WrenchNinja
Member
A device full of a person's memories. It's an implant.What is grey box? I dont have Kasumi DLC.
A device full of a person's memories. It's an implant.What is grey box? I dont have Kasumi DLC.
Anyone else go the opposite of what their alignment was for the ending of ME2? I was max paragon my last time through and ended up keeping the base intact because I'm just too curious as to what it could do in 3.
Alignment was much more nebulous in 2 than in 1. I did a full Renegade playthrough, and even then I would sometimes get 1 or 2 paragon points when making a decision.
They seemed to make it so that you got a little of both points for each decision, unless you went full Paragon.
What is grey box? I dont have Kasumi DLC.
I bought back some time ago M1+2. Tried 1 so far. I went into the game... not good. Go back and forth making chores. My friend kept saying: The argument is amazing so it makes up for these flaws etc.... But when the council removed the Specter status of the bad dude based on a recording I show them. That was the point where I said: "really?"
You were just telling me that I wouldn't be able to lay a finger on him because he's a veteran, very respected Specter. Suddenly I come up with a recording and without a second thought or any kind of sound investigation they remove his status?
So, I'd like someone to encourage me to continue playing it because... well, that broke it for me. Guess my friend hyped it up too much for me.
A device full of a person's memories. It's an implant.
You'll either get into the lore, or you wont. If you're willing to quit that early on then pack it up and don't bother, as if little things like that are going to bother you then I cant fathom how you'll get through everything that follows.
Yeah, my concern, as I added up:
"In other words, I understand the game needed to make an introduction of the power of the villain, but they forced it in such a small gap that it didn't feel right at all. "
I just want to know if this happens often in the storyline, crammed with almost bipolar situations, making small storylines that go from black to white in short spans.
If from this point on it develops on a big deep storyline, i'll give it a try.
So my character import problem mentioned on the last page fixed itself after I deleted the character and restarted. That was weird.
I bought back some time ago M1+2. Tried 1 so far. I went into the game... not good. Go back and forth making chores. My friend kept saying: The argument is amazing so it makes up for these flaws etc.... But when the council removed the Specter status of the bad dude based on a recording I show them. That was the point where I said: "really?"
You were just telling me that I wouldn't be able to lay a finger on him because he's a veteran, very respected Specter. Suddenly I come up with a recording and without a second thought or any kind of sound investigation they remove his status?
So, I'd like someone to encourage me to continue playing it because... well, that broke it for me. Guess my friend hyped it up too much for me.
In other words, I understand the game needed to make an introduction of the power of the villain, but they forced it in such a small gap that it didn't feel right at all.
What is grey box? I dont have Kasumi DLC.
If small questions like that annoy you, how do you even play games?
Damn, I get a BSOD each and every time I try to install Shadow Broker. Looks like I'm stuck with vanilla ME2 for this playthrough.
I bought back some time ago M1+2. Tried 1 so far. I went into the game... not good. Go back and forth making chores. My friend kept saying: The argument is amazing so it makes up for these flaws etc.... But when the council removed the Specter status of the bad dude based on a recording I show them. That was the point where I said: "really?"
You were just telling me that I wouldn't be able to lay a finger on him because he's a veteran, very respected Specter. Suddenly I come up with a recording and without a second thought or any kind of sound investigation they remove his status?
So, I'd like someone to encourage me to continue playing it because... well, that broke it for me. Guess my friend hyped it up too much for me.
In other words, I understand the game needed to make an introduction of the power of the villain, but they forced it in such a small gap that it didn't feel right at all.
Thanks for info, quite interesting. What DLC are worthy? I know that Shadow Broker is, Kasumi looks like its worth buying, any others?A device that stores memory data. In the quest you help Kasumi retrieve the greybox of Keiji, her former partner and lover. Kasumi wants it because it is a physical, hard copy of all the memories they shared, and Keiji had the greybox heavily encrypted to only respond and unlock to Kasumi's usage.
However, once you get it Kasumi discovers that Keiji has left a message that he wants the greybox deleted, as it contains sensitive information that could seriously implicate the Alliance and damage relationships with the citadel. When he says this, it shows still images of Sovereign, though never elaborates on what, exactly, that information is.
So, at the end of the quest, you're left with the option of keeping the data or deleting it.
Thanks for info, quite interesting. What DLC are worthy? I know that Shadow Broker is, Kasumi looks like its worth buying, any others?
True. Probably my only real complaint with 2 was the alignment system. I like to respond how I would respond, paragon with civilians and crew members, renegade with mercs and other enemies, but in ME2 you had to have max of one stat in order to keep everyone loyal.
Kasumi's value is directly proportional to how much you use her. Her mission is great, but its very short. You're not just paying for it, but also her usage as a squadmate, so if you don't intend to use her for other quests her value drops.
Overlord is great. The longest of all the DLC, some great set pieces and plenty of variety. A good plot too. It and Shadow Broker are the meatiest of the DLC.
Arrival is a bit poopy.
I mostly did too but it came right down to the wire to keep everyone loyal. I was full paragon/a little less than half renegade by the end. I would always make a point of going one or the other though and avoided neutral responses most of the time.I always responded the way I'd respond, and ended with enough paragon to keep everyone loyal. Apparently most people just go pure paragon/pure renegade, but I can't imagine playing that way and still enjoying the game. It does kind of suck that key points require a certain paragon/renegade threshold, though; I don't blame people for feeling like they need to mix/max their conversation responses.
(In general, I use paragon responses for most things, neutral responses with people I dislike or in situations I'm unsure about, and renegade responses when someone is rude to me or really annoys me.)
