the logic of organic machine creatures that have existed for 10's of millions of years? Maybe the first reaper was built by a madman and imprinted with an unstable personality. Maybe they are just crazy.... I do not see why that is an impossibility

Because once we figured out what the Conduit was in ME 1, What Sovereign was planning on doing made sense.  The motives are still a mystery, warped/unknowable logic and all.  Still, crazy, not stupid.  In ME 2 , the Collectors' project still makes no sense.  What were the Collectors trying to accomplish?  How does this help bring back the Reapers?  How in fact were they planning on finishing it?  Oh, and why did the tube thingees'  armor thingees keep turning on and off?  What is this, some kind of video game?

I think it is very simple.  Shepard destroyed their "vanguard" so I think it was very likely that they were building a new one to attack and open up the citadel relay.  This is supported by the fact that the reapers light up and start moving toward the milky way after you destroy it.  I assume they would finish the same way they began, but if you are refering to how they would kidnap so many more humans I think that is simple too.  I think they would have stopped the abductions for a brief lengths of time to weaken suspicions.  Everyone thinks they were going to do it in one swoop but I do not think that is the case.  I think they would would have abducted so many people and taken a increasingly longer breaks after.  Example, abduct 100,000, 2 year break, abduct another 200,000 3 year break.  Or it could have been even more random than that, but it was far too early in the project too tell how they would have pulled it off.  The political fighting in ME is obviously very heated and for that reason I wouldn't be surprised if the reapers could abduct millions before a response.  Hell, Saren attacked inside citadel space and the only thing they did was send you.  Geth attacked the citadel and they didn't even really pursue them.  Anderson/Udina also represent the alliance on the council so even if they wanted to, the other members on the council wouldn't let them go charging into the terminus systems.  The hands of the alliance are tied.

[brfritos]

Ecael wrote...

brfritos wrote...

Ecael wrote...
Plot holes can't be fixed or avoided entirely, but they can be patched up at a later date.

Listing plot holes is wasting time because nothing is accomplished. The writers gain nothing from someone pointing them out.

Yes, some plots can be fixed by patchs, specially someones like in the Codex.
Reading that I saved the Council when I really left them to die is not good.

But appointing huge plot holes, like Legion telling me the first time I talked to Soverign was on Ilos (not Virmire), make the writers and QA pay more attention to their work.

The problem is not really plot holes, but "continuity".
In the first ME you don't see this kind of thing very often, ME2 has much more errors in this department.
I think this damage the story even more than a plot holes

That could have been a mishap done by someone typing up the dialogue script for D.C. Douglas, and not a plot hole by anyone's standards.

But like I said, why bother listing what appears to be a plot hole without any explanation for it? Even plot-wise, you could just say that the geth were present on both Ilos and Virmire (which is true), and they believed Shepard talked to (spoiler) on Ilos instead of the VI (spoiler).

You don't see problems with continuity in Mass Effect 1 because it's not continuing from anything. Star Trek, Star Wars and Aliens all have more than 2 episodes of content available right now to compare with each other and tie up loose ends.

There's a difference between continuity and plot holes.
Plot holes are exactly what the name means: later in the story it contradicts what was said before.

Continuity are errors that solely happens regarding the enviroment of the game (weapons, clothes, messages) or when manipulating something.
One game prodigal in this is Fallout 3, you can see continuity errors in every corner.

In ME2 one example is when you choose the Archangel mission, talk to the mercenary and choose to return to the Normandy for a change of armor, for example.
Then, you receive a message telling about something that don't have happen yet (spoilers are not allowed in this forum, but I'm confident that you know what I'm talking about).

In movies or TV series you can see this when a character are using a piece of clothe and in the next scene he appears without it.

[ ]'s

Modifié par brfritos, 20 mai 2010 - 02:19 .

[Zahxia]

LimberRain wrote...

I think it is very simple.  Shepard destroyed their "vanguard" so I think it was very likely that they were building a new one to attack and open up the citadel relay.  This is supported by the fact that the reapers light up and start moving toward the milky way after you destroy it. 

