4359 réponses à ce sujet

[CitrusPOP]

never said i was getting mad.. i'm referring to people just picking up the game that have no idea that he's in it.

[M_e_t_A]

who all brings Garrus with his badass weaponry and quick response time with them to every mission, if it's a hard one? I usually bring Grunt (even though i didnt get his loyalty yet) and Garrus, since his loyalty mission is moderately easy on insanity difficulty (as long as you constantly use your collectors beam on the 2 heavy mechs at the end.)

[Darke1]

I have to say i loved the Kasumi DLC and i liked the Firewalker pack (despite teh default keys not being the same as the hints and tips pop-ups).



The Kasumi DLC was a lot of fun and a great step forward for the DLC content...now we just need more missions, the extra sniper rifle, assault rifle and pistol. )



Kasumi would make a great "true" companion add in ME3, as well as an interesting LI.



Fantastic work Bioware DLC team and look forward to seeing more hot extras in the coming months (i guess the other outfit packs will be along soon).

[LJScribes]

Love the Kasumi DLC, also the Appearance pack, can't wait to see more of those,
wish I could see more character's actually wearing armor, Zaeed, Grunt, Garrus and Mordin also Legion are the only ones that look like they're ready to battle the Collectors.

Miranda is in spandex, Jacob is too but at least he wears shoulder pads heh.
Tali is fine the way she is I guess, Samara is in the same way as Miranda cept with shoulder pad

I'd say something about Thane wearing a "nice suit" and Jack wearing...nothing but since jack at least is wearing clothes and Thane has been slightly better equipped I'll leave em out, also because they were just updated.

Hmm, if my squad can battle in there everyday attire why can't my Shep fight in his Firefly casual wear?

Also another thing I really want to see wold be more armor pieces even if they have the same stats as some other pieces, NOT armor suits where i can't remove my helmet

I'm tired of wearing the same gear for every playthrough,  I saw the video of all the different armor piece models, how you said you estimate at about 300 different helms?  where are they? and how come only 2 and one visor made it ingame?(Dr. Pepper excluded)

Modifié par LJScribes, 09 avril 2010 - 11:39 .

[danielassault]

Everything is good about this DLC, EXPECT for the ending. Bioware built up for us to find a hidden message in that greybox. Very interesting for us to find out what it is. For some reason Bioware didn't give us the answer. Amateurish writing Bioware. Basic storytelling guidelines can tell you that's one of the things you just don't do.



I hate it when videogame and film makers think their audience is stupid. Leaving the answer out is stupid.

[FluxDeluxe]

Yes i found that bewildering it mentions how much the info could harm the alliance. I can only think that it is a prelude to more DLC. Perhaps even larger DLC or maybe an expansion....



Corruption in the alliance, collusion with the reapers within certain arms of the government. Not really as far fetched as rebuilding sheperd from pulp.

[cerberus1701]

danielassault wrote...

Everything is good about this DLC, EXPECT for the ending. Bioware built up for us to find a hidden message in that greybox. Very interesting for us to find out what it is. For some reason Bioware didn't give us the answer. Amateurish writing Bioware. Basic storytelling guidelines can tell you that's one of the things you just don't do.

I hate it when videogame and film makers think their audience is stupid. Leaving the answer out is stupid.

.

Leaving the answer out if it's done as something of a prequel for future content is not stupid.

Nor is leaving it out period, stupid. Not from a literary standpoint or any other. From a literary standpoint, the story was obtaining the greybox, since the premise was built entirely around obtaining it. Obtaining it was the climax. The payoff. Getting a glimpse of it's content was the deneumont. Deciding what to do with the greybox was the end.

So, whether you like it or not, basic storytelling guidelines were followed.

And, even if it's never revealed WHAT the threat to the Alliance is (or was, if you destroy the box) that doesn't make it stupid or "amateurish writing." Well, perhaps it does to people who have to have everything spelled out for them.

The Sopranos finale didn't spell everything out.

I suspect Lost's won't answer EVERY question.

No one knows what Bill Murray whispered in Lost in Translation. And those are just a few.

In these cases the writer has invited the reader into the narrative and engaged them in filling in the blanks with their imaginations

Writers don't make these choices because they think their audience is "stupid" Quite the opposite.

