10273 réponses à ce sujet

[Tempest]

I think its easy to forget that story in a game isn't the same as plot. Also combat is not the same as interaction.

There are many games that REALLY lack engaging stories, super mario, but the plot helps push us forward with the action. If you make a hybrid of Anything+RPG means that a good/great story is a must since that is what helps it push it past "Generic Action Game".



I will personally say that I did not like Heavy Rain since the interaction was at a minimal compared to most games. I played it, but I'd rather read books than replay Heavy Rain since both had similar interactions (To my taste).

[uberdowzen]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

How?

Well put.

[uberdowzen]

iakus wrote...

But Shepard isn't building a team.  TIM is, Shepard's just the captain of the team.  And the loyalty missions don't factor into the main plot at all.  In fact, they practically occur in a vacuum, save Mordin, Tali and Legion's, which might have some carryover into ME 3 (maybe an email or something )  I don't really see any evidence of how the mission itself affects them.  For several we don't even know why they're joining up.

You missed my point. The mission itself it fairly unimportant. The game is about the people on the team, not the mission itself.

[Tempest]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

The loyalty missions are sidequests, they aren't suppose to pass off as part of the main plot.

In regards to why the characters join, or why they would join, really the recruitment of Thane and Samara are the ones that make no sense.

Well if you do not do ANY of the loyalty missions side quests since they are not canon in your opinion, than shepard dies and there is no Shepard for ME3.

Now if we say that the Loyalty are part of the main plot, THAN they must be done for Shepard to survive to reach ME3.

Either they are not part of the plot and Shepard dies  OR they are part of the plot and shepard lives.   Which one would I choose?

[Onyx Jaguar]

Tempest wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

The loyalty missions are sidequests, they aren't suppose to pass off as part of the main plot.

In regards to why the characters join, or why they would join, really the recruitment of Thane and Samara are the ones that make no sense.

Well if you do not do ANY of the loyalty missions side quests since they are not canon in your opinion, than shepard dies and there is no Shepard for ME3.

Now if we say that the Loyalty are part of the main plot, THAN they must be done for Shepard to survive to reach ME3.

Either they are not part of the plot and Shepard dies  OR they are part of the plot and shepard lives.   Which one would I choose?

No, Shepard CAN EASILY survive without doiong the sidequests

[Tempest]

uberdowzen wrote...

iakus wrote...

But Shepard isn't building a team.  TIM is, Shepard's just the captain of the team.  And the loyalty missions don't factor into the main plot at all.  In fact, they practically occur in a vacuum, save Mordin, Tali and Legion's, which might have some carryover into ME 3 (maybe an email or something )  I don't really see any evidence of how the mission itself affects them.  For several we don't even know why they're joining up.

You missed my point. The mission itself it fairly unimportant. The game is about the people on the team, not the mission itself.

Well, what I believe he is trying to say is tthat Shepard is supposed to be the main character (since it is supposed to be about shepard), but he/she lacks any character development compared to the squadies.  You can argue its supposed to be about the team, but he is arguing that the trilogy is supposed to be about Shepard and the squadies are lucky to be coming in for the ride.

[uberdowzen]

I think the problem is that a lot of people only consider something plot if a cinematic starts, the camera pans to an NPC and that NPC explains things in very clear terms. IMO, this is bad storytelling and not playing to the strengths of the genre. ME2 creates feelings and emotions, the gradual build up to the mission, Mordin's feelings of guilt over the genophage, Garrus' change in outlook after his experiences on Omega, Samara's curse, Jacob's uncertainty in Cerberus...the list goes on. Just because not a lot happens, doesn't make it a terrible plot.

[Tempest]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Tempest wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

The loyalty missions are sidequests, they aren't suppose to pass off as part of the main plot.

In regards to why the characters join, or why they would join, really the recruitment of Thane and Samara are the ones that make no sense.

Well if you do not do ANY of the loyalty missions side quests since they are not canon in your opinion, than shepard dies and there is no Shepard for ME3.

Now if we say that the Loyalty are part of the main plot, THAN they must be done for Shepard to survive to reach ME3.

Either they are not part of the plot and Shepard dies  OR they are part of the plot and shepard lives.   Which one would I choose?

No, Shepard CAN EASILY survive without doiong the sidequests

Yes he can, but that requires using specific characters for it, which defeats the purpose of getting "specialists" in the 1st place.   Thus the conundrum of having your cake but not being able to eat it.

