217 réponses à ce sujet

[BaladasDemnevanni]

MassAffected wrote...

Also, there were loyalty missions in the first game with Dr. Heart and Wrex's family armor...where all you got was a text box for Wrex and a few lines for Garrus. With ME2 you saw a significant change in your companions as well as the struggles within them during the loyalty missions.

I only wish there were greater repercussions than their ability to survive during the suicide mission. I personally loved each of the loyalty/recruitment missions- they were handled very well. But I think the game would benefit by taking a leaf out of Dragon Age's book. If you ****** a recruited character off enough, they leave (since they had no personal motive really to fight the Collectors). This way the suicide mission would feel alot more...suicidal since you could go in without that full roster of 10.

[fortunesque]

Knoll Argonar wrote...


I don't think so. Thane, talking about his life, Mordin about the Genophage, Jack, being fulled by her own mind, Miranda, softening talking about her past, Samara and her daughter (she became more interesting after that mission though), Legion and the Geth dilemma, Tali and the Migrant Fleet... I think there's actually more content there about those characters than Liara in Noveria, really.

Even Garrus, with his actions during his loyalty mission (being very ruthless with that volus, wanting to hurt Harkin if necesary...) says more about himself than during any other convo in ME1.

And I think that's were ME2 wins: characters not only speak about something: they DO something. Mordin goes crazy when he finds that krogan experiments and his student, Tali cries when she finds her father, Samara KILLS her daughter.

That's deeper than Kaidan's past, IMO.

IMO, the idea that Shepard has to *do* something for every squadmate doesn't provide depth, it simply turns the Commander into a shrink or a errand boy.

In fact, it provides a false sense of depth. A character like Kaidan has his past squared away. He isn't distracted by something and is focused on the mission, whereas an ME2 character comes into the roster 'disloyal'- distracted by a problem to the point where they can easily die on the final mission. Instead, he (along with the rest of the ME1 squad) puts aside any personal issues in order to be focused on the task at hand: saving the galaxy.

[lastpawn]

DarthCaine wrote...

sooooo, is there anyone that prefers ME2 over ME1 but likes ME1's characters better ?

<= Right here. I also like the feel of ME1's story better, though I prefer the storytelling in ME2.

[Knoll Argonar]

jlb524 wrote...

Knoll Argonar wrote...


And I think that's were ME2 wins: characters not only speak about something: they DO something. Mordin goes crazy when he finds that krogan experiments and his student, Tali cries when she finds her father, Samara KILLS her daughter.

That's deeper than Kaidan's past, IMO.

This is really only b/c the squad mates are the focus of the ME2 plot.  In ME1, this was not the case.  The plot had a life of it's own separate from the squad.  The ME1 squad was swept up with the events of ME1 along with Shepard. 

In ME2, if feels like every squad mate just received their '15 minutes of fame' and that was it.  'Oh Shepard, I need you help!'  'OK'  "Thanks for your help Shepard....since you don't want to get in my pants GOODBYE!'

....so?

That doesn't change the fact that ME2 has deeper characters if you look at it that way, at least IMO. It could have been improved, with more random talk during main hubs, characters moving around the Ship and even socializing a little more, but it has improved what ME1 had.

[MassAffected]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

MassAffected wrote...

Also, there were loyalty missions in the first game with Dr. Heart and Wrex's family armor...where all you got was a text box for Wrex and a few lines for Garrus. With ME2 you saw a significant change in your companions as well as the struggles within them during the loyalty missions.

I only wish there were greater repercussions than their ability to survive during the suicide mission. I personally loved each of the loyalty/recruitment missions- they were handled very well. But I think the game would benefit by taking a leaf out of Dragon Age's book. If you ****** a recruited character off enough, they leave (since they had no personal motive really to fight the Collectors). This way the suicide mission would feel alot more...suicidal since you could go in without that full roster of 10.

I agree. Personally for me, Garrus' and Miranda's missions were my favorite. I saw the struggle within Garrus, almost felt it. I felt the betrayal that Miranda did when Niket told her he was working for her father. Those missions were MOVING to me and made the second game that much more enjoyable because of the rich cast of characters. Granted it wasn't perfect, and some squadies I didn't take to...but that was bound to happen. The only things I would change is like you said, a member leaving if you ****** them off and squad interaction like in Dragon Age. Outside of that I see the ME2 cast as a lot more developed and engaging compared to the ME1 cast. I still like both games and play them back to back when I make new characters. Oh well, all this is my opinion and as they say "opinions are like ****s, everyone has one".