Stretch your own imagination rather than slamming authors who use a legitimate storytelling method just because it doesn't connect every dot for you the way you think it should.

[royaljminnis]

hey I want to buy the kasumi dlc but the bioware site doesn't have an area for armed force's europe when you go to put your card information in and I can't verify my card anyone know the fix for this?

Modifié par royaljminnis, 09 avril 2010 - 02:48 .

[jakal66]

cerberus1701 wrote...

danielassault wrote...

Everything is good about this DLC, EXPECT for the ending. Bioware built up for us to find a hidden message in that greybox. Very interesting for us to find out what it is. For some reason Bioware didn't give us the answer. Amateurish writing Bioware. Basic storytelling guidelines can tell you that's one of the things you just don't do.

I hate it when videogame and film makers think their audience is stupid. Leaving the answer out is stupid.

.

Leaving the answer out if it's done as something of a prequel for future content is not stupid.

Nor is leaving it out period, stupid. Not from a literary standpoint or any other. From a literary standpoint, the story was obtaining the greybox, since the premise was built entirely around obtaining it. Obtaining it was the climax. The payoff. Getting a glimpse of it's content was the deneumont. Deciding what to do with the greybox was the end.

So, whether you like it or not, basic storytelling guidelines were followed.

And, even if it's never revealed WHAT the threat to the Alliance is (or was, if you destroy the box) that doesn't make it stupid or "amateurish writing." Well, perhaps it does to people who have to have everything spelled out for them.

The Sopranos finale didn't spell everything out.

I suspect Lost's won't answer EVERY question.

No one knows what Bill Murray whispered in Lost in Translation. And those are just a few.

In these cases the writer has invited the reader into the narrative and engaged them in filling in the blanks with their imaginations

Writers don't make these choices because they think their audience is "stupid" Quite the opposite.

Stretch your own imagination rather than slamming authors who use a legitimate storytelling method just because it doesn't connect every dot for you the way you think it should.

Agreed:O

[cynicalsaint1]

cerberus1701 wrote...

danielassault wrote...

Everything is good about this DLC, EXPECT for the ending. Bioware built up for us to find a hidden message in that greybox. Very interesting for us to find out what it is. For some reason Bioware didn't give us the answer. Amateurish writing Bioware. Basic storytelling guidelines can tell you that's one of the things you just don't do.

I hate it when videogame and film makers think their audience is stupid. Leaving the answer out is stupid.

.

Leaving the answer out if it's done as something of a prequel for future content is not stupid.

Nor is leaving it out period, stupid. Not from a literary standpoint or any other. From a literary standpoint, the story was obtaining the greybox, since the premise was built entirely around obtaining it. Obtaining it was the climax. The payoff. Getting a glimpse of it's content was the deneumont. Deciding what to do with the greybox was the end.

So, whether you like it or not, basic storytelling guidelines were followed.

And, even if it's never revealed WHAT the threat to the Alliance is (or was, if you destroy the box) that doesn't make it stupid or "amateurish writing." Well, perhaps it does to people who have to have everything spelled out for them.

The Sopranos finale didn't spell everything out.

I suspect Lost's won't answer EVERY question.

No one knows what Bill Murray whispered in Lost in Translation. And those are just a few.

In these cases the writer has invited the reader into the narrative and engaged them in filling in the blanks with their imaginations

Writers don't make these choices because they think their audience is "stupid" Quite the opposite.

Stretch your own imagination rather than slamming authors who use a legitimate storytelling method just because it doesn't connect every dot for you the way you think it should.

That !@#$ing briefcase in Pulp Fiction is another good example.

[cynicalmicahel]

jakal66 wrote...

cerberus1701 wrote...

danielassault wrote...

Everything is good about this DLC, EXPECT for the ending. Bioware built up for us to find a hidden message in that greybox. Very interesting for us to find out what it is. For some reason Bioware didn't give us the answer. Amateurish writing Bioware. Basic storytelling guidelines can tell you that's one of the things you just don't do.

I hate it when videogame and film makers think their audience is stupid. Leaving the answer out is stupid.

.

Leaving the answer out if it's done as something of a prequel for future content is not stupid.

