-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Mass Effect 2 |OT|
- Thread starter Skilotonn
- Start date
- Status
Patryn said:
It's kinda funny that in a game that was advertised as "the suicide mission" and where that sentence was repeated over and over throughout the game, in the end your entire team can survive the so-called "suicide mission" if you play the game right (that is: do all important missions that the game has to offer and don't listen to Miranda during the final mission :lol). Yet, at the same time, Mass Effect 1 had a real suicide mission, that came out of nowhere (the moment I've heard that I have to let one of my people with the Aegohr Team I was really afraid of losing him/her) and the sacrifice was inevitable - you just had to make the choice and leave one your men to die. It was especially awful on my first playthrough when Ashley killed Wrex (I had no idea that you could save him back then
).Leckan said:
That is not what I wanted to hear.
There's a chance I have no clue what you're talking about (the only class I've touched in both ME 1 & 2 is infiltrator), but if you are speaking of experience points being spent on an assault rifle upgrade instead of a sniper rifle upgrade, you can re-allocate all spent experience points at the research terminal (costs 2500 element zero).
harriet the spy
Member
VaLiancY said:
This is a great article, echoed by others on the thread. I still love ME2 to bits, but it's true that I'd remember for it for longer if I had had to
lose half of my team. including tali.
lorddarkflare
Banned
harriet the spy said:
Agreed.
Yeah, the first one had its huge flaws (especially on xbox) but it was easy to forgive them. The second one os definitely better, I miss the huge long missions from the first one though. According to PC gamer (or blog?) interview they made them shorter on purpose, the decision was based on the telemetrics data and feedback. But I still remember my shock when I got to Noveria just to browse some stores (it was my first Bioware game, so I didn't know what to expect) and ended up doing 5-hour quest which I wasn't able to put down.
Damn, I encountered an extremely minor glitch, I hate to nitpick, but the Ish side quest isn't greyed out in my Journal screen. It says it's completed, but the complete message is not checkmarked and the mission is lingering in the top part of my side quests list.
Ish is the guy that wanted me to scoop up some dirt on Aria (he is on Omega). I collected two packages for him and then approached Ish. Instead of giving him the packages I convinced him to just give it up, so as to avoid incurring the wrath of Aria. I think that messed up the journal screen. Oh well, like I said, a very minor thing.
Also, I have just one more cluster to 100% then I can consider my veteran run-through officially completed. I think I'm going to move on to a different game before I try to do insanity runs in Mass Effect 2 (and Mass Effect 1).
So... Borderlands, Assassin's Creed games, Dead Space, Bayonetta, or Force Unleashed?
Ish is the guy that wanted me to scoop up some dirt on Aria (he is on Omega). I collected two packages for him and then approached Ish. Instead of giving him the packages I convinced him to just give it up, so as to avoid incurring the wrath of Aria. I think that messed up the journal screen. Oh well, like I said, a very minor thing.
Also, I have just one more cluster to 100% then I can consider my veteran run-through officially completed. I think I'm going to move on to a different game before I try to do insanity runs in Mass Effect 2 (and Mass Effect 1).
So... Borderlands, Assassin's Creed games, Dead Space, Bayonetta, or Force Unleashed?
Known annoying bug. Are you using the newest patch?
I haven't played the game in a while. I'm going to wait for 1 more piece of DLC then start another run.
http://www.cerberusdailynews.com/
Seems like it will be story pertinent.
I haven't played the game in a while. I'm going to wait for 1 more piece of DLC then start another run.
http://www.cerberusdailynews.com/
Seems like it will be story pertinent.
I just finished this last night for the first time and I can say with certainty that I enjoyed the first game a lot more.
Don't get me wrong, the production values and art direction in ME2 are awe-inspiring and for the most part, Bioware did a great job of fixing issues the original had; but unfortunately, the whole experience felt watered-down for me. The combat was fun at the beginning, but by the end, encounters had become so routine that there was very little challenge. I don't know if this is a fair criticism though, because I'd probably be praising this combat system if I went back and played through ME1.
The removal of a lot of the RPG elements was a big bummer, too, but that's been talked about ad nauseam, so I won't go any further with that.
Now my biggest issue with the game was the main story. It wasn't bad by any means, but paled in comparison to the story in ME1. It was really cool in the first game when you started piecing together all of Saren's activities (Mu Relay, Conduit, etc.) and the true nature of the reapers was revealed. ME2's plot, while still pretty cool seemed so straight-forward by comparison (get a team together and go get those Collectors!).