[JeanLuc761]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

I dont think a couple of lines during a loyalty mission intersped between near constant combat constitutes a character driven mission either. If Liaras content of Noveria doesnt count, you might as well discount every loyalty mission in the game. Its practically the same.

Out of curiosity, why are you so against the amount of combat in Mass Effect 2?  People seem to forget that Mass Effect is and always has been a TPS/RPG hybrid rather than a straight RPG (though, a lot of RPG's have a ****load of combat anyway).

As for the loyalty missions...really, how much dialogue are you looking for here?  I recorded nearly every cutscene in the game and put them up on youtube and to give you an idea on the dialogue:

Jacob: ~10 minutes
Mordin: 15-17 minutes
Tali: ~50 minutes (not kidding)
Grunt: ~15 minutes
Miranda: ~18 minutes


etc etc.  There was a LOT of dialogue for each character and it wasn't just what they said, but what they did.  All of it was important and all of it was centered around THEM.  That completely blows away the characterization in ME1 imo.

[Knoll Argonar]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

MassAffected wrote...

Also, there were loyalty missions in the first game with Dr. Heart and Wrex's family armor...where all you got was a text box for Wrex and a few lines for Garrus. With ME2 you saw a significant change in your companions as well as the struggles within them during the loyalty missions.

I only wish there were greater repercussions than their ability to survive during the suicide mission. I personally loved each of the loyalty/recruitment missions- they were handled very well. But I think the game would benefit by taking a leaf out of Dragon Age's book. If you ****** a recruited character off enough, they leave (since they had no personal motive really to fight the Collectors). This way the suicide mission would feel alot more...suicidal since you could go in without that full roster of 10.

Agreed.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

fortunesque wrote...

IMO, the idea that Shepard has to *do* something for every squadmate doesn't provide depth, it simply turns the Commander into a shrink or a errand boy.

In fact, it provides a false sense of depth. A character like Kaidan has his past squared away. He isn't distracted by something and is focused on the mission, whereas an ME2 character comes into the roster 'disloyal'- distracted by a problem to the point where they can easily die on the final mission. Instead, he (along with the rest of the ME1 squad) puts aside any personal issues in order to be focused on the task at hand: saving the galaxy.

True, but I could turn this around to say that any character has to even say something to you provides a false sense of depth. You and Garrus have an understanding- you both want to take down Saren. There doesn't need to necessarily be anymore than that. Why every character must dialogue with you about their life is already unrealistic. We accept this false depth because we like the idea of having a very personal crew.
 
It's the same with ME2- people find characters they are very attached to. They don't like the idea that their favorite might not get a chance to be explored further.
I for one would have been upset if Samara got a loyalty mission and Thane didn't.

I was also bugged by the fact that it was the squad members who provided meaningful dialogue and all the crew were thrust into a side role for ME1. This felt very contrived.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 23 mars 2010 - 12:51 .

[MassAffected]

JeanLuc761 wrote...

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

I dont think a couple of lines during a loyalty mission intersped between near constant combat constitutes a character driven mission either. If Liaras content of Noveria doesnt count, you might as well discount every loyalty mission in the game. Its practically the same.

Out of curiosity, why are you so against the amount of combat in Mass Effect 2?  People seem to forget that Mass Effect is and always has been a TPS/RPG hybrid rather than a straight RPG (though, a lot of RPG's have a ****load of combat anyway).

As for the loyalty missions...really, how much dialogue are you looking for here?  I recorded nearly every cutscene in the game and put them up on youtube and to give you an idea on the dialogue:

Jacob: ~10 minutes
Mordin: 15-17 minutes
Tali: ~50 minutes (not kidding)
Grunt: ~15 minutes
Miranda: ~18 minutes


etc etc.  There was a LOT of dialogue for each character and it wasn't just what they said, but what they did.  All of it was important and all of it was centered around THEM.  That completely blows away the characterization in ME1 imo.

You rock dude!

[Knoll Argonar]

fortunesque wrote...

Knoll Argonar wrote...