Nor is leaving it out period, stupid. Not from a literary standpoint or any other. From a literary standpoint, the story was obtaining the greybox, since the premise was built entirely around obtaining it. Obtaining it was the climax. The payoff. Getting a glimpse of it's content was the deneumont. Deciding what to do with the greybox was the end.

So, whether you like it or not, basic storytelling guidelines were followed.

And, even if it's never revealed WHAT the threat to the Alliance is (or was, if you destroy the box) that doesn't make it stupid or "amateurish writing." Well, perhaps it does to people who have to have everything spelled out for them.

The Sopranos finale didn't spell everything out.

I suspect Lost's won't answer EVERY question.

No one knows what Bill Murray whispered in Lost in Translation. And those are just a few.

In these cases the writer has invited the reader into the narrative and engaged them in filling in the blanks with their imaginations

Writers don't make these choices because they think their audience is "stupid" Quite the opposite.

Stretch your own imagination rather than slamming authors who use a legitimate storytelling method just because it doesn't connect every dot for you the way you think it should.

Agreed:O

My own personal conspiracy: I think that the secret of the Gray Box might tie into a future DLC with Liara and the Shadow Broker. I mean the kind of secret that could shatter the Alliance is exactly the kind of thing that an information broker would love to get thier hands on. Think about it... Liara could use the secret to flush out the Shadow Broker and then she could finally confront him. It could also give us the story of how and why she fell so hard. And it would give us the oppurtunity to explore one of the more interesting groups in my opinion... the shadow broker and his network.

[cerberus1701]

cynicalmicahel wrote...

jakal66 wrote...

cerberus1701 wrote...

danielassault wrote...

Everything is good about this DLC, EXPECT for the ending. Bioware built up for us to find a hidden message in that greybox. Very interesting for us to find out what it is. For some reason Bioware didn't give us the answer. Amateurish writing Bioware. Basic storytelling guidelines can tell you that's one of the things you just don't do.

I hate it when videogame and film makers think their audience is stupid. Leaving the answer out is stupid.

.

Leaving the answer out if it's done as something of a prequel for future content is not stupid.

Nor is leaving it out period, stupid. Not from a literary standpoint or any other. From a literary standpoint, the story was obtaining the greybox, since the premise was built entirely around obtaining it. Obtaining it was the climax. The payoff. Getting a glimpse of it's content was the deneumont. Deciding what to do with the greybox was the end.

So, whether you like it or not, basic storytelling guidelines were followed.

And, even if it's never revealed WHAT the threat to the Alliance is (or was, if you destroy the box) that doesn't make it stupid or "amateurish writing." Well, perhaps it does to people who have to have everything spelled out for them.

The Sopranos finale didn't spell everything out.

I suspect Lost's won't answer EVERY question.

No one knows what Bill Murray whispered in Lost in Translation. And those are just a few.

In these cases the writer has invited the reader into the narrative and engaged them in filling in the blanks with their imaginations

Writers don't make these choices because they think their audience is "stupid" Quite the opposite.

Stretch your own imagination rather than slamming authors who use a legitimate storytelling method just because it doesn't connect every dot for you the way you think it should.

Agreed:O

My own personal conspiracy: I think that the secret of the Gray Box might tie into a future DLC with Liara and the Shadow Broker. I mean the kind of secret that could shatter the Alliance is exactly the kind of thing that an information broker would love to get thier hands on. Think about it... Liara could use the secret to flush out the Shadow Broker and then she could finally confront him. It could also give us the story of how and why she fell so hard. And it would give us the oppurtunity to explore one of the more interesting groups in my opinion... the shadow broker and his network.

That could be. My personal notion at the moment though is that we could eventually see what the threat to the Alliance was (In DLC if not a full expansion....which I hope for daily, btw...hint, hint, Bioware.) I agree with the person a few pages back who conjectured that the Alliance (or part of it) may be in collusion with the Reapers to ensure humanity's survival.

Hell, in terms of that basic goal it's not outside the realm of possibility that The Illusive Man is working with the Reapers. There is circumstantial evidence at least in my thinking that makes it a possibility.

[Vilanova]

cynicalmicahel wrote...

jakal66 wrote...

cerberus1701 wrote...

danielassault wrote...