In ME2 there were the main story missions, which were great and I really enjoyed them, but I honestly spent 60+% of my game time doing the recruiting and loyalty side-missions for my crew. Those weren't bad, but they did very little to advance or expand the main story and usually only served as a means of fleshing out the characters (most of whom I didn't particularly care about) a bit more. This really caused the main story, arguably the most important part of a Bioware game, to feel really disjointed.
What I loved about ME1 so much is that the experience felt a lot more directed and there would almost always be a reason you'd be going somewhere that was pertinent to the story. You'd also be picking up your crew mates as you progressed through these missions which helped you stay focused on the plot. That helped me become so much more immersed and interested in the story and the universe I was in.
I had an unusual amount of love for the first game, so maybe I had unrealistic expectations for how this game was going to play out. Bioware still did a great job and ME3 will be a day-one purchase for me, no question. I just felt that the sequel didn't have quite the impact on me that the original did.
Don't get me wrong, the production values and art direction in ME2 are awe-inspiring and for the most part, Bioware did a great job of fixing issues the original had; but unfortunately, the whole experience felt watered-down for me. The combat was fun at the beginning, but by the end, encounters had become so routine that there was very little challenge. I don't know if this is a fair criticism though, because I'd probably be praising this combat system if I went back and played through ME1.
The removal of a lot of the RPG elements was a big bummer, too, but that's been talked about ad nauseam, so I won't go any further with that.
Now my biggest issue with the game was the main story. It wasn't bad by any means, but paled in comparison to the story in ME1. It was really cool in the first game when you started piecing together all of Saren's activities (Mu Relay, Conduit, etc.) and the true nature of the reapers was revealed. ME2's plot, while still pretty cool seemed so straight-forward by comparison (get a team together and go get those Collectors!).
In ME2 there were the main story missions, which were great and I really enjoyed them, but I honestly spent 60+% of my game time doing the recruiting and loyalty side-missions for my crew. Those weren't bad, but they did very little to advance or expand the main story and usually only served as a means of fleshing out the characters (most of whom I didn't particularly care about) a bit more. This really caused the main story, arguably the most important part of a Bioware game, to feel really disjointed.
What I loved about ME1 so much is that the experience felt a lot more directed and there would almost always be a reason you'd be going somewhere that was pertinent to the story. You'd also be picking up your crew mates as you progressed through these missions which helped you stay focused on the plot. That helped me become so much more immersed and interested in the story and the universe I was in.
I had an unusual amount of love for the first game, so maybe I had unrealistic expectations for how this game was going to play out. Bioware still did a great job and ME3 will be a day-one purchase for me, no question. I just felt that the sequel didn't have quite the impact on me that the original did.
Truant said:
I don't know. Mass Effect 2 doesn't really feel like ANY act in a story. There's very little setup, no real upping of the stakes, and little to no feeling of accomplishment or overcoming a major obstacle.
What it DOES feel like is an expansion pack or large-scale DLC.
Confidence Man
Member
It's basically a big sidequest. At the end you're right back where you started with the overall plot not having moved forward an inch.
Reapers are still coming
We still don't know why they want to wipe everyone out
We still don't have a clue how to stop them
Council still doesn't believe anything
All our new companions are disposable, hence cannot have any serious role in ME3
We still don't know why they want to wipe everyone out
We still don't have a clue how to stop them
Council still doesn't believe anything
All our new companions are disposable, hence cannot have any serious role in ME3
Patryn said:
My thoughts exactly. There was no single antagonist that your efforts were directed towards, instead it was just this group that you really knew very little about, except that they were bad, so in the end your victory over them didn't really feel all that meaningful.
I guess maybe there was upping of the stakes at the very end -
looked like the destruction of the Collector base riled up the Reapers(?). Actually, I don't even know.
Confidence Man said:
Truth.
Wiggum2007
Junior Member
Confidence Man said:
Yeah, I think ME1 was about as bare as ME2 when it comes to the main storyline, content-wise. The main difference was that ME1's story actually contributed to the overall story arc while ME2 left us off right where we were at the end of the first game.
Wiggum2007 said:
But you forget that ME1 also had the task of setting up this new world and universe, which I thought it did quite well, for the most part. That's the point of the first part of a trilogy: Setting up the toys, explaining what is what.