-Machines made of organic matter?
-Consider the function of the vanguard: Is it supposed to walk through space firing lasers out of its behind? (Don't go into 'they revere a race that destroyed one of their own: The Reapers were established to be far superior than organic life and wouldn't take on the form of their enemy out of a gesture of respect)
-In the opening moments of the game Freedoms Progress, Ferris Fields and Horizon are attacked. These aren't the first attacks the Collector's are attacking indiscriminantly. Colonists should be fleeing to Alliance/Citadel space in droves at this point regardless of how common attacks by pirates and slavers must be. One attack on Eden Prime was enough to deter Colonisation efforts.
-Their ship uses rocket boosters and hell even the incompetent to the point they can't wipe themselves Cerberus found samples for Mordin to use they're not being subtle. ( I found it hilarious that even Casey Hudson mocks Cerberus when interviewed about the Overlord DLC)

The Collector's plan is needlessly complicated and holds up to scrutiny in a manner butter stays firm against hot toast.

[MassEffect762]

Note to bioware.(ignore this ME2 fans)



I've been slowly creeping another playthrough of ME2 to have another shepard transfer and play the new DLC(Firewalker/Kasumi) and I say this honestly, what a chore/bore it is to play after the initial playthrough. I'm not even planet mining.(ZZzz)



Keep up input folks, Bioware keep reading it.

[Ecael]

brfritos wrote...

Ecael wrote...

brfritos wrote...

Ecael wrote...
Plot holes can't be fixed or avoided entirely, but they can be patched up at a later date.

Listing plot holes is wasting time because nothing is accomplished. The writers gain nothing from someone pointing them out.

Yes, some plots can be fixed by patchs, specially someones like in the Codex.
Reading that I saved the Council when I really left them to die is not good.

But appointing huge plot holes, like Legion telling me the first time I talked to Soverign was on Ilos (not Virmire), make the writers and QA pay more attention to their work.

The problem is not really plot holes, but "continuity".
In the first ME you don't see this kind of thing very often, ME2 has much more errors in this department.
I think this damage the story even more than a plot holes

That could have been a mishap done by someone typing up the dialogue script for D.C. Douglas, and not a plot hole by anyone's standards.

But like I said, why bother listing what appears to be a plot hole without any explanation for it? Even plot-wise, you could just say that the geth were present on both Ilos and Virmire (which is true), and they believed Shepard talked to (spoiler) on Ilos instead of the VI (spoiler).

You don't see problems with continuity in Mass Effect 1 because it's not continuing from anything. Star Trek, Star Wars and Aliens all have more than 2 episodes of content available right now to compare with each other and tie up loose ends.

There's a difference between continuity and plot holes.
Plot holes are exactly what the name means: later in the story it contradicts what was said before.

Continuity are errors that solely happens regarding the enviroment of the game (weapons, clothes, messages) or when manipulating something.
One game prodigal in this is Fallout 3, you can see continuity errors in every corner.

I know this is taken from Wikipedia, but:
continuity - consistency of the characteristics of persons, plot, objects, places and events seen by the reader or viewer over some period of time

Thus, your definition of plot hole falls within the definition of continuity (at least by Wikipedia's standards). Continuity is then a broader term to describe inconsistency in more than one aspect.

In ME2 one example is when you choose the Archangel mission, talk to the mercenary and choose to return to the Normandy for a change of armor, for example.
Then, you receive a message telling about something that don't have happen yet (spoilers are not allowed in this forum, but I'm confident that you know what I'm talking about).

In movies or TV series you can see this when a character are using a piece of clothe and in the next scene he appears without it.

I may need a little more convincing of continuity than just e-mails, though. The private terminal messages are extremely anachronistic, and thus shatter continuity (especially Admiral Hackett sending you an e-mail well before you board the SR-2). However, time stops everywhere Shepard is not; otherwise, things like the Refund Guy hanging out near the shop (ME1) or the warehouse (ME2) within the timespan of the entire game would break continuity, unless he's really THAT insistent on a refund.

As for the Archangel mission, I'll post up the e-mail here since it's not really a spoiler:

"Almost all those mercs that had gotten killed by Archangel" - which is fairly vague, as he could have watched the news and saw the dead bodies made by just Archangel (before Shepard even arrived). Regardless of whether or not you go early or take days to do that mission, he's still going to watch the news at some point if you do that interrupt. Just because Shepard went straight to the Normandy after helping him doesn't mean Shepard didn't spend days on Omega doing other tasks or even just strolling around.

Like I said, everything in Mass Effect is explainable in some way or another. And people should put more effort into explaining or solving instead of complaining and nitpicking.

Wizards:wizard:

Modifié par Ecael, 20 mai 2010 - 04:02 .

[Ecael]

MassEffect762 wrote...