[uberdowzen]

Tempest wrote...

Well, what I believe he is trying to say is tthat Shepard is supposed to be the main character (since it is supposed to be about shepard), but he/she lacks any character development compared to the squadies.  You can argue its supposed to be about the team, but he is arguing that the trilogy is supposed to be about Shepard and the squadies are lucky to be coming in for the ride.

But Shepherd is only vaguely a character, only slightly more so than in most RPGs.

[Onyx Jaguar]

The specialists will get the job done regardless of whether or not they survive

[Tempest]

uberdowzen wrote...

I think the problem is that a lot of people only consider something plot if a cinematic starts, the camera pans to an NPC and that NPC explains things in very clear terms. IMO, this is bad storytelling and not playing to the strengths of the genre. ME2 creates feelings and emotions, the gradual build up to the mission, Mordin's feelings of guilt over the genophage, Garrus' change in outlook after his experiences on Omega, Samara's curse, Jacob's uncertainty in Cerberus...the list goes on. Just because not a lot happens, doesn't make it a terrible plot.

I totally agree on how well developed the squadies became.  The problem is that the trilogy is supposed to be about Shepard and how he/she grows in all 3 games.  Since he/she has very little to no personal growth seems ackward in a trilogy that is shpposed to be about him/her.

[KitsuneRommel]

Tempest wrote...

If you took the elevator ride with your squadies in ME1 there was a chance that your squadies would talk to each other, I always looked forward to the chance of seeing your squadies talk to each other like they may actually be living creatures.  I wanted MORE of those communication between squadies in ME2, but it was cut down even more compared to ME1.

Tali and Ashley have had one (1!) dialogue on my elevator rides so far. The rest have been repeating newscasts.

Modifié par KitsuneRommel, 23 mai 2010 - 04:49 .

[finnithe]

I keep on reading that SkullandBonesMember says that in ME2 combat took priority over plot but I still don't get what he means.

[uberdowzen]

Tempest wrote...

I totally agree on how well developed the squadies became.  The problem is that the trilogy is supposed to be about Shepard and how he/she grows in all 3 games.  Since he/she has very little to no personal growth seems ackward in a trilogy that is shpposed to be about him/her.

Because Shepherd developed so much as a character in ME1. Shepherd is essentially just your way of affecting the world, not a character

[Tempest]

I do believe that if you have any non-loyal party members during the last fight, Shepard dies. I don't know if anyone has done it without any loyalties though.

[Tempest]

uberdowzen wrote...

Tempest wrote...

I totally agree on how well developed the squadies became.  The problem is that the trilogy is supposed to be about Shepard and how he/she grows in all 3 games.  Since he/she has very little to no personal growth seems ackward in a trilogy that is shpposed to be about him/her.

Because Shepherd developed so much as a character in ME1. Shepherd is essentially just your way of affecting the world, not a character

Yeah, but that makes shepard personally boring and predictable.   Would have been very easy to have him/her point out how much he/she hates or likes Cerberus to further his/her character development.   This is JUST the 2nd game afterall not the 3rd/final one.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Tempest wrote...

I do believe that if you have any non-loyal party members during the last fight, Shepard dies. I don't know if anyone has done it without any loyalties though.

You have ten to twelve squadmates, three are exceptionally tough, one has plot armor.  Minimum of Eight I believe.

First round-1 dies
Second round-you have the option of having one die
Third round-1 or 2 dies
Fourth round-2+die

That still would leave half your team alive, you have to choose just right in order to make sure more die in the fourth round

Only if you do not activate the two "Bonus" characters would you ensure death

Modifié par Onyx Jaguar, 23 mai 2010 - 05:00 .

[Tempest]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

Tempest wrote...

If you took the elevator ride with your squadies in ME1 there was a chance that your squadies would talk to each other, I always looked forward to the chance of seeing your squadies talk to each other like they may actually be living creatures.  I wanted MORE of those communication between squadies in ME2, but it was cut down even more compared to ME1.

Tali and Ashley have had one (1!) dialogue on my elevator rides so far. The rest have been repeating newscasts.

Really?  I had Liara talking to Grunt, Tali with Garrus, though I do agree that news casts came out more often than I wanted.   Which comes to the point I was making with that post.   ME1 was not perfect in anyway with squadie communication and could have polished it a little more, but ME2 pales in comparison.

