570 réponses à ce sujet

[glacier1701]

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

glacier1701 wrote...

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

So I question for those who don't think that the plot for ME2 moved forward the plot of the series as a whole: Did Baldur's Gate 2 also suffer the same issue? The plot of Baldur's Gate 2 was almost wholly separate from the larger Bhaalspawn plot. Irenicus was using the PC's Bhaalspawn taint as a means to their own end completely separate from the overriding storyline to the series. At the end of the game, the PC is barely a step closer to knowing anything more about their heritage or stopping the plans of the other Bhaalspawn children or keeping his/her father from being reincarnated through them. Disregarding that it is the longest of the "3" games (Throne of Bhaal in many ways constitutes a separate entry in the series given its plot developments) should seem like a simple side story or "one shot" as it were.

Next question: Does this inherently make the story weaker?

To be totally honest its been so long since I played the game I have completely forgotten what went on. Even your retelling of the plot for BG2 doesnt ring any bells for me. So I cant comment on your question. Since I cant do that perhaps you care to state your position on the ME2 topic and why you think that way.

Simply that Mass Effect is following the traditional 3 act story just as Baldur's Gate did. First act is for setting up the overarching plot, second act is for exploring the characters and the setting, third act is for resolution of the plot. I used the Baldur's Gate series as an example, since I figured it would share the most common ground among posters here being a Bioware series, and is the only other "trilogy" they've done. Plus, there are few here I think that would assault BG2's story as much as they do ME2's, which seems odd given the above similarities between them.

Not totally sure if I remember correctly but didnt the SLAYER form play a part in the end of the series? Or at least it gave us some new information about our main character? If it did that then while perhaps weaker in comparison to the rest of the series it still did more than what we have been given in ME2.

Unfortunately I can also say this - because of the passage of real time and thus experience in more games its hard to say something about the past. About all I can recall is that I still felt a lot better about the story in BG2 than the way I feel about the story in ME2. In other words when I finished with BG2 there was anticipation for the final game. Having finished ME2 there is not the same anticipation factor there. Dont read much into that because time has passed since BG2 and ME2 and so my likes/dislikes and overal expectations for a game have changed as I have played other games. ME1 was a game that I liked (despite its problems) and ME2 promised to deliver more of the same with many things fixed. Unfortunately it did not deliver and so ME3 is not necassarily an automatic buy for me as it might have been had ME2 been anywhere close to what it was promised to be.

[alickar]

plot very good shep gets revives after 2 yrs collects new squaddies fights collectors very good plot collectors connected to reapers collectors destoryed reaper army weaker

[glacier1701]

FlintlockJazz wrote...

glacier1701 wrote...

FlintlockJazz,

You missed the point of the post entirely. It is not necessary to fulfill BOTH conditions as you seem to keep on saying but only to meet 1 of them. Your arguements highlight the fact that they dont meet BOTH conditions and thus you actually validate the point of the first post.

So to bring you back into line here are the conditions:

1- Do I need them on my team?
2- Were they involved in the main plot.

What you need to see is the word OR between 1 and 2 not AND.

Dude, I know what I'm talking about but great assumptions mate.  I argued that both Garrus and Ashley/Kaidan fail both those conditions if you had actually read my post.  How about you actually point out where I am wrong instead of making blanket claims about my post which you would know if you actually read my post.  Many of the  characters in both ME1 and ME2 fail to meet one or both of the conditions and many do. 

Please, if you are going to try and flame me by claiming that I am not reading it right how about you do the courtesy and do the same?  If you had instead brought forward points that did prove my points wrong then you would have contributed something to the discussion, but instead you didn't, you tried to be clever and didn't even attempt to explain why I am not addressing the issue.  Making blanket claims does not help your argument.

Okie lets break down your arguements.