The second part of a trilogy is supposed to be about upping the stakes, sending the protagonist to their lowest point and establishing an overwhelming obstacle to be overcome. ME2 came to a table already set with players just waiting to be positioned, without the need to spend time carefully explaining everything. And then it proceeded to do nothing. So what's its excuse?
ME2 made the very strange choice of essentially starting over, with a new dude in charge, a new ship, and a mostly new crew. The consequence of allowing you to kill a possible three main characters in ME1, which was pretty stupid honestly. They should have stuck with building on the crew and organization that they had.Patryn said:
I'll still play ME3, but I'm not expecting much from the story.
Wiggum2007
Junior Member
Patryn said:
Oh I agree. I think ME1 didn't have a whole lot there main storyline-wise, much of the Conduit search just seemed like filler and it didn't get really interesting until the final sections of the game. What I'm trying to say is that despite this, ME1 at least served an important part to the overall trilogy and set the stage for further escalation of the story. While ME2 felt like it had about as much "there" as ME1's main quest line, it didn't really go anywhere with it and ultimately didn't seem to contribute any really progress to the overall trilogy's story arc.
i.e., near the end of ME1 we find out most Prothean relay technology is actually Reaper, and the Citadel is actually a Mass Relay linking to the Reapers in dark space. Holy crap, this is a huge deal and something needs to be done to stop it! Then in ME2, we finally reach the big conclusion at the Collector Base and... we get a clumsy reveal of the Reapers' reproduction process. Uh ok, neat. Why does this matter?
Aaron said:
It wasn't starting over that was the misstep. It was making recruiting separate from the main storyline and then making that the major focus of > 75 percent of the game.
The first game in a trilogy could have gotten away with that as it helps in establishing a world, but it's horribly misplaced in the second game, which should be almost completely concerned with advancing the storyline.
Wiggum2007 said:
There's a difference between "non-existent" and "non-interesting." You may have found the conduit stuff boring, but, as you point out, it advanced the main storyline.
And I still disagree that they had the same amount of main storyline. I still feel like ME2 had a lot thinner main storyline. After all, I explained ME2's plot in three sentences. You'd need at least a paragraph or two for ME1.
Wiggum2007
Junior Member
Patryn said:
I sure hope ME3 is completely dedicated to the main storyline, but with the possibility of every crew member dying in ME2, I get the feeling we're going to have to go through all of that recruiting again. Urgh.
Patryn said:
I don't really agree with that. Both ME1 and ME2 are very "slow" in how they advance the overall arc. The main difference to me is that ME1 had a lot more work to do in setting up the world, so a lot of events feel more relevant as you spend a lot of time learning how things work together. Both games only have about 5 missions that are pertinent to their actual "main plot" arcs and the rest of the time is spent fleshing out characters or tangents to the main theme.
In the first game, you learn very little about the Reapers or the Protheans, because of Saren's interactions with Sovereign and the inclusion of the Geth. It's a more dramatic sequence because you have an antagonist who brings the threat to the Citadel and council space, so most of your time is spent working counter to his actions.
The second game just takes the idea and flips the course of action over to the protagonist - your time is spent basically filling Saren's role from the first game. There is not necessarily a sense of galactic doom impending because you don't learn about the Collectors' actions until later in the game. However, you do pick up a little more relevant information in the second game about the Reapers through the Collectors. We discover the Reaper cycle in the first game but almost nothing about the specifics or anything directly about the fate of the Protheans, so I think it was a proper decision to explore the Protheans because it directly affects Humans in the upcoming cycle. The whole point of the second game is to highlight the fact that Humans are to take the role of the Protheans in this cycle, with the resulting goal being to interrupt the cycle in a way the Protheans could not (preventing the assimilation of their race before the Reaper incursion).
The third game's role is pretty obvious - discover the cycle, interrupt the cycle, end the cycle. The only unknown will really be whether the galaxy has to defend against a Reaper force that finds another way out of dark space or whether Shepard finds a way to assault the Reapers before they can return to the galaxy. My guess is that it will play similarly to Dragon Age, where the incursion begins and they fight in a moving front line with the Reapers slowly destroying sections of the galaxy before the conclusion.
The second game just takes the idea and flips the course of action over to the protagonist - your time is spent basically filling Saren's role from the first game. There is not necessarily a sense of galactic doom impending because you don't learn about the Collectors' actions until later in the game. However, you do pick up a little more relevant information in the second game about the Reapers through the Collectors. We discover the Reaper cycle in the first game but almost nothing about the specifics or anything directly about the fate of the Protheans, so I think it was a proper decision to explore the Protheans because it directly affects Humans in the upcoming cycle. The whole point of the second game is to highlight the fact that Humans are to take the role of the Protheans in this cycle, with the resulting goal being to interrupt the cycle in a way the Protheans could not (preventing the assimilation of their race before the Reaper incursion).