Note to bioware.(ignore this ME2 fans)

That would include BioWare ignoring the post then, wouldn't it?


As I've said before, someone who likes ME1/hates ME2 is much, much more likely than someone who hates ME1/likes ME2. Why? Because if someone hated the first game, why would they go and buy the next one not knowing how different it would be until actually playing it?

"I hated the first Harry Potter novel, so you know I'm going to do? I'm going to throw it out buy the next one!"

There are people who like both ME1/ME2, and they happen to be in the majority, according to several BioWare employees and several game critics.

I've been slowly creeping another playthrough of ME2 to have another shepard transfer and play the new DLC(Firewalker/Kasumi) and I say this honestly, what a chore/bore it is to play after the initial playthrough. I'm not even planet mining.(ZZzz)

So it's boring not because of planet-scanning now, it's boring because you're running around empty planets in a ground vehicle, shooting things while inside it, and then shooting things in every other mission?

Sounds like both games to me.

Modifié par Ecael, 20 mai 2010 - 03:42 .

[Dudeman315]

Ecael wrote...

Like I said, everything in Mass Effect is explainable in some way or another. And people should put more effort into explaining or solving instead of complaining and nitpicking.

Wizards:wizard:

No, that is the job of the person telling the story.  If I bought a movie and it was just the raw video and audio tracks and told to make it make sense because the post production guys didn't feel like it was their job to make the movie make sense, I would be unhappy at the very least.  It's the story tellers job in a sequel to try and remain consistant to the established universe and tell an intresting story, not make me tell the story(otherwise I'd be the storyteller).

[uberdowzen]

MassEffect762 wrote...

Note to bioware.(ignore this ME2 fans)

I've been slowly creeping another playthrough of ME2 to have another shepard transfer and play the new DLC(Firewalker/Kasumi) and I say this honestly, what a chore/bore it is to play after the initial playthrough. I'm not even planet mining.(ZZzz)

Keep up input folks, Bioware keep reading it.

I won't ignore this as I'm an ME1 fan too...

Firstly, Bioware is unlikely to respond to feedback that says that the game is a "chore/bore". I mean how are they going to act on that? And there are many many people who would outright disagree with you.

I'm onto my third playthrough of ME2 and I'm finding it just as entertaining (if not more because I've realised how good the plot actually is) as my first.

Yes, Bioware please read this. Also read the large amount of input from people who loved the game.

[uberdowzen]

Dudeman315 wrote...

No, that is the job of the person telling the story.  If I bought a movie and it was just the raw video and audio tracks and told to make it make sense because the post production guys didn't feel like it was their job to make the movie make sense, I would be unhappy at the very least.  It's the story tellers job in a sequel to try and remain consistant to the established universe and tell an intresting story, not make me tell the story(otherwise I'd be the storyteller).

How is having a few minor incosistencies (which Star Trek has many of I might add) akin to skipping the entire post production of a movie? That'd be more like just sending players the source code and resources and asking them to put the rest together. That's not a very good anology at all.

[Ecael]

Dudeman315 wrote...

Ecael wrote...

Like I said, everything in Mass Effect is explainable in some way or another. And people should put more effort into explaining or solving instead of complaining and nitpicking.

Wizards:wizard:

No, that is the job of the person telling the story.  If I bought a movie and it was just the raw video and audio tracks and told to make it make sense because the post production guys didn't feel like it was their job to make the movie make sense, I would be unhappy at the very least.  It's the story tellers job in a sequel to try and remain consistant to the established universe and tell an intresting story, not make me tell the story(otherwise I'd be the storyteller).

So if constructive problem solving should only be done by writers, should constructive criticism of certain games be taken into account only by actual game critics, ~97% of which gave Mass Effect 2 a 90% or higher?

That would work.

[uberdowzen]

Ecael wrote...

should constructive criticism of certain games be taken into account only by actual game critics, ~97% of which gave Mass Effect 2 a 90% or higher?

I'd say yes. Journalists tend to put a lot more thought into whether they like a game than the general populace.

[Iakus]

uberdowzen wrote...

MassEffect762 wrote...

Note to bioware.(ignore this ME2 fans)

I've been slowly creeping another playthrough of ME2 to have another shepard transfer and play the new DLC(Firewalker/Kasumi) and I say this honestly, what a chore/bore it is to play after the initial playthrough. I'm not even planet mining.(ZZzz)

Keep up input folks, Bioware keep reading it.