Everything is good about this DLC, EXPECT for the ending. Bioware built up for us to find a hidden message in that greybox. Very interesting for us to find out what it is. For some reason Bioware didn't give us the answer. Amateurish writing Bioware. Basic storytelling guidelines can tell you that's one of the things you just don't do.

I hate it when videogame and film makers think their audience is stupid. Leaving the answer out is stupid.

.

Leaving the answer out if it's done as something of a prequel for future content is not stupid.

Nor is leaving it out period, stupid. Not from a literary standpoint or any other. From a literary standpoint, the story was obtaining the greybox, since the premise was built entirely around obtaining it. Obtaining it was the climax. The payoff. Getting a glimpse of it's content was the deneumont. Deciding what to do with the greybox was the end.

So, whether you like it or not, basic storytelling guidelines were followed.

And, even if it's never revealed WHAT the threat to the Alliance is (or was, if you destroy the box) that doesn't make it stupid or "amateurish writing." Well, perhaps it does to people who have to have everything spelled out for them.

The Sopranos finale didn't spell everything out.

I suspect Lost's won't answer EVERY question.

No one knows what Bill Murray whispered in Lost in Translation. And those are just a few.

In these cases the writer has invited the reader into the narrative and engaged them in filling in the blanks with their imaginations

Writers don't make these choices because they think their audience is "stupid" Quite the opposite.

Stretch your own imagination rather than slamming authors who use a legitimate storytelling method just because it doesn't connect every dot for you the way you think it should.

Agreed:O

My own personal conspiracy: I think that the secret of the Gray Box might tie into a future DLC with Liara and the Shadow Broker. I mean the kind of secret that could shatter the Alliance is exactly the kind of thing that an information broker would love to get thier hands on. Think about it... Liara could use the secret to flush out the Shadow Broker and then she could finally confront him. It could also give us the story of how and why she fell so hard. And it would give us the oppurtunity to explore one of the more interesting groups in my opinion... the shadow broker and his network.

How about this?
The shadow broker was originally going to buy it off but since we took it, he doesnt know if we kept it or destroyed it so it can be done. lol, maybe we could ge some new guns or atleast, armor parts.
lol, give grunt the geth armor from me1!!!!

[Sierra Oscar]

cerberus1701 wrote...

Lavans6879 wrote...

cerberus1701 wrote...

Care for some cheese with your whine?

1) You're not owed any modding support. By ANY developer. Some may be ok with people fracking with their creation and that's fine. But it doesn't make them evil because they don't want to make it easy for people to screw with what they built.

2) Kasumi "should have been included" Yeah. This from someone who has a serious case of Entitlement Syndrome.

You have no right to talk if you feel compelled to mock someone.

First off, there's no need -not- to include modding support. BioWare released an official SDK for Dragon Age for modders, which need I remind you was released prior to Mass Effect 2. The -only- reason why they don't release a SDK for Mass Effect 2 is because they don't have a license for it since they don't own the engine. Had they stuck with the Eclipse engine, there might actually be official modding support and third party content, let alone proper Eyefinity and widescreen support.

Second off, Kasumi was already confirmed as a character before Mass Effect 2 was even released in a couple of E3 trailers. Not only that, but there were already data files for the character within the release build of Mass Effect 2. I don't see BioWare asking their customers to spend $10 for a character to be an overly level method of conducting business, especially if said customer is the owner of the Collector's Edition. This is the reason why people are resorting to piracy while honest customers get slapped in the face with DLC fees and invasive DRM.

As for the CE. What you were promised by the CE is exactly what was delivered. When you go to Chili's for their 9.99 appetizer and entree special you don't get to whine that you're owed dessert because everyone knows that dessert comes with a meal."

I agree fully here, quite a few threads contain some people of the oppinion that buying the CE entiles them to a higher tier of entitlement. Utterly ridiculous, I purchased the CE because I have the first one as CE (therefore for the sake of continuity) and because I was willing to pay extra for artwork and an accompanying DVD, no more, no less.

People were told from kickoff what the content of the CE edition entailed, where the hell this idea of "I deserve more free stuffs" came from god knows.

[cerberus1701]

Sierra Oscar wrote...

cerberus1701 wrote...

Lavans6879 wrote...

cerberus1701 wrote...

Care for some cheese with your whine?