The third game's role is pretty obvious - discover the cycle, interrupt the cycle, end the cycle. The only unknown will really be whether the galaxy has to defend against a Reaper force that finds another way out of dark space or whether Shepard finds a way to assault the Reapers before they can return to the galaxy. My guess is that it will play similarly to Dragon Age, where the incursion begins and they fight in a moving front line with the Reapers slowly destroying sections of the galaxy before the conclusion.
I suppose I just don't see a good way for them to have advanced the fight against the Reapers with them not being an active presence in the Milky Way. The current means for them to affect the galaxy in the second game are the primary antagonists of the second game, so it seemed appropriate to me.
Wallach said:
Except that the second game is answering a question that was already answered in the first game.
You seem to be indicating that the point of ME2 was to show what happened to the Protheans. Which wasn't necessarily, because an answer was provided in the first game: They were wiped out. At the same time, it's draining any and all dramatic tension out of the series.
And you say that humans were to take the place of the Protheans, except that we already knew they were coming to take us out. Sure, we learn they twist some of the races into slaves or whatever, but that seems a silly concept to devote an entire game to. It doesn't really add anything to the stakes or danger that the universe was facing. Again, it kills dramatic tension.
You end the first game all pumped up to fight the Reapers and then....nothing, pretty much. If, instead of showing us that the Collectors are creating a new Reaper it was revealed that they were creating a way for the Reapers to get to our galaxy a lot faster, it would have worked a lot better. That creates tension! As it is, the Reapers should still be hundreds of years away in dark space. Sure, there could be a throwaway explanation for why they're closer than they should be in ME3, but it seems ridiculous that they didn't base the plot for ME2 off speeding this up.
As has been said, we end ME2 at the exact same spot we ended ME1: The Reapers are coming at exactly the same time they were coming in ME1 and we don't know how to stop them! The only way that ME2 will even matter is if your party members play prominent roles in ME3, and I find that unlikely given the fact that any of them could be dead.
I completely foresee a situation where you could jump from ME1 to ME3 and not lose anything. That's how ME2 falters.
And you say that humans were to take the place of the Protheans, except that we already knew they were coming to take us out. Sure, we learn they twist some of the races into slaves or whatever, but that seems a silly concept to devote an entire game to. It doesn't really add anything to the stakes or danger that the universe was facing. Again, it kills dramatic tension.
You end the first game all pumped up to fight the Reapers and then....nothing, pretty much. If, instead of showing us that the Collectors are creating a new Reaper it was revealed that they were creating a way for the Reapers to get to our galaxy a lot faster, it would have worked a lot better. That creates tension! As it is, the Reapers should still be hundreds of years away in dark space. Sure, there could be a throwaway explanation for why they're closer than they should be in ME3, but it seems ridiculous that they didn't base the plot for ME2 off speeding this up.
As has been said, we end ME2 at the exact same spot we ended ME1: The Reapers are coming at exactly the same time they were coming in ME1 and we don't know how to stop them! The only way that ME2 will even matter is if your party members play prominent roles in ME3, and I find that unlikely given the fact that any of them could be dead.
I completely foresee a situation where you could jump from ME1 to ME3 and not lose anything. That's how ME2 falters.
Basically, to sum up my feelings on Mass Effect 2: Taken in isolation, by itself, it's a wonderful game that's fun to play. As part of the Mass Effect trilogy, it's an abject failure.
Patryn said:
Well, we really didn't learn much about the Protheans in the first game, which was my point. We assumed that they were wiped out, but we only had the story of what happened on Ilos, which was not the actual fate of the Prothean race.
I get what you're saying about where we left off with the Reapers, but the problem was that Sovereign was the only Reaper they left active outside of dark space. With Sovereign gone, there was no observable link between the remaining Reapers and the fate of the galaxy, which was the role served by the Collectors in the second game.
The whole "speeding up" thing is the purpose of ME2. Without Sovereign, the Reapers needed a way to re-establish a direct link within the galaxy, and thus the abduction of human colonies to birth a new Reaper via the Protheans in the galactic core. With that destroyed, the Reapers are again left with seemingly no options for re-entering the Milky Way to finish the current cycle (which for ME3 will probably have something to do with Haelstrom's sun).