I won't ignore this as I'm an ME1 fan too...

Firstly, Bioware is unlikely to respond to feedback that says that the game is a "chore/bore". I mean how are they going to act on that? And there are many many people who would outright disagree with you.

I'm onto my third playthrough of ME2 and I'm finding it just as entertaining (if not more because I've realised how good the plot actually is) as my first.

Yes, Bioware please read this. Also read the large amount of input from people who loved the game.

Between bouts of ME 1, I'm slowly working my way through a tird playthrough of ME2 between bouts of ME 1 as well, but as an experiment (How small a squad can I do the Suicide Mission with, trying for six)  And it's less bad, than before.  But I think that's because I'm using an import frm an ME 1  that I didn't run.  This game is less personal.  This Shep isn't really "mine" so I care a lot less about what choices were or were not made.  Kaiden's all mad at me?  So what?  My choices last game are ignored? Who cares, they weren't my choices to begin with Collectors working for Reapers?  If you say so, Villain-wise though they seem to  be placing fourth, somewhere between security bots and wild varren.   I have nothing invested in this Shep but curiosity. 

ME 2 is playing much better as a standalone game.  This is probably not a good thing.

[KitsuneRommel]

MassEffect762 wrote...

Note to bioware.(ignore this ME2 fans)

I've been slowly creeping another playthrough of ME2 to have another shepard transfer and play the new DLC(Firewalker/Kasumi) and I say this honestly, what a chore/bore it is to play after the initial playthrough. I'm not even planet mining.(ZZzz)

Keep up input folks, Bioware keep reading it.

Needs more sploshions, right?

[KitsuneRommel]

tonnactus wrote...

What doesnt work with ashley? Shooting,surviability?? What is your class and on difficulty you are playing?

It's just that if there's an enemy behind a corner or a piece of wall she just stands there trying to shoot a hole through the whole thing . They just spent half of the Rogue VI mission dead while I sniped the bots from locations where they did not hit back.

[uberdowzen]

iakus wrote...

Between bouts of ME 1, I'm slowly working my way through a tird playthrough of ME2 between bouts of ME 1 as well, but as an experiment (How small a squad can I do the Suicide Mission with, trying for six)  And it's less bad, than before.  But I think that's because I'm using an import frm an ME 1  that I didn't run.  This game is less personal.  This Shep isn't really "mine" so I care a lot less about what choices were or were not made.  Kaiden's all mad at me?  So what?  My choices last game are ignored? Who cares, they weren't my choices to begin with Collectors working for Reapers?  If you say so, Villain-wise though they seem to  be placing fourth, somewhere between security bots and wild varren.   I have nothing invested in this Shep but curiosity. 

ME 2 is playing much better as a standalone game.  This is probably not a good thing.

Life isn't perfect. Why should Shepherd's life be then? It pulled at my heartstrings when Kaidan turned is back on me, I was like "No!!! Come with us!!!!". I think that shows how good ME2 is rather than how bad it is.

[AlanC9]

Zahxia wrote...
-Machines made of organic matter?

"Organic matter" just means that you've got some carbon chemistry  going on.  Machine/life isn't a coherent distinction.

[CroGamer002]

Ecael wrote...

brfritos wrote...

Ecael wrote...

brfritos wrote...

Ecael wrote...
Plot holes can't be fixed or avoided entirely, but they can be patched up at a later date.

Listing plot holes is wasting time because nothing is accomplished. The writers gain nothing from someone pointing them out.

Yes, some plots can be fixed by patchs, specially someones like in the Codex.
Reading that I saved the Council when I really left them to die is not good.

But appointing huge plot holes, like Legion telling me the first time I talked to Soverign was on Ilos (not Virmire), make the writers and QA pay more attention to their work.

The problem is not really plot holes, but "continuity".
In the first ME you don't see this kind of thing very often, ME2 has much more errors in this department.
I think this damage the story even more than a plot holes

That could have been a mishap done by someone typing up the dialogue script for D.C. Douglas, and not a plot hole by anyone's standards.

But like I said, why bother listing what appears to be a plot hole without any explanation for it? Even plot-wise, you could just say that the geth were present on both Ilos and Virmire (which is true), and they believed Shepard talked to (spoiler) on Ilos instead of the VI (spoiler).

You don't see problems with continuity in Mass Effect 1 because it's not continuing from anything. Star Trek, Star Wars and Aliens all have more than 2 episodes of content available right now to compare with each other and tie up loose ends.