Garrus - when having failed to get the Council to do anything about Saren you have a number of ways to proceed. One of those is the fact that you know Garrus was investigating Saren but his investigation was shut down. So the lead is what does Garrus know? In the follow up to that you find out this mysterious Quarian after you help take out the thugs threatening the Doctor down in the Wards.

So this leads you through the main plot which at that point is to gain evidence that Saren is a traitor. Garrus himself does not have that evidence but is a connection to the evidence. So that fulfills condition #2 even if he is NOT on the ship he has done his part for the game.


Tali - She has the geth data that directly implicates Saren. That in itself fulfills condition #2. Does not matter you have no choice in having her as a squadmate but by then she has fulfilled her part in the story.


Ashley/Kaiden - are there pretty much from the beginning. Ashley knows about the Geth and Sovereign because she was an eyewitness (though like all the eyewitnesses from Eden Prime they all seem to be dismissed by the Council). She at least knows where the dig site is (essential since you do NOT have any local knowledge) and when that turns up empty can at least point you to the next areas to go to to search. Thus she fulfills condition #2 in that the plot ends if you did not have her. Kaiden is basically a teammate and has no importance plotwise until Virmire when you have to decide who lives/dies at that one point. Its only then that his justification comes out - he fulfills condition #2 as it is now clear to the player that the stakes being played for do include the fact that squadmates (and if you did a lot of talking to him a friend) can die and that much more is likely to happen if you do not suceed.


Wrex - As has been stated his is the weakest part in ME1. He has a connection to the plot in that he tells you (if you talk to him enough) that Saren has been doing stuff on the side for what appears to be a long time. IN a way Wrex can be connected to the main plot in that when you hear that it is now possible Wrex MIGHT be an agent for Saren (though this is never explored at the time). The only part Wrex plays is at Virmire where once again the stakes in the game are highlighted in that you have to face the fact  that you are condeming a species to extinction by destruction of the base just so the remaining species of the galaxy can survive. So again at the one moment he fulfills condition #2. Of course you could not take him and then his part is meaningless but he has a potential part to play. So this is what makes him the weakest.


Liara - well without her its game over. No more needs to be said.

[JediPilot0]

FlintlockJazz wrote...
Excuse me, I did not say that at all.  Please do not quote someone and make BS as to what they are saying.

Whoops, I'm sorry it was a misquote, an honest mistake. Don't pretend like it was intentional or something. I'll fix it.

[JediPilot0]

FlintlockJazz wrote...
You are missing the point.  You can choose not to accept him at all, therefore as a teammate he is unnecessary.  Also, he is working against orders when he chooses to investigate Saren, he is being told not to by his C-Sec leaders, so actually your point is contradictory since it show that C-Sec isn't investigating Saren.  Again, its an unimportant side story that could have been done without.

Please tell me how I'm missing MY OWN point that I'm trying to make? glacier said the rest of what I was going to say.

And I don't think Garrus was going against C-Sec orders. The council says C-Sec is investigating, and Executor Palin says "you investigation is over, Garrus." Where does it say Garrus was rogue when doing his investigation?

Anyone could get the data? It was on a busted Geth, btw. But it doesn't matter. The whole point, is you MISSED my point.

[JediPilot0]

FlintlockJazz wrote...
Please, if you are going to try and flame me by claiming that I am not reading it right how about you do the courtesy and do the same?

You've got a pretty loose definition of flaming, then. WTF?

[JediPilot0]

condition 1: Do I need to bring them on the Normandy? Do I need them on my team?

• The ME1 squaddies never have to be part of your Normandy crew,
  they are interchangeable as squadmates. So they fail condition 1, except Liara, who you have to bring to help with the cypher.

• The ME2 squaddies all are completely interchangable at their curcial
  moment to shine, so you never need any one squadmate for anything. Fail
  condition # 1. Mordin is the only one you NEEDED to have with you on
  the ship for the seeker swarms. He's the only one that passes. Everyone
  else was only for the suicide mission, but they are all interchangeable.

