570 réponses à ce sujet

[JMA22TB]

Kalfear wrote...

Did ME2 accomplish anything [plot wise?

Nope.

What it did was close up alot of annoying opened ended situations from ME1 that the new shooter first devs of ME2 didnt want hanging over their heads.

Please notice we didnt get any NEW option situations in ME2, everything had closure with no future promises beyond the Floatilla and message from Rachni (if you played and saved them in ME1).

ME2 was all about closing off communications and getting more linear in design.

Plot wasnt advanced at all from my veiw point, which is one of my main complaints with ME2.

So having a say in whether the genophage can be cured or that progress be destroyed is not an option situation? Or the Quarian situation you've clearly overlooked? Or the Collector base choice, you know, at the end of the game? Or the Heretic rewrite/destruction choice? Or how to deploy your squad in the Suicide Mission that could end up in their potential deaths?

Not much compelling choice at all.

Casey Hudson mentioned before the game was released that Mass 3 will resolve plots going as far back as ME1, so there's more to come. Try playing through in multiple perspectives, the game feels different on every level in terms of the details.

If you're complaining about linearity then the ME series is not for you. From the beginning the end goal has been to stop the Reapers and that never changes. Saren was the enemy in ME, everything was centered around stopping him. Same for Collectors in ME2.

[Terraneaux]

JMA22TB wrote...If you're complaining about linearity then the ME series is not for you. From the beginning the end goal has been to stop the Reapers and that never changes. Saren was the enemy in ME, everything was centered around stopping him. Same for Collectors in ME2.

No, it wasn't.  A lot of ME2 was spent paying attention to the emotional needs of people you'd only just met, and developing them in a weird sort of way.  There wasn't really any development of the main character, and the plot is sort of happening out there (you spend a lot of time waiting for TIM to tell you what to do) while you hang out with your squaddies.

[JediPilot0]

smudboy wrote...


I refuse to believe "because it's 2 of 3, it will suck" philosophy.  That's like saying "every quest story will end in an anti-climax", or some ridiculous maxim.

This is what annoys me the most. I don't care that people like the story, that's up to them, but this is a hack of an excuse.

Imagine if ME1 and 2 were flipped:

ME1: what the hell are these machines that are taking humans? We need help, we're not council members yet. HUMAN REAPER!? WTF?

ME2: Ends with the battle of the citadel stationa and now you know that the reapers are out to exterminate everyone. See? Stakes are raised. And the story went somwhere. All that's left is to stop them somehow.

I like plot-driven stories, not "mystery" driven stories. There's no reason we shouldn't find out what the hell is going on. The questions should be what are we going to do?

Modifié par JediPilot0, 15 mars 2010 - 03:33 .

[Arijharn]

smudboy wrote...

The side-characters do develop quite significantly.  However, that and they are not related to the main plot.  It's essentially 11 other stories whose only continuity is (aside from ME1)  "they're on the same ship, and Shepard asked us to come."  A wasted effort.  Thane could've been any other merc, Samara could've been any other Asari (e.g. oh wait ,we can get her daughter!), Grunt, Jack, Zaeed, etc.  In ME1, we had Tali, Liara and Ashley having multiple motivations for trying to save the galaxy, that were all part of the main plot.

I think you're considering the other characters as if they were in a vacuum too much (to expound; just themselves). They advance the main plot in the sense that they expand upon your chances of surviving the mission. They aren't perfect by any means (damn you Garrus, how many times do you need to calibrate the Thanix weapon systems when they haven't been fired or adjusted since the last time?!), but its disingenious to assume they don't evolve in some way, even if it might not be the way you'd like (Thane reconnecting with his son, Grunt forging his own identity, Miranda coming to terms with who she is and her sister, etc). They were chosen not by you but by the Illusive Man because it's reasonable to assume he knows more about the state of the galaxy than you, who has been dead for the past 2 years.