There's a difference between continuity and plot holes.
Plot holes are exactly what the name means: later in the story it contradicts what was said before.

Continuity are errors that solely happens regarding the enviroment of the game (weapons, clothes, messages) or when manipulating something.
One game prodigal in this is Fallout 3, you can see continuity errors in every corner.

I know this is taken from Wikipedia, but:
continuity - consistency of the characteristics of persons, plot, objects, places and events seen by the reader or viewer over some period of time

Thus, your definition of plot hole falls within the definition of continuity (at least by Wikipedia's standards). Continuity is then a broader term to describe inconsistency in more than one aspect.

In ME2 one example is when you choose the Archangel mission, talk to the mercenary and choose to return to the Normandy for a change of armor, for example.
Then, you receive a message telling about something that don't have happen yet (spoilers are not allowed in this forum, but I'm confident that you know what I'm talking about).

In movies or TV series you can see this when a character are using a piece of clothe and in the next scene he appears without it.

I may need a little more convincing of continuity than just e-mails, though. The private terminal messages are extremely anachronistic, and thus shatter continuity (especially Admiral Hackett sending you an e-mail well before you board the SR-2). However, time stops everywhere Shepard is not; otherwise, things like the Refund Guy hanging out near the shop (ME1) or the warehouse (ME2) within the timespan of the entire game would break continuity, unless he's really THAT insistent on a refund.

As for the Archangel mission, I'll post up the e-mail here since it's not really a spoiler:

"Almost all those mercs that had gotten killed by Archangel" - which is fairly vague, as he could have watched the news and saw the dead bodies made by just Archangel (before Shepard even arrived). Regardless of whether or not you go early or take days to do that mission, he's still going to watch the news at some point if you do that interrupt. Just because Shepard went straight to the Normandy after helping him doesn't mean Shepard didn't spend days on Omega doing other tasks or even just strolling around.

Like I said, everything in Mass Effect is explainable in some way or another. And people should put more effort into explaining or solving instead of complaining and nitpicking.

Wizards:wizard:

It's not a wizard, it's RPG.
Name me one RPG that doesn't have similiar thing.

[bjdbwea]

iakus wrote...

Between bouts of ME 1, I'm slowly working my way through a tird playthrough of ME2 between bouts of ME 1 as well, but as an experiment (How small a squad can I do the Suicide Mission with, trying for six)  And it's less bad, than before.  But I think that's because I'm using an import frm an ME 1  that I didn't run.  This game is less personal.  This Shep isn't really "mine" so I care a lot less about what choices were or were not made.  Kaiden's all mad at me?  So what?  My choices last game are ignored? Who cares, they weren't my choices to begin with Collectors working for Reapers?  If you say so, Villain-wise though they seem to  be placing fourth, somewhere between security bots and wild varren.   I have nothing invested in this Shep but curiosity. 

ME 2 is playing much better as a standalone game.  This is probably not a good thing.

I agree. ME 2 may be okay as a standalone game. But as a successor to THE ME 1, it is not. Too many steps back, too many cut corners. The actual improvements (mostly technical stuff like graphics and sound) can't outweigh that at all.

I also agree about it often not being "my" Shepard. In ME 1 I never felt like there was something missing in dialogue options. In ME 2, too often Shepard says something without me having any choice at all, but more importantly, in numerous occasions I can't agree with any of the possible choices.

Furthermore, it's almost impossible to give Shepard any personality beyond "the warrior whose only facial expression is :mellow:". It seems as if Shepard doesn't care about anything.

Only in some romances it's possible for Shepard to express a bit of personality and being human, but it already stops at the "continuation" of the ME 1 romances. Reaction = .

Modifié par bjdbwea, 20 mai 2010 - 11:53 .

[Poison_Berrie]

bjdbwea wrote...
I also agree about it often not being "my" Shepard. In ME 1 I never felt like there was something missing in dialogue options. In ME 2, too often Shepard says something without me having any choice at all, but more importantly, in numerous occasions I can't agree with any of the possible choices.

Furthermore, it's almost impossible to give Shepard any personality beyond "the warrior whose only facial expression is :mellow:". It seems as if Shepard doesn't care about anything.