OR

condition 2: Did they at least contribute to the Reaper story in some way? Do they at least have meaning?

• The ME1 squaddies are all doing something related to the Reaper plot and stopping Saren when you meet them all. They all pass condition # 2 (part of main story). Except Wrex, but I ALREADY SAID HE HAD A WEAK CONNECTION.

• The ME2 squaddies are all doing their own thing not related to the main plot (except miranda, jacob, mordin). Therefore, they all fail condition #2, since you can remove them and the story doesn't change. As I said, remove Thane, or Samara. NO DIFFERENCE.

So even thuogh, sure, you don't need to bring Garrus or Tali with you, they AT LEAST were involved in the story.
Summary:
Condition 1:
ME1 - Liara only (1/6)
ME2 - Mordin only (1/11)

Condition2:
ME1 - Everyone but Wrex (5/6)
ME2 - Miri, Jacob, Mordin (3/11)

Most of ME2's squadmates don't contribute squat.

Modifié par JediPilot0, 17 mars 2010 - 05:47 .

[smudboy]

JediPilot0 wrote...


condition 1: Do I need to bring them on the Normandy? Do I need them on my team?

• The ME1 squaddies never have to be part of your Normandy crew,
  they are interchangeable as squadmates. So they fail condition 1, except Liara, who you have to bring to help with the cypher.

• The ME2 squaddies all are completely interchangable at their curcial
  moment to shine, so you never need any one squadmate for anything. Fail
  condition # 1. Mordin is the only one you NEEDED to have with you on
  the ship for the seeker swarms. He's the only one that passes. Everyone
  else was only for the suicide mission, but they are all interchangeable.

OR

condition 2: Did they at least contribute to the Reaper story in some way? Do they at least have meaning?

• The ME1 squaddies are all doing something related to the Reaper plot and stopping Saren when you meet them all. They all pass condition # 2 (part of main story). Except Wrex, but I ALREADY SAID HE HAD A WEAK CONNECTION.

• The ME2 squaddies are all doing their own thing not related to the main plot (except miranda, jacob, mordin). Therefore, they all fail condition #2, since you can remove them and the story doesn't change. As I said, remove Thane, or Samara. NO DIFFERENCE.

So even thuogh, sure, you don't need to bring Garrus, Tali, Wrex with you, they AT LEAST were involved in the story.

Not to argue for or against.  I'd merely like to point out that Mordin was merely used as a plot device (countermeasure), much the same way Tali was in ME1 (Saren MP3 Evidence.)

In regards to ME2, both Mordin and Tali have main plot existence.

[JediPilot0]

Not to argue for or against.  I'd merely like to point out that Mordin was merely used as a plot device (countermeasure), much the same way Tali was in ME1 (Saren MP3 Evidence.)

Sure, plot device or not, at least it was something, which is what I've been saying all along. Most of ME2 squaddies don't even have that.

EDIT- I'd also like to say to everyone that the ME1 vs ME2 squaddie involvment is one HUUUGE diversion of the ME2 plot discussion. But I don't know if beladalalalala (don't know what his name is exactly) is coming back or not.

Modifié par JediPilot0, 17 mars 2010 - 05:58 .

[Yeled]

JediPilot0 wrote...

Not to argue for or against.  I'd merely like to point out that Mordin was merely used as a plot device (countermeasure), much the same way Tali was in ME1 (Saren MP3 Evidence.)

Sure, plot device or not, at least it was something, which is what I've been saying all along. Most of ME2 squaddies don't even have that.

I agree with most of your points, JediPilot.  But I do think Tali and Garrus should get a free pass in ME2.  They don't need to be connected to the Collector plot because they are grandfathered in to the story.   They have a personal connection to the main protagonist, which is often times a stronger connection than if they had been tied directly to the Collectors.

Modifié par Yeled, 17 mars 2010 - 05:54 .

[JediPilot0]

Yeled wrote...