I don't think so. Thane, talking about his life, Mordin about the Genophage, Jack, being fulled by her own mind, Miranda, softening talking about her past, Samara and her daughter (she became more interesting after that mission though), Legion and the Geth dilemma, Tali and the Migrant Fleet... I think there's actually more content there about those characters than Liara in Noveria, really.

Even Garrus, with his actions during his loyalty mission (being very ruthless with that volus, wanting to hurt Harkin if necesary...) says more about himself than during any other convo in ME1.

And I think that's were ME2 wins: characters not only speak about something: they DO something. Mordin goes crazy when he finds that krogan experiments and his student, Tali cries when she finds her father, Samara KILLS her daughter.

That's deeper than Kaidan's past, IMO.

IMO, the idea that Shepard has to *do* something for every squadmate doesn't provide depth, it simply turns the Commander into a shrink or a errand boy.

In fact, it provides a false sense of depth. A character like Kaidan has his past squared away. He isn't distracted by something and is focused on the mission, whereas an ME2 character comes into the roster 'disloyal'- distracted by a problem to the point where they can easily die on the final mission. Instead, he (along with the rest of the ME1 squad) puts aside any personal issues in order to be focused on the task at hand: saving the galaxy.

Me mentioning Kaidan was just an example, and I don't get your point: can't a Drell with perfect memory that's probably going to die worrying about his son, who seems to be becoming exactly what he didn't want to?

Jack and Jacob were a little off, i'd admit, though.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

JeanLuc761 wrote...

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

I dont think a couple of lines during a loyalty mission intersped between near constant combat constitutes a character driven mission either. If Liaras content of Noveria doesnt count, you might as well discount every loyalty mission in the game. Its practically the same.

Out of curiosity, why are you so against the amount of combat in Mass Effect 2?  People seem to forget that Mass Effect is and always has been a TPS/RPG hybrid rather than a straight RPG (though, a lot of RPG's have a ****load of combat anyway).

As for the loyalty missions...really, how much dialogue are you looking for here?  I recorded nearly every cutscene in the game and put them up on youtube and to give you an idea on the dialogue:

Jacob: ~10 minutes
Mordin: 15-17 minutes
Tali: ~50 minutes (not kidding)
Grunt: ~15 minutes
Miranda: ~18 minutes


etc etc.  There was a LOT of dialogue for each character and it wasn't just what they said, but what they did.  All of it was important and all of it was centered around THEM.  That completely blows away the characterization in ME1 imo.

Wtf? Could I get a link to that Tali dialogue? I had no idea she had that much.

[xxSgt_Reed_24xx]

jlb524 wrote...

Knoll Argonar wrote...


And I think that's were ME2 wins: characters not only speak about something: they DO something. Mordin goes crazy when he finds that krogan experiments and his student, Tali cries when she finds her father, Samara KILLS her daughter.

That's deeper than Kaidan's past, IMO.

This is really only b/c the squad mates are the focus of the ME2 plot.  In ME1, this was not the case.  The plot had a life of it's own separate from the squad.  The ME1 squad was swept up with the events of ME1 along with Shepard. 

In ME2, if feels like every squad mate just received their '15 minutes of fame' and that was it.  'Oh Shepard, I need you help!'  'OK'  "Thanks for your help Shepard....since you don't want to get in my pants GOODBYE!'

QFT

[Knoll Argonar]

JeanLuc761 wrote...

Out of curiosity, why are you so against the amount of combat in Mass Effect 2?  People seem to forget that Mass Effect is and always has been a TPS/RPG hybrid rather than a straight RPG (though, a lot of RPG's have a ****load of combat anyway).

As for the loyalty missions...really, how much dialogue are you looking for here?  I recorded nearly every cutscene in the game and put them up on youtube and to give you an idea on the dialogue:

Jacob: ~10 minutes
Mordin: 15-17 minutes
Tali: ~50 minutes (not kidding)
Grunt: ~15 minutes
Miranda: ~18 minutes


etc etc.  There was a LOT of dialogue for each character and it wasn't just what they said, but what they did.  All of it was important and all of it was centered around THEM.  That completely blows away the characterization in ME1 imo.

LOL? 50 minutes? MORE than MORDIN? That's... unexpected xDDDD Did you actually record all dialogue?

Now I see why I am not the only Talimancer in the forums xD

[JeanLuc761]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

JeanLuc761 wrote...