I don't think there are a whole lot more times were he talks without your input compared to the first. Most of it questions that come naturally out of your earlier choice or something of the like.
As for it not feeling like your Shepard, well clearly it's a subjective thing. I must say I found myself agreeing more often with dialogue options than I did in ME 1.
None the less, Shepard's character as a whole never felt as my character as I've had in other RPG's because a large part of him is predefined.

[Ecael]

bjdbwea wrote...

iakus wrote...

Between bouts of ME 1, I'm slowly working my way through a tird playthrough of ME2 between bouts of ME 1 as well, but as an experiment (How small a squad can I do the Suicide Mission with, trying for six)  And it's less bad, than before.  But I think that's because I'm using an import frm an ME 1  that I didn't run.  This game is less personal.  This Shep isn't really "mine" so I care a lot less about what choices were or were not made.  Kaiden's all mad at me?  So what?  My choices last game are ignored? Who cares, they weren't my choices to begin with Collectors working for Reapers?  If you say so, Villain-wise though they seem to  be placing fourth, somewhere between security bots and wild varren.   I have nothing invested in this Shep but curiosity. 

ME 2 is playing much better as a standalone game.  This is probably not a good thing.

I agree. ME 2 may be okay as a standalone game. But as a successor to THE ME 1, it is not. Too many steps back, too many cut corners. The actual improvements (mostly technical stuff like graphics and sound) can't outweigh that at all.

That may have influenced a lot of the problems inherent (or even carried over) in Mass Effect 2. Mass Effect 1 works fine as a standalone game with a standalone plot - whether or not they made two more games, the player can just assume Shepard goes on to stop the larger threat at hand with the help of the Council. Mass Effect 2 was planned as a standalone game without a standalone plot. This puts a lot of pressure on the dozen writers working on the project.

Movie trilogies often have the same problems without a definitive novel to work with - The Matrix is definitely an example of this - and they don't even have to worry about what their audience chose in the last movie nor do they have to worry about making it 30-40 hours long! So this may be the current view of some on the forums on ME2:



However, while Mass Effect 3 may also suffer from not having a "standalone" plot without a beginning, it will have an end - and they will focus on consequences rather than both sides of the equation.

Depending on how they wrap up Mass Effect 3 and which characters can return as squadmates (all of them would still work, and they would all still have a lot of dialogue), it will become either The Matrix Effect or The Mass of the Effect trilogy.

I also agree about it often not being "my" Shepard. In ME 1 I never felt like there was something missing in dialogue options. In ME 2, too often Shepard says something without me having any choice at all, but more importantly, in numerous occasions I can't agree with any of the possible choices.

Furthermore, it's almost impossible to give Shepard any personality beyond "the warrior whose only facial expression is :mellow:". It seems as if Shepard doesn't care about anything.

Only in some romances it's possible for Shepard to express a bit of personality and being human, but it already stops at the "continuation" of the ME 1 romances. Reaction = .

That's often found in ME1 as well - try to break up with Liara after accidentally romancing her. It's impossible.

(Blasphemy!)

Modifié par Ecael, 20 mai 2010 - 04:34 .

[Ecael]

Ecael wrote...

Forgot to add this, relevant to Lord of the Rings...

[Iakus]

uberdowzen wrote...

iakus wrote...

Between bouts of ME 1, I'm slowly working my way through a tird playthrough of ME2 between bouts of ME 1 as well, but as an experiment (How small a squad can I do the Suicide Mission with, trying for six)  And it's less bad, than before.  But I think that's because I'm using an import frm an ME 1  that I didn't run.  This game is less personal.  This Shep isn't really "mine" so I care a lot less about what choices were or were not made.  Kaiden's all mad at me?  So what?  My choices last game are ignored? Who cares, they weren't my choices to begin with Collectors working for Reapers?  If you say so, Villain-wise though they seem to  be placing fourth, somewhere between security bots and wild varren.   I have nothing invested in this Shep but curiosity. 

ME 2 is playing much better as a standalone game.  This is probably not a good thing.

Life isn't perfect. Why should Shepherd's life be then? It pulled at my heartstrings when Kaidan turned is back on me, I was like "No!!! Come with us!!!!". I think that shows how good ME2 is rather than how bad it is.

"I Remember Me"  pulled at my heartstrings
The Virmire choice pulled at my heartstrings
Tali's loyalty mission pulled at my heartstrings (best paragon interrupt ever)
Miranda's loyalty mission pulled at my heartrings
Heck, the female krogan in Mordin's loyalty mission kinda tugged at my hearstrings

Horizon just makes me go "Huh?"