I agree with most of your points, JediPilot.  But I do think Tali and Garrus should get a free pass in ME2.  They don't need to be connected to the Collector plot because they are grandfathered in to the story.   They have a personal connection to the main protagonist, which is often times a stronger connection than if they had been tied directly to the Collectors.

Hmmm, I suppose I'm not against that. I felt the strongest bonds to those two for the reason you stated.

Which goes back to how Bioware dumped most of our squaddies into the background during the horrible plot device of dying and comming back within the opening credits. Like bad movies do.

Modifié par JediPilot0, 17 mars 2010 - 06:07 .

[TyDurden13]

Don't quit your day jobs, guys.

[Yeled]

JediPilot0 wrote...

Yeled wrote...

I agree with most of your points, JediPilot.  But I do think Tali and Garrus should get a free pass in ME2.  They don't need to be connected to the Collector plot because they are grandfathered in to the story.   They have a personal connection to the main protagonist, which is often times a stronger connection than if they had been tied directly to the Collectors.

Hmmm, I suppose I'm not against that. I felt the strongest bonds to those two for the reason you stated.

Which goes back to how Bioware dumped most of our squaddies into the background during the horrible plot device of dying and comming back within the opening credits. Like bad movies do.

I agree.

[Xandurpein]

What Bioware did introduce in ME2 is the fact that squaddies can die, depending on your choices in the game and in particular the suicide mission. The idea is of course to create more drama. At the same time they basically lost the ability to give any squaddie in ME2 a role as necessary to the plot in ME3, since hthey can be dead. So it's a trade off, and this is of course they had to remove those squaddies from ME1 they intend to be pivotal in the plot in ME3 from ME2.

Only way to make a squaddie necessary to the plot in ME3 is to make sure there is no way they can be killed in ME2. That said I think some squaddies, like Tali, can play a role in ME3, only it won't be a necessary role. If the player has Tali alive, no doubt Tali will play a role in quarian politics in ME3, but it won't all hinge on her.

/Edit. Like in Dragon Age. The party members that are necessary to the plot (Alistair and Morrigan) are forced on the player and they can't die (at least not until a pivotal point in the plot) while the other party members are all optional and have no real influence on the plot.

Modifié par Xandurpein, 17 mars 2010 - 06:12 .

[smudboy]

Xandurpein wrote...

What Bioware did introduce in ME2 is the fact that squaddies can die, depending on your choices in the game and in particular the suicide mission. The idea is of course to create more drama. At the same time they basically lost the ability to give any squaddie in ME2 a role as necessary to the plot in ME3, since hthey can be dead. So it's a trade off, and this is of course they had to remove those squaddies from ME1 they intend to be pivotal in the plot in ME3 from ME2.

Only way to make a squaddie necessary to the plot in ME3 is to make sure there is no way they can be killed in ME2. That said I think some squaddies, like Tali, can play a role in ME3, only it won't be a necessary role. If the player has Tali alive, no doubt Tali will play a role in quarian politics in ME3, but it won't all hinge on her.

For one, BioWare introduced squad death in ME1, and did so quite well.  (Maybe their other games, I don't recall.)  In comparison to ME2, when it happens, it was rushed, or just "happens."  This is not what I call successful drama.  Mind you, it could've been, a la Saving Private Ryan, but cutscenes just aren't "visceral" enough compared to game play.

We've got 2 specific plot points in ME1 where we can have character death.  Each are very personal.

In ME2, it's all over the place.  In a magicalyl/interchangeable/upgradeable/loyalable system that's completely unknown to being almost nonsensical.  How making someone "loyal" like Garrus/Miranda/Jacob, and making them bullet proof being a fireteam leader is beyond me.  It's like "whoops.  We lost Tali."  Huh?  Oh right, shields.  Or "my two team mates fighting Arnold got crushed by objects.  But they're loyal, so they're ok."