I, like so many other people, enjoy the concept of an 'over-arching' storyline. A storyline that invests me and makes me want to keep on playing it, but I also like immediate storylines as well. Wouldn't it make sense for someone who knows about the Reapers and seeks to combat them combat them on all (or as many) fronts as he can? The side benefit of fighting a proxy war with the Collector's in this case is because you know Harbinger (or any other Reaper) for example isn't just going to pop up on the edge of the black hole's accretion disk and obliterate the Normandy. Of course, even if you don't think the Collector's are in any way attached to the Reapers (IIRC Shephard has the option of being dubious; although the Illusive Man remarks that the 'patterns are there, buried in the data.') you would have to admit that a risk exists and even if it was a separatist faction of Elcor responsible, you would most likely want to do something about it.

But I agree that the story wasn't nearly as fleshed out as much as I'd like and to give an example of something that particularly bugged me about it, namely the Lazarus project itself and more specifically: the complete lack of reaction of the fact that Shephard has not only returned from death (this could be explained (less than optimally) as a great secret), but the how's and why's in relation to his less than organic rebuild and possible origin of these (Reaper implants?). What about the philosophical/religious quandry's that should/could of arisen due to this (does Shephard start to doubt? Is (s)he still human? What is 'to be human'? Should Shephard start to worry that he's becoming like Saren? - A hero that has become increasingly cybernetic) 

[JediPilot0]

JMA22TB wrote...
So having a say in whether the genophage can be cured or that progress
be destroyed is not an option situation? Or the Quarian situation
you've clearly overlooked? Or the Collector base choice, you know, at
the end of the game? Or the Heretic rewrite/destruction choice? Or how
to deploy your squad in the Suicide Mission that could end up in their
potential deaths?

Those are all completely optional sidequests. If they were really a part of the main plot, why aren't they part of the main story? It irks me a bit that this important stuff was swept under the rug by Bioware if it is so important.

Handling the Geth, to me, seemed like the most important thing we did in this game, and it's a sidequest. There is something wrong with that.

Modifié par JediPilot0, 15 mars 2010 - 03:41 .

[JMA22TB]

Terraneaux wrote...

JMA22TB wrote...If you're complaining about linearity then the ME series is not for you. From the beginning the end goal has been to stop the Reapers and that never changes. Saren was the enemy in ME, everything was centered around stopping him. Same for Collectors in ME2.

No, it wasn't.  A lot of ME2 was spent paying attention to the emotional needs of people you'd only just met, and developing them in a weird sort of way.  There wasn't really any development of the main character, and the plot is sort of happening out there (you spend a lot of time waiting for TIM to tell you what to do) while you hang out with your squaddies.

It's clear you didn't listen to them. You're not fighting a known enemy you can prepare for, and you're resigning them to death. They're clearing their minds to focus on the task at hand. Shepard is not babysitting, you're evolving as a leader by assembling your team, which has you becoming part of galaxy-changing choices (krogan, quarians, geth).

Developing the main character is exactly what you're doing in the ME series. Shepard is the one in charge and you're developing him as you go. It's not third person in that sense, you are Shepard. You're either moving toward a selfless hero who puts the needs of others before himself (paragon) or inching humanity ever closer to dominating the galaxy (renegade).

I will agree that more background-related stuff for Shepard would be nice, but how is that relevant to his quest to stop the Reapers? 

The plot was moved forward by learning more about the Reapers than you knew before, defeating the biggest threat to the human race and their most difficult to find agent, and assembling a ship and a squad that has you more prepared for what's to come.

[smudboy]

JMA22TB wrote...

...speculationographic...

Well okay, that's fine.  Just don't expect any rational argument from me on it.

And again, ME2 is not some masterwork, nor is it some great mystery ready to be deduced in story telling when playing "if this, then..."  Or throwing my logical brain out the door because ME2' story is so avant-garde, I can't possibly approach it normally?

Rebooting via deus ex machina in the first 10 minutes, resurrecting the dead, and having no reprecussions on the protagonist (not even some PTSD?  WTF is wrong with Shepard's shoulder?), is reason enough to induce head initiated facepalming.  SHOOTING THE CORE! of a bio-metal Terminator for max damage as an end boss, and not knowing why or how this is happening, is the stuff of farcical, aquatic ceremonies.

Wouldn't it have been great if the suicide run had an equally important escape plan?  No.  We just have Shepard run away from all those doors he closed using a...wait...floating platform?

[JMA22TB]

JediPilot0 wrote...