1) You're not owed any modding support. By ANY developer. Some may be ok with people fracking with their creation and that's fine. But it doesn't make them evil because they don't want to make it easy for people to screw with what they built.

2) Kasumi "should have been included" Yeah. This from someone who has a serious case of Entitlement Syndrome.

You have no right to talk if you feel compelled to mock someone.

First off, there's no need -not- to include modding support. BioWare released an official SDK for Dragon Age for modders, which need I remind you was released prior to Mass Effect 2. The -only- reason why they don't release a SDK for Mass Effect 2 is because they don't have a license for it since they don't own the engine. Had they stuck with the Eclipse engine, there might actually be official modding support and third party content, let alone proper Eyefinity and widescreen support.

Second off, Kasumi was already confirmed as a character before Mass Effect 2 was even released in a couple of E3 trailers. Not only that, but there were already data files for the character within the release build of Mass Effect 2. I don't see BioWare asking their customers to spend $10 for a character to be an overly level method of conducting business, especially if said customer is the owner of the Collector's Edition. This is the reason why people are resorting to piracy while honest customers get slapped in the face with DLC fees and invasive DRM.

As for the CE. What you were promised by the CE is exactly what was delivered. When you go to Chili's for their 9.99 appetizer and entree special you don't get to whine that you're owed dessert because everyone knows that dessert comes with a meal."

I agree fully here, quite a few threads contain some people of the oppinion that buying the CE entiles them to a higher tier of entitlement. Utterly ridiculous, I purchased the CE because I have the first one as CE (therefore for the sake of continuity) and because I was willing to pay extra for artwork and an accompanying DVD, no more, no less.

People were told from kickoff what the content of the CE edition entailed, where the hell this idea of "I deserve more free stuffs" came from god knows.

Indeed.

I paid more for the CE because they said I'd get this and this, and this.

I GOT this, and this, and this.

That's the end of the contract, and therefore the end of my expectation.
 
It's just awesome when people think they are owed things when they were never promised them to start with. 

[PARAGON87]

Man, GameSpot totally ripped BioWare apart for Kasumi's pricing and length. Never thought I would agree with them and their lower-than-average way of rating games!

www.gamespot.com/xbox360/rpg/masseffect2kasumisstolenmemory/review.html

Modifié par PARAGON87, 09 avril 2010 - 05:19 .

[Therigan]

all DLC content is pretty much a rip...only last like 2hrs and you pay $10 or more for it

[cerberus1701]

Honestly, Kasumi,, her story, a decent Shep casual wear choice, tech boost, and what is now by far the best SMG and arguably one of the best weapons in the game overall was completely and totally worth the $7.

[Joe1962]

cerberus1701 wrote...

Honestly, Kasumi,, her story, a decent Shep casual wear choice, tech boost, and what is now by far the best SMG and arguably one of the best weapons in the game overall was completely and totally worth the $7.

Agreed, totally. The best 7 bucks I've ever spent.

[danielassault]

cerberus1701 wrote...

Leaving the answer out if it's done as something of a prequel for future content is not stupid.

This is the main problem... leaving it for "future content". There are plenty of things Mass Effect's story isn't telling us, which I'm fine with, knowing there is more coming. However, you do finish the main plot-line in both ME1 & ME2.
ME1: Find out what Saren is up to and stop him. Done.
ME2: Find out why human colonies are dissapearing and stop it. Done
ME3: I'm guessing, find out a way to stop the Reapers. It will be done as well probably, and there will probably be more things to come, but the main story will be complete, as the exposition promises to the player.

The story of Kasumi: Stolen Memories, gives you an exposition:
A master thief will join your crew, as payment she needs help to return an odd device which holds valuable information that could hurt humanity. You agree to help because this is relevant to your interest, as a protector of humanity. What is this big secret, I wonder? Why is it so important she finds it? Well, I guess we will find out soon.

cerberus1701 wrote...
Nor is leaving it out period, stupid. Not from a literary standpoint or any other. From a literary standpoint, the story was obtaining the greybox, since the premise was built entirely around obtaining it. Obtaining it was the climax. The payoff. Getting a glimpse of it's content was the deneumont. Deciding what to do with the greybox was the end.

So, whether you like it or not, basic storytelling guidelines were followed.