Mind you I'm all for realistic death in a contemporary setting like a military operation, but whereupon the focus of the game is the Suicide Mission, they sure could've put some emphasis on Shepard's reaction.  The best I recall is when you lose someone at first (I remember Jack getting blown away since I didn't have upgraded Armor, and Shepard FLIPPING OUT over it in the cockpit, and Miranda trying to calm him down.)  The worst are when the tech expert gets hit by a rocket, and Shepard just drops his head, and the two people crushed after killing Arnold.

Modifié par smudboy, 17 mars 2010 - 06:18 .

[JediPilot0]

smudboy wrote...
The worst are when the tech expert gets hit by a rocket, and Shepard just drops his head, and the two people crushed after killing Arnold.

My first time playing, I had EVERYONE alive, and then during the escape sequence, I see a random shot of Mordin lying on the ground. Biggest WTF ever*.

*of course, NOW I know how the mechanics of that mission work, but still. I didn't even see him go down, ffs.


And now any successive playthroughs are going to be completely artificial or manufactured, because I know that I have to purposely screw up to have squadmates die.

Modifié par JediPilot0, 17 mars 2010 - 06:33 .

[Urazz]

Xandurpein wrote...

What Bioware did introduce in ME2 is the fact that squaddies can die, depending on your choices in the game and in particular the suicide mission. The idea is of course to create more drama. At the same time they basically lost the ability to give any squaddie in ME2 a role as necessary to the plot in ME3, since hthey can be dead. So it's a trade off, and this is of course they had to remove those squaddies from ME1 they intend to be pivotal in the plot in ME3 from ME2.

Only way to make a squaddie necessary to the plot in ME3 is to make sure there is no way they can be killed in ME2. That said I think some squaddies, like Tali, can play a role in ME3, only it won't be a necessary role. If the player has Tali alive, no doubt Tali will play a role in quarian politics in ME3, but it won't all hinge on her.

/Edit. Like in Dragon Age. The party members that are necessary to the plot (Alistair and Morrigan) are forced on the player and they can't die (at least not until a pivotal point in the plot) while the other party members are all optional and have no real influence on the plot.

Agreed.  I'm thinking that's what is going to happen.  The squadmates in ME2 won't be pivotal to the plot in ME3 but will probably make for an easier option in a particular mission if you have them there.  The most obvious ones would be Tali and Legion.  They would probably make resolving the Quarian/Geth conflict easier to accomplish.

I'm personally thinking most of the ME1 squaddies won't be available as squadmates but will be much more prominent and seen in ME3.  Wrex would probably be leading the Krogan to help you and Liara may end up replacing the shadow broker and replacing the Illusive Man as your source of intel.

It wouldn't surprise me if Kaiden/Ashley be available as squadmates though but it wouldn't suprise me if they end up on another mission or something and end up running into you on a regular basis.

JediPilot0 wrote...

smudboy wrote...
The worst are when the tech expert gets hit by a rocket, and Shepard just drops his head, and the two people crushed after killing Arnold.

My first time playing, I had EVERYONE alive, and then during the escape sequence, I see a random shot of Mordin lying on the ground. Biggest WTF ever*.

*of course, NOW I know how the mechanics of that mission work, but still. I didn't even see him go down, ffs.


And now any successive playthroughs are going to be completely artificial or manufactured, because I know that I have to purposely screw up to have squadmates die.

Yeah, I face this problem as well.  I had everyone survive the first time I went through and was successful on every playthrough after that as well.

Modifié par Urazz, 17 mars 2010 - 06:54 .

[CraigHB]

Same thing here, in the final escape, Mordin just dropped for what seemed like no reason.

I was actually surprised by the number of new characters and subplots introduced in ME2. My first thought was, "how are they going to deal with this mess in ME3?" Though, I really enjoyed getting to know the new characters and playing all the side missions.

It seemed to me that ME1 was much more plot driven than ME2. I fully understood the nature and purpose of the events and characters in ME1's final showdown. In ME2, the final showdown with the Human Reaper made me think, "what the hell is this thing?"

