243 réponses à ce sujet

[Wild Still]

Thank you for the edit OP. Also, yes I would agree to a degree, while I don't think ME2 "failed" as an RPG it is definitely not what ME1 was. Overall, no doubt ME2 is a better game than ME1 but in terms of dialogue, plot and development, it is certainly not there with DA:O or ME1.

Modifié par Wild Still, 20 mars 2010 - 11:53 .

[BaladasDemnevanni]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

And the fact that the character interaction took a step backwards in favor of 'SPLOSHUNS despite being marketed as "getting to know your team" isn't a good enough argument for you?

I could've sworn the characters were the one thing everyone actually enjoyed more over the original...

[Ray Joel Oh]

Saberwolf116 wrote...

Wow, you guys have been way too harsh on the OP-if anything, I almost agree with him.

Yes, ME2 was watered down plot-wise, but that's only because we asked for it.

Who asked for it?  Did you ask for it?  Somebody hold my purse.

[SelphieSK]

JRCHOharry wrote...

I think i could take this guy seriously if he didn't have a large jiggly fellow shooting guns in his sig.

Plus arguing about something that has been argued about for I don't know how many times...

[fortunesque]

Saberwolf116 wrote...

Wow, you guys have been way too harsh on the OP-if anything, I almost agree with him.

Yes, ME2 was watered down plot-wise, but that's only because we asked for it.

I agree, but I sure as hell didn't ask for it.

Everything that people complained about even *slightly* was completely axed and/or maimed beyond recogniton.

When they announced that there was 30% more dialogue but a larger amount of squadmates, I knew there would be trouble. So now we have a doubling in squadmates and a small increase in dialogue in comparison to the amount of new squaddies.

AND we're getting yet another squadmate. I'm kind of scratching my head on this one. 

[SkullandBonesmember]

Saberwolf116 wrote...

Wow, you guys have been way too harsh on the OP-if anything, I almost agree with him.

Yes, ME2 was watered down plot-wise, but that's only because we asked for it.

Keelah se'lai.

Anyway, RPG fans didn't ask for it. However many who played ME1 expected 'SPLOSHUNS. Halo tards drown out  us RPG fans.

[jasonontko]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

JohnnyDollar wrote...

The issues about dialogs is in several threads. Perhaps naming your thread in not such a negative way would reduce the negative backlash that you are receiving from other members.

It's just really frustrating. Didn't mean it as an insult, just venting.

 I agree with your OP, your not alone.  But be prepared for an onslaught of fanboys. 

Their no escaping it, fanboys, the story was cast aside to put in sexy squadmates and more FPS action.  Still is a great game just could have been better.

 

[SkullandBonesmember]

jasonontko wrote...

I agree with your OP, your not alone.  But be prepared for an onslaught of fanboys. 

Their no escaping it, fanboys, the story was cast aside to put in sexy squadmates and more FPS action.  Still is a great game just could have been better.

IT'S NOOOOOT AN FPS.
Because a TPS is sooooo much different.

[Asari]

AAAAAHH PLAAAYYYGGGUU...sorry starcraft fever.



First, Jacob and Miri does not wear armor because they're badass, same goes for Garrus, Samara, Grunt and Harbinger...plus they've got shields!



Second. Michael and Ruewbacca, they're busy and not worth remembering.



Third. Of course they're not loyal, hes with Cerberus.



Fourth. Speak with everyone after you gain a new level, then they'll have something new...except for Garrus because he is always in the middle of some calibrations..



Fifth. there was no fifth.



They act like nothing happens because the game ends there, no point to continue from there.

[Forsakerr]

fortunesque wrote...

Saberwolf116 wrote...

Wow, you guys have been way too harsh on the OP-if anything, I almost agree with him.

Yes, ME2 was watered down plot-wise, but that's only because we asked for it.

I agree, but I sure as hell didn't ask for it.

Everything that people complained about even *slightly* was completely axed and/or maimed beyond recogniton.

When they announced that there was 30% more dialogue but a larger amount of squadmates, I knew there would be trouble. So now we have a doubling in squadmates and a small increase in dialogue in comparison to the amount of new squaddies.

AND we're getting yet another squadmate. I'm kind of scratching my head on this one. 

i also did nt asked for less RPG and  more FPS thats for sure

And dont forget the new squad mate has no interaction ,a female version of Zaeed, another plush doll that you press a button and spout recorded lines +1 at less RPG again

[jasonontko]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

jasonontko wrote...

I agree with your OP, your not alone.  But be prepared for an onslaught of fanboys. 

Their no escaping it, fanboys, the story was cast aside to put in sexy squadmates and more FPS action.  Still is a great game just could have been better.

IT'S NOOOOOT AN FPS.
Because a TPS is sooooo much different.

LOL, my mistake sir.

[SimonTheFrog]

Well... i understand some of your points but most of them are a matter of taste and some are a matter of finite resources.

Bioware did cram in a lot of content, but at some point they had to stop cramming in more. Because 1.) it's gotta be finished at some point and 2.) its expensive to add more and more content.



Yes, there things that i see missing in the game, some with high priority and some with low. But that's just a part of developing games. Theres always room for more. It's fair enough to point out missing parts. But 1.) the valid ones have their own thread, so no need to start a new one, the others are basically a matter of taste or your personal preferences. In this case it would be advisable, if you want to post them, to put it more politely and not as "fail" in general.



As a general thing: yes, ME2 reduced its RPG-features and enhanced combat instead. That was what BioWares wanted to achieve with ME2. And they didn't fail doing so. Of course this raises a lot of debates and questions but again, there are many threads about this already. You're not the only and first one that noticed that ME2 is more shooter oriented than ME1. And you're not the only one who likes classic RPG features more than shooter features.