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

I dont think a couple of lines during a loyalty mission intersped between near constant combat constitutes a character driven mission either. If Liaras content of Noveria doesnt count, you might as well discount every loyalty mission in the game. Its practically the same.

Out of curiosity, why are you so against the amount of combat in Mass Effect 2?  People seem to forget that Mass Effect is and always has been a TPS/RPG hybrid rather than a straight RPG (though, a lot of RPG's have a ****load of combat anyway).

As for the loyalty missions...really, how much dialogue are you looking for here?  I recorded nearly every cutscene in the game and put them up on youtube and to give you an idea on the dialogue:

Jacob: ~10 minutes
Mordin: 15-17 minutes
Tali: ~50 minutes (not kidding)
Grunt: ~15 minutes
Miranda: ~18 minutes


etc etc.  There was a LOT of dialogue for each character and it wasn't just what they said, but what they did.  All of it was important and all of it was centered around THEM.  That completely blows away the characterization in ME1 imo.

Wtf? Could I get a link to that Tali dialogue? I had no idea she had that much.

Well, I don't mean 50 minutes of just HER talking; I'm more referring to any and all dialogue that occured on that mission (which, granted, all revolved around Tali anyway).  Same goes for the other characters.

[lastpawn]

Vinear wrote...

K. I've played them back to back, twice, and am doing so a third time.

You can only talk to Tali about one of three things, and a fourth thing later about her family...a bit.

Wrex has all of two conversations in ship, and one is about his family armor. 

No. Both Tali and Wrex have far more talks than you suggest they do.

To give you an example, just off the top of my head (I haven't played ME1 in over a year)...

Wrex has unique conversations about (1) his people "Don't compare humans to us", (2) meeting Saren "all the mercs ended up dead," (3) his family, the betrayal, and armor, (4) his adventures as a merc - fighting an asari commando, (5) clearing things up about Vermire, (6) some minor "crazy is good" talk when you steal Normandy.

These are all unique talks that occur once with Wrex.

Tali talks about (1) how great the normandy is, (2) she can have a 1-time argument with you regarding geth, (3) she's having trouble sleeping, tells you more about her people, (4) she's doing better, tells you she needs to bring something back, tells you about her father having a high standing, (5) asks for geth data, (6) expresses gratitude, (7) something minor when you steal Normandy.

Again, these are all unique talks that occur once with Tali.

I won't call you a liar, but I'll say you didn't try very hard.

[fortunesque]

Knoll Argonar wrote...

fortunesque wrote...

Knoll Argonar wrote...


I don't think so. Thane, talking about his life, Mordin about the Genophage, Jack, being fulled by her own mind, Miranda, softening talking about her past, Samara and her daughter (she became more interesting after that mission though), Legion and the Geth dilemma, Tali and the Migrant Fleet... I think there's actually more content there about those characters than Liara in Noveria, really.

Even Garrus, with his actions during his loyalty mission (being very ruthless with that volus, wanting to hurt Harkin if necesary...) says more about himself than during any other convo in ME1.

And I think that's were ME2 wins: characters not only speak about something: they DO something. Mordin goes crazy when he finds that krogan experiments and his student, Tali cries when she finds her father, Samara KILLS her daughter.

That's deeper than Kaidan's past, IMO.

IMO, the idea that Shepard has to *do* something for every squadmate doesn't provide depth, it simply turns the Commander into a shrink or a errand boy.

In fact, it provides a false sense of depth. A character like Kaidan has his past squared away. He isn't distracted by something and is focused on the mission, whereas an ME2 character comes into the roster 'disloyal'- distracted by a problem to the point where they can easily die on the final mission. Instead, he (along with the rest of the ME1 squad) puts aside any personal issues in order to be focused on the task at hand: saving the galaxy.

Me mentioning Kaidan was just an example, and I don't get your point: can't a Drell with perfect memory that's probably going to die worrying about his son, who seems to be becoming exactly what he didn't want to?

Jack and Jacob were a little off, i'd admit, though.

My point was that the idea that every single squadmate has an earth-shattering, completely distracting problem feels contrived. Cleaning up everyone's problems provides like a false sense of depth.

Because Shepard has to do something for every squadmate, it feels like you're a caretaker and not a peer of these people. It is unfortunate.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

MassAffected wrote...