JMA22TB wrote...
So having a say in whether the genophage can be cured or that progress
be destroyed is not an option situation? Or the Quarian situation
you've clearly overlooked? Or the Collector base choice, you know, at
the end of the game? Or the Heretic rewrite/destruction choice? Or how
to deploy your squad in the Suicide Mission that could end up in their
potential deaths?

Those are all completely optional sidequests. If they were really a part of the main plot, why aren't they part of the main story? It irks me a bit that this important stuff was swept under the rug by Bioware if it is so important.

Handling the Geth, to me, seemed like the most important thing we did in this game, and it's a sidequest. There is something wrong with that.

Well to argue that easily, if you don't do them Shepard dies in the end. You can't import a dead Shepard, so yes the 'optional side-quests' are part of the main story.

[JediPilot0]

JMA22TB wrote...
Well to argue that easily, if you don't do them Shepard dies in the end. You can't import a dead Shepard, so yes the 'optional side-quests' are part of the main story.

You only have to make sure one squadmate survives......

[smudboy]

JediPilot0 wrote...

smudboy wrote...


I refuse to believe "because it's 2 of 3, it will suck" philosophy.  That's like saying "every quest story will end in an anti-climax", or some ridiculous maxim.

This is what annoys me the most. I don't care that people like the story, that's up to them, but this is a hack of an excuse.

Imagine if ME1 and 2 were flipped:

ME1: what the hell are these machines that are taking humans? We need help, we're not council members yet. HUMAN REAPER!? WTF?

ME2: Ends with the battle of the citadel stationa and now you know that the reapers are out to exterminate everyone. See? Stakes are raised. And the story went somwhere. All that's left is to stop them somehow.

I like plot-driven stories, not "mystery" driven stories. There's no reason we shouldn't find out what the hell is going on. The questions should be what are we going to do?

It is annoying, I see it on almost every page when story is discussed.

I heard someone mention that before in the forums, puttin ME2 first.  It's quite a fascinating concept  It also goes to show just how forgettable, if not useless, ME2 is in the trilogy.

Another funny argument I get is "ME2 is a character driven story."  No, no it isn't!  These are potentially the same people who don't know the definition of plot holes.  Oh well.  There's always much to learn about writing, and telling good stories.  Keeping it simple is a good golden rule.

Glad to know some people know better.

[R34P3RR3D33M3R]

JediPilot0 wrote...

JMA22TB wrote...
Well to argue that easily, if you don't do them Shepard dies in the end. You can't import a dead Shepard, so yes the 'optional side-quests' are part of the main story.

You only have to make sure one squadmate survives......

You need two minimum.

[Sigma Tauri]

Well, in my opinion, Bioware could've looked at Baldur's Gate 2 for an inspiration in storytelling. The game allowed you to take your time by doing optional side quests that are associated to joinable NPCs. Then, it could've continued exploring the plot near the end as the game more linear, culminating to Shepard, his death, and a connection to Harbinger's plans. But, that would've been very unpopular because like freedom to do side quests before the final battle.

Modifié par monkeycamoran, 15 mars 2010 - 03:55 .

[Ghostano]

JediPilot0 wrote...

smudboy wrote...

JediPilot0 wrote...

Okay, so this thread has grown by 5 pages since I've last been here. Another thing about ME2 vs 1 is even though ME2 is touted as being much more "personal" it's quite the opposite. Nothing in this game had as great personal moments as when you became a Spectre, or emerged limping from the Citadel rubble.

Here's a good link about it:

http://metagame.org/...ffect-2-part-2/

Good find.

I'm sure you probably read this, too:

www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/

Wow, that was an amazing read. I just read all 3 parts. Aside from a few errors here and there, it pretty much exactly mirrors how I feel. What the hell, Bioware?

Thanks, Smudboy. Everyone should read those 3 pages.

 I read this and the other link up the page. It may be because I am tired but when I read this :


  Okay, so it’s a Reaper… somehow. What is the utility of a kilometer-tall robotic space-faring biped? Walk around in space? Punch spaceships? Bite stuff? Embarrass the enemy with its massive space genitalia? This is the OPPOSITE of what a machine race would do. This is adding inefficient organic cruft to a machine.
The problem with the Reapers as they are portrayed in this game is that they’re terrible at using their resources to meet their stated goals.