So, if you are not trolling, then please try to present your points with more structure for a better read and try to stay polite. Even if parts of the game frustrate you it's always better to present points in an emotionally neutral and well explained way. And it's always better to look out for existing threads.

[SkullandBonesmember]

Asari wrote...

AAAAAHH PLAAAYYYGGGUU...sorry starcraft fever.

First, Jacob and Miri does not wear armor because they're badass, same goes for Garrus, Samara, Grunt and Harbinger...plus they've got shields!

Garrus has armor. Grunt has armor.

SimonTheFrog wrote...

Well... i understand some of your points but most of them are a matter of taste and some are a matter of finite resources.
Bioware
did cram in a lot of content, but at some point they had to stop
cramming in more. Because 1.) it's gotta be finished at some point and
2.) its expensive to add more and more content.

Yes, there
things that i see missing in the game, some with high priority and some
with low. But that's just a part of developing games. Theres always
room for more. It's fair enough to point out missing parts. But 1.) the
valid ones have their own thread, so no need to start a new one, the
others are basically a matter of taste or your personal preferences. In
this case it would be advisable, if you want to post them, to put it
more politely and not as "fail" in general.

As a general thing:
yes, ME2 reduced its RPG-features and enhanced combat instead. That was
what BioWares wanted to achieve with ME2. And they didn't fail doing
so. Of course this raises a lot of debates and questions but again,
there are many threads about this already. You're not the only and
first one that noticed that ME2 is more shooter oriented than ME1. And
you're not the only one who likes classic RPG features more than
shooter features.

So, if you are not trolling, then please try
to present your points with more structure for a better read and try to
stay polite. Even if parts of the game frustrate you it's always better
to present points in an emotionally neutral and well explained way. And
it's always better to look out for existing threads.

Noted.

[jasonontko]

SimonTheFrog wrote...

Well... i understand some of your points but most of them are a matter of taste and some are a matter of finite resources.
Bioware did cram in a lot of content, but at some point they had to stop cramming in more. Because 1.) it's gotta be finished at some point and 2.) its expensive to add more and more content.

Yes, there things that i see missing in the game, some with high priority and some with low. But that's just a part of developing games. Theres always room for more. It's fair enough to point out missing parts. But 1.) the valid ones have their own thread, so no need to start a new one, the others are basically a matter of taste or your personal preferences. In this case it would be advisable, if you want to post them, to put it more politely and not as "fail" in general.

As a general thing: yes, ME2 reduced its RPG-features and enhanced combat instead. That was what BioWares wanted to achieve with ME2. And they didn't fail doing so. Of course this raises a lot of debates and questions but again, there are many threads about this already. You're not the only and first one that noticed that ME2 is more shooter oriented than ME1. And you're not the only one who likes classic RPG features more than shooter features.

So, if you are not trolling, then please try to present your points with more structure for a better read and try to stay polite. Even if parts of the game frustrate you it's always better to present points in an emotionally neutral and well explained way. And it's always better to look out for existing threads.

 I think he was polite enough.  If he got more interesting, he would have to be less polite.  That just the way it is.  Your either interesting and offensive to some people or your polite and dull to everyone.  There are limits but there different for everyone.      

[Asari]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Asari wrote...

AAAAAHH PLAAAYYYGGGUU...sorry starcraft fever.

First, Jacob and Miri does not wear armor because they're badass, same goes for Garrus, Samara, Grunt and Harbinger...plus they've got shields!

Garrus has armor. Grunt has armor.

same goes for Harbinger, yet he is the only one with a yellow "armor meter"

[jasonontko]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

SimonTheFrog wrote...
As a general thing: yes, ME2 reduced its RPG-features and enhanced combat instead. That was what BioWares wanted to achieve with ME2. And they didn't fail doing so. Of course this raises a lot of debates and questions but again, there are many threads about this already. You're not the only and first one that noticed that ME2 is more shooter oriented than ME1. And you're not the only one who likes classic RPG features more than shooter features.

I thought the enhanced combat was nice.  Personally I would like a little more dialog, but no biggie.  I sometimes think that some people here would almost prefer a dating/social type sim without hardly any combat at all.

Jonny Dollar

You should become a game dev, you make millions.  I think the trick is making it a dating sim but marketing it as regular game, because even the Taliband I am sure cant bring themselves to buy Singles or something like that.

[knightnblu]

I have always viewed ME as a hybrid in the vein of Systemshock. Part RPG and part FPS blended seamlessly to give a new twist on gaming. As I am sure that Bioware would admit, it is darned hard to do, but if done right it yields one heck of a payoff. While I certainly agree that the RPG side of the game suffered in ME2, the FPS side rocked. I would have liked more character interactions, greater range of exploration, and a better economy, but I am hoping for that in ME3.



RPG fans tend to be somewhat demanding (I know that I am for instance) in what we expect from our games. While the story of ME2 was not as tight as ME1, this is just a lead up and there is little that you can do to advance the plots in such a situation because the focus is on positioning you for the finale.



They could have expanded the interactions with the Council and Anderson, provided more side quests, and so forth, but then you have to factor in DLC which is still being figured out. Overall, I believe that ME2 is one hell of a game, but it does have some problems that I hope will be corrected in ME3. By taking this path Bioware is taking a risk because of the difficulty of what they are trying to achieve, but despite the problems I believe that they mostly done what they set out to do.



Nevertheless, we don’t ask for much…just perfection. ;-)

[SkullandBonesmember]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

I think it was the use of fanboy and fail in the same sentence.