I agree. Personally for me, Garrus' and Miranda's missions were my favorite. I saw the struggle within Garrus, almost felt it. I felt the betrayal that Miranda did when Niket told her he was working for her father. Those missions were MOVING to me and made the second game that much more enjoyable because of the rich cast of characters. Granted it wasn't perfect, and some squadies I didn't take to...but that was bound to happen. The only things I would change is like you said, a member leaving if you ****** them off and squad interaction like in Dragon Age. Outside of that I see the ME2 cast as a lot more developed and engaging compared to the ME1 cast. I still like both games and play them back to back when I make new characters. Oh well, all this is my opinion and as they say "opinions are like ****s, everyone has one".

100% agreed here. Right now, I'm at a high point with ME2- I think it's a terrific game. At the same time, it's success (and the entire series) rests with ME3. # 2 did a great job of setting up the next game. As long as they don't reset your party a third time (which I think is too much even for Bioware to attempt) and keep with the current direction, I'll be fine.

And I also loved Miranda's loyalty mission. It was pretty emotional watching her cry as her sister walked off. It showed she had a deeper layer than just being a heartless wench.

Edit: And Jean, either way I'd still like a link to those conversations. I don't have access to my 360 right now, so any chance to hear a character convo is welcome. =)

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 23 mars 2010 - 01:01 .

[Knoll Argonar]

They're living beings, pal.

[Collider]

fortunesque wrote...
My point was that the idea that every single squadmate has an earth-shattering, completely distracting problem feels contrived. Cleaning up everyone's problems provides like a false sense of depth.

I felt that these missions gave a glimpse into their lives that made them more complex and human. But really, both ME1 and ME2 characters were done well, and as to which game had the best characters, it's all a matter of opinion.

[Onyx Jaguar]

fortunesque wrote...

Knoll Argonar wrote...

fortunesque wrote...

Knoll Argonar wrote...


I don't think so. Thane, talking about his life, Mordin about the Genophage, Jack, being fulled by her own mind, Miranda, softening talking about her past, Samara and her daughter (she became more interesting after that mission though), Legion and the Geth dilemma, Tali and the Migrant Fleet... I think there's actually more content there about those characters than Liara in Noveria, really.

Even Garrus, with his actions during his loyalty mission (being very ruthless with that volus, wanting to hurt Harkin if necesary...) says more about himself than during any other convo in ME1.

And I think that's were ME2 wins: characters not only speak about something: they DO something. Mordin goes crazy when he finds that krogan experiments and his student, Tali cries when she finds her father, Samara KILLS her daughter.

That's deeper than Kaidan's past, IMO.

IMO, the idea that Shepard has to *do* something for every squadmate doesn't provide depth, it simply turns the Commander into a shrink or a errand boy.

In fact, it provides a false sense of depth. A character like Kaidan has his past squared away. He isn't distracted by something and is focused on the mission, whereas an ME2 character comes into the roster 'disloyal'- distracted by a problem to the point where they can easily die on the final mission. Instead, he (along with the rest of the ME1 squad) puts aside any personal issues in order to be focused on the task at hand: saving the galaxy.

Me mentioning Kaidan was just an example, and I don't get your point: can't a Drell with perfect memory that's probably going to die worrying about his son, who seems to be becoming exactly what he didn't want to?

Jack and Jacob were a little off, i'd admit, though.

My point was that the idea that every single squadmate has an earth-shattering, completely distracting problem feels contrived. Cleaning up everyone's problems provides like a false sense of depth.

Because Shepard has to do something for every squadmate, it feels like you're a caretaker and not a peer of these people. It is unfortunate.

You don't have to do those.  This is a game first and they add levels to the game.  Story wise both Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 are quite short if you approach only the plot missions.

[Knoll Argonar]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

MassAffected wrote...

I agree. Personally for me, Garrus' and Miranda's missions were my favorite. I saw the struggle within Garrus, almost felt it. I felt the betrayal that Miranda did when Niket told her he was working for her father. Those missions were MOVING to me and made the second game that much more enjoyable because of the rich cast of characters. Granted it wasn't perfect, and some squadies I didn't take to...but that was bound to happen. The only things I would change is like you said, a member leaving if you ****** them off and squad interaction like in Dragon Age. Outside of that I see the ME2 cast as a lot more developed and engaging compared to the ME1 cast. I still like both games and play them back to back when I make new characters. Oh well, all this is my opinion and as they say "opinions are like ****s, everyone has one".