I don't think it's quite right to say you will be able to jump from ME1 -> ME3 because the story of the Geth is not fleshed out until ME2, and it's obvious they are going to play a significant role in the final game. Without ME2 you wouldn't have any understanding of why they went from being Saren's allies to opposing the Reapers in ME3. It also will set up a means for the player to participate in the final game with the option of not bearing allegiance with the Alliance, which I think is a good thing since the finale will not have a canonical ending.
I get what you're saying about where we left off with the Reapers, but the problem was that Sovereign was the only Reaper they left active outside of dark space. With Sovereign gone, there was no observable link between the remaining Reapers and the fate of the galaxy, which was the role served by the Collectors in the second game.
The whole "speeding up" thing is the purpose of ME2. Without Sovereign, the Reapers needed a way to re-establish a direct link within the galaxy, and thus the abduction of human colonies to birth a new Reaper via the Protheans in the galactic core. With that destroyed, the Reapers are again left with seemingly no options for re-entering the Milky Way to finish the current cycle (which for ME3 will probably have something to do with Haelstrom's sun).
I don't think it's quite right to say you will be able to jump from ME1 -> ME3 because the story of the Geth is not fleshed out until ME2, and it's obvious they are going to play a significant role in the final game. Without ME2 you wouldn't have any understanding of why they went from being Saren's allies to opposing the Reapers in ME3. It also will set up a means for the player to participate in the final game with the option of not bearing allegiance with the Alliance, which I think is a good thing since the finale will not have a canonical ending.
Wallach said:
You're assuming the Geth will play a major role in ME3. Since it's entirely possible to completely avoid Legion (in fact, one reviewer actually thought Legion was a hidden character!), I'm not expecting the "normal" Geth to play a large role in ME3. If I'm wrong, I'm shout mea culpas to the high heavens. It's just that ME2 has reduced my faith in Bioware giving the results of your choices any weight.
And if the "new" Reaper was supposed to be an imminent threat, for me it failed miserably. I LAUGHED when I saw it. I didn't see it as ominous in the least. And since you learn about it and kill it in a span of ten minutes, that doesn't seem to be a large and looming challenge.
Which again brings me back to my point. We ARE right back to where we were at the end of ME1: The Reapers still far away. They should have used this game to close the distance, and make them an imminent threat for ME3. Now time will have to be spent explaining why Shepard is so worried when it could be hundreds of years before they arrive.
And if the "new" Reaper was supposed to be an imminent threat, for me it failed miserably. I LAUGHED when I saw it. I didn't see it as ominous in the least. And since you learn about it and kill it in a span of ten minutes, that doesn't seem to be a large and looming challenge.
Which again brings me back to my point. We ARE right back to where we were at the end of ME1: The Reapers still far away. They should have used this game to close the distance, and make them an imminent threat for ME3. Now time will have to be spent explaining why Shepard is so worried when it could be hundreds of years before they arrive.
Patryn said:
Well, I think one way or the other the Geth are going to play a role in ME3 because they are going to have to resolve the Quarian situation with them thinking of going to war to reclaim their homeworld space.
More importantly, the largest unresolved problem in ME2 is directly involved with Geth space - Haestrom's sun (which is what the Illusive Man is monitoring in the background throughout the game). I think that pretty much guarantees Geth involvement with the main plot of the final game.
I do agree that the revelation of the new Reaper should have come earlier; it happens too fast to carry proper weight through the finale of the game. Something about that should have been more directly alluded to earlier, maybe on the Collector ship mission or the Reaper IFF. It would have worked better to increase the understanding of urgency in stopping the harvesting of human colonies (and probably given players more context for the urgency of saving your crew after their abduction).
More importantly, the largest unresolved problem in ME2 is directly involved with Geth space - Haestrom's sun (which is what the Illusive Man is monitoring in the background throughout the game). I think that pretty much guarantees Geth involvement with the main plot of the final game.
I do agree that the revelation of the new Reaper should have come earlier; it happens too fast to carry proper weight through the finale of the game. Something about that should have been more directly alluded to earlier, maybe on the Collector ship mission or the Reaper IFF. It would have worked better to increase the understanding of urgency in stopping the harvesting of human colonies (and probably given players more context for the urgency of saving your crew after their abduction).