 It made me laugh

[smudboy]

Arijharn wrote...

smudboy wrote...

The side-characters do develop quite significantly.  However, that and they are not related to the main plot.  It's essentially 11 other stories whose only continuity is (aside from ME1)  "they're on the same ship, and Shepard asked us to come."  A wasted effort.  Thane could've been any other merc, Samara could've been any other Asari (e.g. oh wait ,we can get her daughter!), Grunt, Jack, Zaeed, etc.  In ME1, we had Tali, Liara and Ashley having multiple motivations for trying to save the galaxy, that were all part of the main plot.

I think you're considering the other characters as if they were in a vacuum too much (to expound; just themselves). They advance the main plot in the sense that they expand upon your chances of surviving the mission. They aren't perfect by any means (damn you Garrus, how many times do you need to calibrate the Thanix weapon systems when they haven't been fired or adjusted since the last time?!), but its disingenious to assume they don't evolve in some way, even if it might not be the way you'd like (Thane reconnecting with his son, Grunt forging his own identity, Miranda coming to terms with who she is and her sister, etc). They were chosen not by you but by the Illusive Man because it's reasonable to assume he knows more about the state of the galaxy than you, who has been dead for the past 2 years.

I, like so many other people, enjoy the concept of an 'over-arching' storyline. A storyline that invests me and makes me want to keep on playing it, but I also like immediate storylines as well. Wouldn't it make sense for someone who knows about the Reapers and seeks to combat them combat them on all (or as many) fronts as he can? The side benefit of fighting a proxy war with the Collector's in this case is because you know Harbinger (or any other Reaper) for example isn't just going to pop up on the edge of the black hole's accretion disk and obliterate the Normandy. Of course, even if you don't think the Collector's are in any way attached to the Reapers (IIRC Shephard has the option of being dubious; although the Illusive Man remarks that the 'patterns are there, buried in the data.') you would have to admit that a risk exists and even if it was a separatist faction of Elcor responsible, you would most likely want to do something about it.

But I agree that the story wasn't nearly as fleshed out as much as I'd like and to give an example of something that particularly bugged me about it, namely the Lazarus project itself and more specifically: the complete lack of reaction of the fact that Shephard has not only returned from death (this could be explained (less than optimally) as a great secret), but the how's and why's in relation to his less than organic rebuild and possible origin of these (Reaper implants?). What about the philosophical/religious quandry's that should/could of arisen due to this (does Shephard start to doubt? Is (s)he still human? What is 'to be human'? Should Shephard start to worry that he's becoming like Saren? - A hero that has become increasingly cybernetic) 

I do not consider the characters in a vacuum.  In fact I think they are some of the most fleshed out characters in video games.  I just strongly feel they're in the wrong game.  Everything you listed in that paragraph has nothing to do with ME2.

It would make sense for "someone who knows about the Reapers and seeks to combat them combat them on all (or as many) fronts as he can".  But what fronts exactly?  How exactly?  How is having a bunch of combat specialists onboard your ship make you any more capable of taking out potentially millions of dreadnaught sentient million year old super-intelligent AI space ships?  That's like saying "we can defeat the ****'s who are flying in airplanes if we just get lots of really good rock throwers together in our car."  I think in ME2 we learn about some large mass effect gun that only damaged a Reaper.  Do we have that technology yet?  I think TIM said no.

There was 0 characterization of Shepard; I agree, there should be something.  A plot of this scale is perhaps the largest in any story (save maybe what I read of the Lucifer comic) because it involves the cyclic destruction of all organic life.  Shepard becomes Jesus, doesn't care how or what has become of himself/herself, and has this massive kink in his shoulder.  His eyes may glow red.  He's the hero of the universe.  There should be religions popping up here and there worshipping/fearing him/her, etc.

[Akrylik]

smudboy wrote...

JediPilot0 wrote...

smudboy wrote...


I refuse to believe "because it's 2 of 3, it will suck" philosophy.  That's like saying "every quest story will end in an anti-climax", or some ridiculous maxim.