I get the feeling that ME2's story was contrived to fit a game plan where ME1's game plan was contrived to fit a story. I hope BW goes back to a more story driven production with ME3. Surprise game boss endings are for FPS games and I play ME because it is *not* an FPS.

Modifié par CraigHB, 17 mars 2010 - 09:00 .

[smudboy]

CraigHB wrote...

Same thing here, in the final escape, Mordin just dropped for what seemed like no reason.

I was actually surprised by the number of new characters and subplots introduced in ME2. My first thought was, "how are they going to deal with this mess in ME3?" Though, I really enjoyed getting to know the new characters and playing all the side missions.

It seemed to me that ME1 was much more plot driven than ME2. I fully understood the nature and purpose of the events and characters in ME1's final showdown. In ME2, the final showdown with the Human Reaper made me think, "what the hell is this thing?"

I get the feeling that ME2's story was contrived to fit a game plan where ME1's game plan was contrived to fit a story. I hope BW goes back to a more story driven production with ME3. Surprise game boss endings are for FPS games and I play ME because it is *not* an FPS.

An interesting insight.  ME1: Story.  ME2:  Characters.  It sounds very familiar to the OP of this discussion, which I agree with as well.
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/105/index/973813/1#973813

Modifié par smudboy, 17 mars 2010 - 09:12 .

[JediPilot0]

smudboy wrote...
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/105/index/973813/1#973813

WTF!? I just got finished reading that first post for the first time 3 minutes ago. I'd never seen that topic before. Strange coincidence.

Anyway, you linked this article in the "did ME2 fail" thread. I have to say, that guy is a little too harsh. I only agree with maybe 20% of the things he says. Really, I only dislike the story and planet scanning, but man, that guy acts like ME2 is a complete trainwreck. WTF, he's blowing some of that stuff WAY out of proportion.

Modifié par JediPilot0, 17 mars 2010 - 09:28 .

[t6ram]

We got to 'do it' twice. I consider that remarkable progress.

[smudboy]

JediPilot0 wrote...

smudboy wrote...
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/105/index/973813/1#973813

WTF!? I just got finished reading that first post for the first time 3 minutes ago. I'd never seen that topic before. Strange coincidence.

Anyway, you linked this article in the "did ME2 fail" thread. I have to say, that guy is a little too harsh. I only agree with maybe 20% of the things he says. Really, I only dislike the story and planet scanning, but man, that guy acts like ME2 is a complete trainwreck. WTF, he's blowing some of that stuff WAY out of proportion.

Ah, then you'll probably like my new post in that thread:
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/105/index/1735660/10#1770502

In regards to that "many failures" article, his emotion and tone aside, he does make valid points:
1) The ME developers don't know how to make exploration work (MAKO/Probes/Fuel?  What's next?)
2) They don't know how to get money/an economy/stores working.  While buying fish and useless junk may seem cool, it doesn't add to the experience at all.  It's just stupid.  ME1 ended up with infinite cash and too much, and now we've got too little and no items, and a massive wack of DLC Heavy Weapons.
3) They don't know how to get cultures working (they sort of got languages going with the ME DLC Bring Down The Sky, with the Batarians having their own language in a few scenes.  All we get are Ardat-Yakshi, and some definition on Quarian's naming conventions.  One of the reasons why the Flotilla was so personal.)
4) While the combat is fun, it and level design for it, are all the same.  Take cover = God mode.  Pop out.  Repeat...for the entire game.  Totally accurate.  Minor variation on level with Tali's (sunlight damage) and Legion's (don't cross data transmission lines!)  But still the same cover mechanic, where if you're not in cover, your perfect aiming enemies will crush you.  Without medigel, you either need tech armor option, a loyalty-shield skill, or you're dead.  On all difficulties.
5) While the mini games are better (save probing), they still feel tacked on in a lot of places.
6) He nails it on the mission arcs.  (Almost everyone having a recruit/loyalty mission.) This is next to a party dynamic argument, but the fact that the ME team could churn out levels in the same manner, for the whole game, where everything (save 2 loyalty missions) are violent shooting galleries, is a huge problem in design.  Especially when only one of them barely touches the plot (Mordin), and there's no development for Shepard.  It's like:
Shepard: "Let's all get on the Normandy Bus!  First stop-"
Jack: "But I want a bomb!"
Shepard: "You kids pipe down back there or I will turn this bus around!  Now let's go get everyone killed."