The climax of a story was not obtaining the Greybox. The climax of every story is when the main character is put in a dramatic situation, which is built from everything that happened to him until that point. What is a dramatic situation? Its is when the hero is given a choice; but not just a simple choice, it is a choice where whatever he chooses, he will always lose something. The climax of this story, is selecting whether to delete or not delete the information on the Greybox. Just as the climax of ME2 is selecting whether to keep or not to keep the station, and as ME1 whether to kill the council or to save them.

Basic story guidelines were followed, I agree with you on that, but hiding the answer to the only mystery built in this story is cheap. Why not give us the answer?

ME1's BDTS DLC gave us a full story with its answers and sill left room for future development.
Every loyalty mission in ME2 gave us the reason for the character's motivation and the answer to their questions.
Kasumi's mission did not, it just gave us the motivation to find her lost memories, but not why the information has such an importance beyond Kasumi's own feelings. Why is it in such a fort? Why is it dangerous to humanity? What is it that the greybox has that can be real bad for the alliance and real valuble for anyone holding it?

cerberus1701 wrote...
And, even if it's never revealed WHAT the threat to the Alliance is (or was, if you destroy the box) that doesn't make it stupid or "amateurish writing." Well, perhaps it does to people who have to have everything spelled out for them.

The Sopranos finale didn't spell everything out.

I suspect Lost's won't answer EVERY question.

No one knows what Bill Murray whispered in Lost in Translation. And those are just a few.

Leaving things open is fine, don't assume I'm looking for things spelled out for me, because I didn't say that or imply that.

Let's take the example of Pulp Fiction: There is a suitcase, which everyone wants, but we never get to see what is inside. Do we need to see? No, because the narrative doesn't revolve around the suitcase's treasure. It doesn't deliver a promise as to what everyone is after.

Kasumi: Stolen Memories gives you a short story of a new character, silly as she may be (Personal taste), and gives you one question to be answered... what is in that greybox that shouldn't get out? That's it. That is what this story builds up to, through the emotional engagement of the characters to their personal feelings. So yeah, the personal feelings are covered, but the answer isn't. And I find it absolutely stupid, that the only question you ask yourself in this short story, is never answered. It is unacceptable that Commander Shepard doesn't progresses in anyway. Only Kasumi closes her circle, Shepard is left open with what should have been closed.

They could have given the answer, and then relate it to something happening on some planet that's illegal and hurting the alliance. And have is so we do not go check the planet out. That's ok to keep open because they never promised us to resolve the problem within the information, they just promised a mystery to be unsolved.

cerberus1701 wrote...
In these cases the writer has invited the reader into the narrative and engaged them in filling in the blanks with their imaginations

Writers don't make these choices because they think their audience is "stupid" Quite the opposite.

Stretch your own imagination rather than slamming authors who use a legitimate storytelling method just because it doesn't connect every dot for you the way you think it should.

I may criticize anyone I want. I'm not slamming, I have more good things to say about Bioware's writers than bad things. I think this is one of the examples of their worst writing. Again, it is not connecting EVERY dot. It's connecting:
MAIN QUESTION A to MAIN ANSWER A.

Modifié par danielassault, 09 avril 2010 - 10:48 .

[Remo1969]

I suspect most of ME2's foundation/storyline is suspect. The main source of interpretation is filtered through the Illusive man. That's where I suspect ME3's knife in the back will be coming from.

[danielassault]

mrfoo1 wrote...

danielassault wrote...
MAIN QUESTION A to MAIN ANSWER A.

I'm a little confused. You want to know why they didn't explain in the Kasumi DLC the content of the Greybox and it's involvement with the Alliance? (quotation is trimmed for post size)

Yes. Before I got the greybox I knew exactly the same things about it as after I got it.

Modifié par danielassault, 10 avril 2010 - 02:40 .

[SaddleTrampNC]

I dare say that the info on the Alliance was the bait to hook Cerberus and peak Shep's interest. As the title says, 'Stolen Memories', all she wanted out of it were the last memories of her boyfriend. All IMO, of course.

[HTTP 404]

I thought it was pretty good DLC even for its price! I like the uniqueness of the level. Also I don't mind things left unexplained, im sure Ill get answers for it in ME3 or another DLC.