This is what annoys me the most. I don't care that people like the story, that's up to them, but this is a hack of an excuse.

Imagine if ME1 and 2 were flipped:

ME1: what the hell are these machines that are taking humans? We need help, we're not council members yet. HUMAN REAPER!? WTF?

ME2: Ends with the battle of the citadel stationa and now you know that the reapers are out to exterminate everyone. See? Stakes are raised. And the story went somwhere. All that's left is to stop them somehow.

I like plot-driven stories, not "mystery" driven stories. There's no reason we shouldn't find out what the hell is going on. The questions should be what are we going to do?

It is annoying, I see it on almost every page when story is discussed.

I heard someone mention that before in the forums, puttin ME2 first.  It's quite a fascinating concept  It also goes to show just how forgettable, if not useless, ME2 is in the trilogy.

Another funny argument I get is "ME2 is a character driven story."  No, no it isn't!  These are potentially the same people who don't know the definition of plot holes.  Oh well.  There's always much to learn about writing, and telling good stories.  Keeping it simple is a good golden rule.

Glad to know some people know better.

yes, ME2 is not character driven, the only character who had any significance was mordin for his cure, which after obtaining renders him expendable just like the rest. however ME2 puts great attention to detail in the crew, seeing as most the game's content is focused on them.

and can you give me an example on one of these proclaimed plot holes you speak of? because so far any plot holes i have witnessed are typically irrelevant to the plot progression of ME2.

[JediPilot0]

R34P3RR3D33M3R wrote...
You need two minimum.

Huh, I thought you only needed one squadmate to pull you up to the ship during the escape sequence. My mistake (?)

Modifié par JediPilot0, 15 mars 2010 - 04:09 .

[JediPilot0]

Akrylik wrote...
and can you give me an example on one of these proclaimed plot holes you speak of? because so far any plot holes i have witnessed are typically irrelevant to the plot progression of ME2.

That's because ME2's plot was irrelevant to the trilogy's plot ;P.

But seriously, just read the link that Smudboy provided.

[Yakko77]

Jon Phoenix wrote...

This was hardly the dark chapter (ala Empire Strikes Back) like they touted.

Why, you ask? Because they are exactly where they were when the game started. An ominous villain who is largely impotent.

The dark chapter would have had several Reapers vanguards arrive and start enslaving planets. You know Bad Guys wins the day, good guys limp away to tend their wounds and make a plan.

The final chapter would have Shepard discover a way to fight them. Usually through a miraculous discovery of an even more ancient civilization (with guns, lots of guns).

This.

The squad recruitment aspect was the best part of ME2 and the game as a whole was a amazing and enjoyable experience (4 play throughs completed as I type this) but at the same time I feel ME2 was a lost opportunity.  ME1 spent a lot of time building up the threat of the Reapers, the brutality of Cerberus and more than just a little build up of a entity/person called the Shadow Broker.  However, in ME2 we get only brief encounters with "dones" of the Reaper Harbinger and run into an already dead Reaper Dreadnought, end up working for the brutal terrorist organization that Shepard worked so hard to thwart and are introduced to a new antogonist (TIM)  and only have passing mention of the Shadow Broker.

In baseball terms, I'd rate ME2 as a triple but it was not a home run but a triple is good.  Hopefully the next batter can get the runner to home plate.

[Akrylik]

JediPilot0 wrote...

Akrylik wrote...
and can you give me an example on one of these proclaimed plot holes you speak of? because so far any plot holes i have witnessed are typically irrelevant to the plot progression of ME2.

That's because ME2's plot was irrelevant to the trilogy's plot ;P.

But seriously, just read the link that Smudboy provided.

right...it's filler plot hole hardly defines ME2 as it's not illogical, just beats around the bush for reaper plot.

[Akrylik]

JediPilot0 wrote...

R34P3RR3D33M3R wrote...
You need two minimum.

Huh, I thought you only needed one squadmate to pull you up to the ship during the escape sequence. My mistake (?)

If you have only 1 squadmate left they will run inside the normandy expecting Joker to pull you up

[Yakko77]

smudboy wrote...

JediPilot0 wrote...