I do disagree over:
1) Log Book and recordings, although I'd love to see more exposition and different creative ways of storytelling, I see nothing wrong with video/audio logs.  But this is BioWare.  Storytelling is (should be) their thing.
2) The GUI is a minor gripe, but why no hot keys, yet keyboard controls for vehicles?
3) The environment interaction.  I actually like the cursor highlight.  Helps me know what the devil is actually interactive.  I don't need Source Engine physics to interact with random objects, just because.  We just needs more objects to touch and play with.

[JediPilot0]

smudboy wrote...
Retconning: Victory
Creation of Plot Holes: Victory
Voice Acting: Victory
Most Annoying Antagonist One Liners: Victory
Use Of Deus Ex Machina Device In The First 10 Minutes For Marketing Campaign And Reboot: Victory
Friendly Invincible Immovable God-Mode Crates That Warn When People Want To Kill You: Victory
(Unintended Comical) Dark Helmet Scenes: Victory
Having An Unnecessarily Large Cast Of Side-Characters: Victory

I was seriously laughing my ass off.

About the other stuff. Yeah, the points are all valid, but I do think they are overblown. They aren't first on my list, at any rate. The story is.

[CraigHB]

No fail, I think they're both great games and haven't enjoyed two games this much in a long time. People are way too harsh. Sure the game(s) could deliver more and could be better in certain areas, but even with their faults, they're fantastic games.

As far as mineral scanning, I agree that it is lame and is (arguably of course) the only area of the game that fails completely. I solved that problem by using Iron Spine's Coalesced.ini editor (changed the completion bonus from 50k to 300k).  I don't have to scan for minerals anymore and it makes the game more fun.

I really like the "god mode" of being in cover.  For people like me who aren't big on the challenge of FPS type action, it's what makes combat so much more fun.  There's always a way to get through a level if you can take advantage of cover.  It's the strategy aspect.  Though, I can see where people who thrive on the challenge of avoiding weapon fire would find it a big disappointment.

Modifié par CraigHB, 17 mars 2010 - 11:21 .

[smudboy]

JediPilot0 wrote...

smudboy wrote...
Retconning: Victory
Creation of Plot Holes: Victory
Voice Acting: Victory
Most Annoying Antagonist One Liners: Victory
Use Of Deus Ex Machina Device In The First 10 Minutes For Marketing Campaign And Reboot: Victory
Friendly Invincible Immovable God-Mode Crates That Warn When People Want To Kill You: Victory
(Unintended Comical) Dark Helmet Scenes: Victory
Having An Unnecessarily Large Cast Of Side-Characters: Victory

I was seriously laughing my ass off.

About the other stuff. Yeah, the points are all valid, but I do think they are overblown. They aren't first on my list, at any rate. The story is.

Totally my number one, too.

Probably the only reason why I'm on the forums.  For the production value, and publicity they put into hyping it, if the story isn't there, everything else suffers/doesn't matter.  Having people trying to defend the story is what keeps me coming back.

ME3 is just going to be another ME2.  There's the slim chance it'll be something completely beyond expectation, but I don't think it's logistically possible, or within this dev teams ability, especially using ME2 as a base.  For all the photorealistic talking heads, importing, continuity (or lack of), and technology they're using, it doesn't come anywhere close to Planescape Torment, Fallout, and from what I'm reading, KotOR, let alone being considered a work of art.