[Tempest]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Tempest wrote...

I do believe that if you have any non-loyal party members during the last fight, Shepard dies. I don't know if anyone has done it without any loyalties though.

You have twelve squadmates, three are exceptionally tough, one has plot armor

First round-1 dies
Second round-you have the option of having one die
Third round-1 or 2 dies
Fourth round-2+die

That still would leave half your team alive, you have to choose just right in order to make sure more die in the fourth round

Cool, so Shepard lives through the non loyals right?

[KitsuneRommel]

iakus wrote...
Some peple here would argue differently about sidequests

Samara, Thane, Jack, at the very least.  I assume Grunt just follows you around to fight stuff.  He makes it pretty clear te Collectors mean nothing to him.  Zaed and Kasumi are getting paid to go on a suicide mission(!)  Legion probably has a reason, though his motives for following Shepard aren't totally clear.

Heavy risk...

Well Jack is supposed to be the most powerful human biotic (despite her not even knowing Singularity) so she's definitely a strong asset.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Tempest wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Tempest wrote...

I do believe that if you have any non-loyal party members during the last fight, Shepard dies. I don't know if anyone has done it without any loyalties though.

You have twelve squadmates, three are exceptionally tough, one has plot armor

First round-1 dies
Second round-you have the option of having one die
Third round-1 or 2 dies
Fourth round-2+die

That still would leave half your team alive, you have to choose just right in order to make sure more die in the fourth round

Cool, so Shepard lives through the non loyals right?

Yep, as long as two members are alive.

I will say however that if you pick up Zaeed and Kasumi the game makes you do their missions or else the Seth Green segment will not occur.

Also you initiate the dialogue that activates the missions you have to do a few of em.  And I believe you have to do a few to trigger the vessel mission.  But you could safely miss most of them.  In fact on my last playthrough because I had Zaeed and Kasumi I didn't even bother with Samara or Thane's recruitment, much less their loyalty mission.

[KitsuneRommel]

Tempest wrote...

Really?  I had Liara talking to Grunt, Tali with Garrus, though I do agree that news casts came out more often than I wanted.   Which comes to the point I was making with that post.   ME1 was not perfect in anyway with squadie communication and could have polished it a little more, but ME2 pales in comparison.

People can't talk if they are not with you, you know.

Which ties into the "too many squadmates" argument really. I don't know why suddenly every RPG goes the way of JRPGs with their numerous partymembers when you can only play with 2-3 at the same time. I'm doing every mission with Ashley and Tali now (last time it was Garrus and Liara) and I'm sure the rest feel really useful sitting in Normandy. The suicide mission (and Virmiere) at least tried to give an illusion that your whole team was doing something. We need more of that.

[Tempest]

So if Shepard can survive with no loyalties, than it makes it pointless to recruit members for the suicide mission since it seems that all you need is the bare minimum. Thus making what was advertised as important from the adds as not as not really important.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Tempest wrote...

So if Shepard can survive with no loyalties, than it makes it pointless to recruit members for the suicide mission since it seems that all you need is the bare minimum. Thus making what was advertised as important from the adds as not as not really important.

Not really, you need commandos for your mission and you could not survive using the bare minimum. 

You could have a minimum of 8 squadmates for the final mission, all of htem have their uses even if they don't survive it.

You recruit at least 6 of them.

[Iakus]

uberdowzen wrote...

I think the problem is that a lot of people only consider something plot if a cinematic starts, the camera pans to an NPC and that NPC explains things in very clear terms. IMO, this is bad storytelling and not playing to the strengths of the genre. ME2 creates feelings and emotions, the gradual build up to the mission, Mordin's feelings of guilt over the genophage, Garrus' change in outlook after his experiences on Omega, Samara's curse, Jacob's uncertainty in Cerberus...the list goes on. Just because not a lot happens, doesn't make it a terrible plot.

Actually, a lot does happen, and they make great plots.  Just not for this particular story.  A whole novel or  even a seperate game could have been made about Garrus in Omega.  A whole series could have been done about Samara's 400 year search for Morinth.  I'd actually like to hear more about Miranda's past.  But none of it is relevent to this  story.  Mass Effect 2, second volume of Commander Shepard's story.  his quest against the Reapers.  The "Fight for the Lost".  As sidequests, I think it's fine to stick them in the game, visit another story briefly, but they cannot and should not carry the entire game.