Okay, so this thread has grown by 5 pages since I've last been here. Another thing about ME2 vs 1 is even though ME2 is touted as being much more "personal" it's quite the opposite. Nothing in this game had as great personal moments as when you became a Spectre, or emerged limping from the Citadel rubble.

Here's a good link about it:

http://metagame.org/...ffect-2-part-2/

Good find.

I'm sure you probably read this, too:

www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/

That twentysided review is one of the hardest hitting but constructive reviews of ME2 and should be required reading at Bioware IMO.  The reviewer liked the game but saw some flaws that HAD to be pointed out. 

[Arijharn]

smudboy wrote...

I do not consider the characters in a vacuum.  In fact I think they are some of the most fleshed out characters in video games.  I just strongly feel they're in the wrong game.  Everything you listed in that paragraph has nothing to do with ME2.

Forgive me if I'm acting particularly dense here, but what on Earth are you talking about 'Everything you listed in that paragraph has nothing to do with ME2.' How isn't Thane evolving by reconnecting with his lost son or Grunt finding his identity got nothing to do with ME2? It's making them focus on the mission, and that mission is to take out the Collector's.

Shephard is one man (or woman), he can not do everything just by himself no matter how awesome he is (and lets admit it, (s)he positively 'reeks' of awesome. If they (meaning Shep and his motley crew of heroes) can't deal with Collector's, how on Earth are they going to be able to deal with the Reapers when they turn up?

smudboy wrote...
It would make sense for "someone who knows about the Reapers and seeks to combat them combat them on all (or as many) fronts as he can".  But what fronts exactly?  How exactly?  How is having a bunch of combat specialists onboard your ship make you any more capable of taking out potentially millions of dreadnaught sentient million year old super-intelligent AI space ships?  That's like saying "we can defeat the ****'s who are flying in airplanes if we just get lots of really good rock throwers together in our car."  I think in ME2 we learn about some large mass effect gun that only damaged a Reaper.  Do we have that technology yet?  I think TIM said no.

What Fronts? The front where the Reapers are using the Collector's to advance their cause without them actually having to do any of the heavy lifting themselves. Just because the Collector's aren't the Reapers doesn't make them not a threat. It might not be the big threat themselves (incidentally, how would Shephard prepare himself against the Reapers when A) There are no Reapers around and He has precious few allies that he knows about other than perhaps the Illusive Man.

Maybe the focus wasn't on it as much as it should of been, but to me it was pretty clear that you were moving pieces across the board during the events of ME2; whether you were empowering humanity (or Cerberus) by giving them the Collector base or by introducing the cues to gaining allies, it certainly felt as if it was building to something, which is far greater than what Shephard could do solely by himself. I mean, the way you describe it seems to illustrate no hope for Shephard himself, afterall, what can one man do to prevent the destruction of the galaxy as we know it against a race of super-sentinent machine constructs. Well, the answer is 'quite a bit,' even if we don't know the details.

As to the weapon that was originally used to destroy the derelict reaper, the answer is that we do have it. It's called a Mass Accelerator Cannon and every vessel seemingly has one. What we don't have is a weapon of the same scale (because the weapon that destroyed the Reaper would of been collossal, but the mechanics would be pretty much the same), but perhaps the answer is we don't need to have the exact same weapon, afterall the Citadel races have in 11 months duplicated an advanced weapon from the husk of Sovereign and gave it the name of 'Thanix.'

smudboy wrote...
There was 0 characterization of Shepard; I agree, there should be something.  A plot of this scale is perhaps the largest in any story (save maybe what I read of the Lucifer comic) because it involves the cyclic destruction of all organic life.  Shepard becomes Jesus, doesn't care how or what has become of himself/herself, and has this massive kink in his shoulder.  His eyes may glow red.  He's the hero of the universe.  There should be religions popping up here and there worshipping/fearing him/her, etc.

I know this is really minor, but Shephard should really be starting to be called a sex symbol with all the ass kicking he does; I mean women should want to be with him, men should want to be like him and the Asari should just... want him (flip for your Shep's gender of course)...

[srzyski89]

No offense to all the supposition going on... but isn't the "plot" of Mass Effect Commander Shepard's story? The plot isn't about stopping the reapers, it is about Commander Shepard and his actions in the galaxy.