Man, anyone else in here keep almost having a heart attack whenever they see they're about to click on the 2 new character spoiler thread?
o.o I didn't even realize there was one. Thanks for the heads up! I'm really grateful EC is keeping a tab on all the spoiler shit though.
Man, anyone else in here keep almost having a heart attack whenever they see they're about to click on the 2 new character spoiler thread?
I wont leave this thread ever again! *hides*That thread has been around for about a week too and it scares me every time.
Kasumi's value is directly proportional to how much you use her. Her mission is great, but its very short. You're not just paying for it, but also her usage as a squadmate, so if you don't intend to use her for other quests her value drops.
Overlord is great. The longest of all the DLC, some great set pieces and plenty of variety. A good plot too. It and Shadow Broker are the meatiest of the DLC.
Arrival is a bit poopy.
I bought all quest DLC and I think the tension and end of Arrival was pretty damn solid. Now if you are referring to everything else(which I assume you are) then yea it was dog shit. Playing without squad mates was a horrible decision.
The last moments of Arrival are definitely the best part, both the intensity and the visual set piece. But I hated the premise. It seemed like really cheap, tacky writing to basically go "oh by the way the Reapers will be here in a couple of days lolol", out of nowhere. The Batarian base was a cool idea, but mechanically dull and uninteresting. It just felt really weak to me, lacking the production values and tight design of the other three DLC missions.
I'm tempted to do a new run of ME1 and 2 before 3, but then I remember that I dislike a good portion of ME1.
Yeah, I'm pretty pissed off. Hope I'll be able to get a summary/make choices regarding Liara at the beginning of ME3.Damn, that blows. Best DLC ever and adds a lot to the story.
Man, Mass Effect has such a strong opener. Really gets the hooks in with the narrative, the Citadel is great and if you go get Liara first like I have then you have all of the squad members before you even touch the real meat of the game. Such a great design. It baffles me why Bioware decided to make 2 just about the squad recruitment.
It was supposed to be a character piece, a story of a group of people and what drives them. I don't really think BioWare succeeded, but that was why it was different. And honestly, as much as I prefer Mass Effect's narrative and pacing by a considerable margin, the actual squadmates were pretty undeveloped in comparison to Mass Effect 2. Characters like Tali and Garrus in particular receive significantly greater exposition and character development. In the first game Tali really wasn't anything more than an information terminal for all things Geth/Quarian, and Garrus was just angsty about everything.
Out of the aliens, Wrex was really the only one who gave proper insight into his species history and how he felt about things.
It was supposed to be a character piece, a story of a group of people and what drives them. I don't really think BioWare succeeded, but that was why it was different. And honestly, as much as I prefer Mass Effect's narrative and pacing by a considerable margin, the actual squadmates were pretty undeveloped in comparison to Mass Effect 2. Characters like Tali and Garrus in particular receive significantly greater exposition and character development. In the first game Tali really wasn't anything more than an information terminal for all things Geth/Quarian, and Garrus was just angsty about everything.
Out of the aliens, Wrex was really the only one who gave proper insight into his species history and how he felt about things.
Started with a new character today, i realised i hadn't had a single playtrough where kaiden lives.
Music at the start felt like coming home, so good.
I think the problem with making it a character piece was that it completely failed to drive the narrative. It's a lot like Starcraft II's mission structure. It didn't provide a sense of urgency or desperation that would have created a compelling atmosphere. Also, it didn't provide the same sense of satisfaction that missions in the first game did. Completing planets in Mass Effect felt much like chapters in a story (particularly Feros and Noveria), while the character stories in ME2 felt more like tasks.
This is true, but I'll take underdeveloped squad mates in a brilliantly told story, rather than fleshed out squad mates in a non-existent story. They dropped the ball so hilariously bad in pushing forward the narrative.
I like ME2's plot conceptually, even down to what they actually put in there. I think it could have worked very well, especially as a middle game in a trilogy. Had I made the game I would have kept the core premise, but culled three or four of the squad mates, replaced their missions with new core story missions for greater development and extended narrative, and opened up the recruitment to make everyone theoretically available in any order. Mass Effect 2 simply seemed to be lacking that basic, core narrative that tied everything together.
I still think the concept is salvageable. I don't consider Mass Effect isn't some unachievable narrative genius, and think Mass Effect 3 can do the same thing over again as long as it just keeps fucking consistent with its themes and develops the core plot over an entire game, not rushing it all to conclusion towards the end.
It wont work as a stand alone game though, and I think that's the inevitable downside of making any trilogy. Mass Effect does indeed work as a stand alone game, and I think this was very deliberate as, had it completely tanked, BioWare would have been left in a lurch.
I wait for the Turian to be an asshole then I disconnect.I love being a dick to the council in ME1. Just cut out the second they try to lecture me, then the next time
Council: Are you actually going to listen or are you going to disconnect
~Disconnect~
Joker: Never gets old.
I still think the concept is salvageable. I don't consider Mass Effect isn't some unachievable narrative genius, and think Mass Effect 3 can do the same thing over again as long as it just keeps fucking consistent with its themes and develops the core plot over an entire game, not rushing it all to conclusion towards the end.
but who would have got the axe, they're all so lovable
(besides Jacobs and Jack)
Jack could easily be removed. I don't dislike Zaeed, but his presence feels very inconsequential, so cut him. Samara is boring, and there are already several more interesting Asari that play central roles in the story. I haven't played the DLC with Kasumi yet, so I have no idea if she should stay or not.
Mordin, Garrus, Thane, Tali and Legion are the most interesting for me, while Miranda and Jacob seem sort of necessary in terms of starting off the story and fleshing out Cerberus. Grunt is pretty bland, but he's at least useful as a jumping off point for exploring Krogan culture.
but who would have got the axe, they're all so lovable
(besides Jacobs and Jack)