100% agreed here. Right now, I'm at a high point with ME2- I think it's a terrific game. At the same time, it's success (and the entire series) rests with ME3. # 2 did a great job of setting up the next game. As long as they don't reset your party a third time (which I think is too much even for Bioware to attempt) and keep with the current direction, I'll be fine.

And I also loved Miranda's loyalty mission. It was pretty emotional watching her cry as her sister walked off. It showed she had a deeper layer than just being a heartless wench.

Edit: And Jean, either way I'd still like a link to those conversations. I don't have access to my 360 right now, so any chance to hear a character convo is welcome. =)

Yeah, that's what I feel to. If ME3 follows what ME2 seemed to obviously start (Geth, Quarian, Krogan, Genophage, Cerberus, Alliance, etc.), ME2 will be considered brilliant as a part of the trilogy.

If Bioware chooses to nuke the Normandy again... then it's just a filler-game.

[Badpie]

fortunesque wrote...

Knoll Argonar wrote...


I don't think so. Thane, talking about his life, Mordin about the Genophage, Jack, being fulled by her own mind, Miranda, softening talking about her past, Samara and her daughter (she became more interesting after that mission though), Legion and the Geth dilemma, Tali and the Migrant Fleet... I think there's actually more content there about those characters than Liara in Noveria, really.

Even Garrus, with his actions during his loyalty mission (being very ruthless with that volus, wanting to hurt Harkin if necesary...) says more about himself than during any other convo in ME1.

And I think that's were ME2 wins: characters not only speak about something: they DO something. Mordin goes crazy when he finds that krogan experiments and his student, Tali cries when she finds her father, Samara KILLS her daughter.

That's deeper than Kaidan's past, IMO.

IMO, the idea that Shepard has to *do* something for every squadmate doesn't provide depth, it simply turns the Commander into a shrink or a errand boy.

In fact, it provides a false sense of depth. A character like Kaidan has his past squared away. He isn't distracted by something and is focused on the mission, whereas an ME2 character comes into the roster 'disloyal'- distracted by a problem to the point where they can easily die on the final mission. Instead, he (along with the rest of the ME1 squad) puts aside any personal issues in order to be focused on the task at hand: saving the galaxy.

I agree that it kind of felt like errands.  As much as I like the loyalty quests there was a part of ME that realistically went "really?  We don't have time for this!  Suck it up!"  Because Shepard does nothing but suck it up the entire game.  If you romanced someone from ME1 there's no closure (not that I'm asking for it, just pointing it out).  I mean part of me was thinking Shepard was DEAD.  I'm sure he has issues.  I'm sure there's people he'd like to see, places he'd like to go, closure he'd like to have, things he'd like to deal with, but he has to set that aside.  Obviously this works because he's the hero, but it still made me kind of resentful of everyone's daddy issues.

I mean, like Fort said.  Kaidan didn't bother Shepard with that **** in the first game.   Shepard didn't have to go find Rhana so Kaidan could get "closure."  He didn't have to clear Ashley's granddad's name, etc.

Modifié par Badpie, 23 mars 2010 - 01:07 .

[lastpawn]

fortunesque wrote...
My point was that the idea that every single squadmate has an earth-shattering, completely distracting problem feels contrived. Cleaning up everyone's problems provides like a false sense of depth.

Because Shepard has to do something for every squadmate, it feels like you're a caretaker and not a peer of these people. It is unfortunate.

This is a good point that is unfortunately too often glossed over. When you do it for every single character, you can't but help feel like you're meta-gaming it, and meta-gaming takes away from the real gaming.

[Onyx Jaguar]

[fortunesque]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

fortunesque wrote...


My point was that the idea that every single squadmate has an earth-shattering, completely distracting problem feels contrived. Cleaning up everyone's problems provides like a false sense of depth.

Because Shepard has to do something for every squadmate, it feels like you're a caretaker and not a peer of these people. It is unfortunate.

You don't have to do those.  This is a game first and they add levels to the game.  Story wise both Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 are quite short if you approach only the plot missions.

If I want to have a satisfying conclusion, then yes, I have to do them all for each character or face the consequences of them being distracted to the point where people will die.