[Sigma Tauri]

srzyski89 wrote...

No offense to all the supposition going on... but isn't the "plot" of Mass Effect Commander Shepard's story? The plot isn't about stopping the reapers, it is about Commander Shepard and his actions in the galaxy.

Eh, his stopping the Reapers is going to have consequences in the galaxy.

[smudboy]

Akrylik wrote...
yes, ME2 is not character driven, the only character who had any significance was mordin for his cure, which after obtaining renders him expendable just like the rest. however ME2 puts great attention to detail in the crew, seeing as most the game's content is focused on them.

and can you give me an example on one of these proclaimed plot holes you speak of? because so far any plot holes i have witnessed are typically irrelevant to the plot progression of ME2.

Right.  I'd label Mordin's defense against the swarms (not his cure for the plague) as merely a plot device.

I'm trying to think of main plot plot holes (memories of Shepard picking up a gun and asking "it doesn't have a thermal clip in it" spring to mind, but I'm trying to focus on the main plot here.)
0) Shepard Jesus.
1) The earliest would be Shepard just blindly going along with TIM.  From ME1, we know Cerberus is pure evil.  Yet Shepard just nods his head, doesn't trust TIM, yet still goes along with everything he asks.  (Aside, ditto with Joker and Chakwas.  Why would they join Cerberus, even after first hand knowledge of what they did, simply because: 1) Joker wanted to fly, 2) Chakwas missed space travel/missed Joker?)
2) Ashley/Kaidan getting swarmed.  They're the first to get frozen, but they don't get collected, and then are freed when the Collectors leave.  How?  Even if the effects wore off, wouldn't that person collapse from muscle exhaustion, be in a coma, be asleep, or at the very least, injured?  Getting hit with a neurotoxin would paralyze to nearly kill them, but to have some alien chemical that: a) stops motor movement, constrict muscles for long periods of time would do some serious neural and muscular damage.
3) The dossiers.  Again, part of 1, but shouldn't TIM, Mr. Intelligence Network know who to bring and why?  Wouldn't Shepard, Mr. Artist on the Battlefield, start coming up with plans to take out an unknown enemy, or at least first get intel on them before coming up with a battle plan?  They had a nice intro for Mordin, but how about everyone else?  Yet they just start collecting soldiers, scientists (one), and mercenaries, just because.  They don't even know what's beyond the Omega-4 relay, but as Jacob states, "this team is as good as it's gonna get."  For what?  We could be attacking a planet, a solar system, or a series of solar systems, or a fleet of Reapers.  The concept is borderline retarded.  Drawing comparisons between this and The Guns of Navarone, The Dirty Dozen, or Seven Samurai doesn't help, because we know a) the opposing force, what everyone's role is, c) what the goal is.  In ME2, we don't know exactly what the opposing force is, where, what everyone is going to do, and how to defeat them.
4) Going off in the shuttle.  More of a plot device, but the most obvious hole in the story.  "What mission?  We finished all the missions, EDI.  We don't need to go anywhere, really."  This would've been a great opportunity, similar to firefights in the Wards of ME1, to save your ship from being collected.
5) Attacking the Collector ship and base.  Here we know our targets.  We've got all our ship upgrades.  We attack the Collector cruiser from weapons range.  Why did Shepard order Joker to get in close?  What was wrong with firing from a safe, maneuverable distance?  And if that could be accomplished safely, why not bombard the undefensive base instead of sending in an infiltration team?  *Oh wait, we have to use our Pokemon for something.*
n-1) Organic-Terminator baby.
n) Destroying the base.

I actually liked the fact you were being taken care of by Cerberus, the evil side of the Alliance and humanity, and decided to work under them.  I didn't like how it was handled.  TIM could've been a truly coniving and dastardly fellow, and Shepard could've easily had some very spectacular arguments.  He, Miranda and Jacob could've had some excellent arguments, too.  If Shepard couldn't run away from Cerberus at the beginning, it should've built up to the ending where he put everyone in harms way and Shepard (and Miranda, etc.) just rips him up.  Not "I won't sacrifice the soul of our species" -- wtf does that even mean?  Then having your entire team not liking you preserve the base.