Patryn said:
You can pretty much boil ME1's main plot down in the same way. And it doesn't have 20-25 hours worth of main plot quality recruitment missions backing it up either. But I guess those don't count if you don't arbitrarily waltz through 4 totally non-linear but there's a recommended order main quest locations and defeat the big bad at the end while blowing up the Starforge/Reaper/Whatever, but not before gaining the aid of the ancient lost super race, like in several other Bioware games. ME2 honestly gave me hope for the future since it strayed rather heavily from the usual formula.
That's revisionist bullshit. Saren was the core of ME1. It was his story more than Sheppard's. You only learn about the
near the end. ME1 managed to weave that into the story of building up your crew to create a single clear narrative. ME2 is garbage by comparison, a pile of cliched recruitment vignettes that feel like they were developed with a madlibs pad in hand, desperately joined by a paltry number of plot missions, which in the end don't accomplish much of anything. Even as a stand alone, it's weak compared to the original. As something meant to build on ME1, it's shit.
reapers
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Aaron said:
The Reapers become part of the plot of Mass Effect 1 before you even leave the citadel. They were not fully revealed until later, but they were implied waaay earlier than people seem to remember.
EDIT: In fact, before you leave the citadel you know Saren is attempting to bring about the return of a sentient machine race called the "Reapers".
They're implied at the end of the first mission, but they don't matter much until the end. You even say yourself in 'Saren is attempting.' He's the villain and focus. The reapers remain secondary to him until near the end of the game. He's involved in pretty much every mess you deal with in ME1, from Liara's crazy moma to the possessing plant thing. He brings the whole story of ME1 together, and makes it work. ME2 has nothing like that.EatChildren said:
elrechazado
Banned
This. I'd compare it more to the manatee family guy writers from that one south park episode though.Aaron said:
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Aaron said:
I know. 'Twas just saying.
ElectricBlue187
Member
Aaron said:
I agree with your points but I still enjoyed ME2 more than ME1. The overarching plot has never been the "point" of Mass Effect. It's all about the setting, the dialog and interesting character interactions. I do sure wish there was a plot better than "evil computers from outer space built everything and now wants to kill everything again for no reason whatsoever" but at least it works just well enough to get us to the next interesting character or setting.
After several playthroughs, I find Saren severely lacking as a villain. You see him a bit early on, but never have any sort of meaningful contact with him besides the council conversation. Shepard's barely interacted with the guy and he treats him as if he were his mortal enemy. He goes to Feros and gets a thing. You never see him. He sends someone to Noveria to get the other key critical plot item. You never see him. Then you get some interaction near the end on Virmire and the endgame. But it doesn't help that his Virmire and Citadel conversations are almost exactly the same, except Bioware enabled the "kill yourself" switch for the latter. Sovereign was more compelling as he at least had an air of mystery about him, though I like to think that midway through the conversation between him and Shepard he realized how much he was fucking up by explaining his master plan so he started bullshitting with vague statements like we are legion whenever Shepard asked a question.
Hopefully ME2 is the beginning of a trend and not the exception, since Bioware's main writing strength is in characters and not in establishing any sort of grandiose narrative. They suck at writing dialogue choices too, which Mass Effect's main character's voice acting seems to circumvent a bit since the sentences have to sound like things an actual person would say when they're spoken.
Hopefully ME2 is the beginning of a trend and not the exception, since Bioware's main writing strength is in characters and not in establishing any sort of grandiose narrative. They suck at writing dialogue choices too, which Mass Effect's main character's voice acting seems to circumvent a bit since the sentences have to sound like things an actual person would say when they're spoken.
Manos: The Hans of Fate
Banned
Bastards, why did this thread need to get bumped! Now I'm going to get a used copy of ME2 (since I had a new one with the Cerberus code already inputted), because playing Alpha Protocol got me thinking of how much I wanted to play this again (and Dragon Age plus now getting Awakenings) since all the DLC is now out.
Damn you!!!!
Damn you!!!!
Gestahl said:
But then ME2 makes these interesting characters and fails to utilize them at all. If ME2 had stuff like DA's banter points (well, more than the TWO they had), then I could see the strength of the characters. As it is, for most of the game they stand around like mute statues.
â Narayan
Member
The lack of overall plot progression in ME2 makes me wonder if BioWare really plans on making the third game the last one. I imagine they'll release an expansion pack for ME2 rather than immediately start on ME3. We'll see, I guess.
Overall though, I found ME2 to be superior to ME1 in every way.
Overall though, I found ME2 to be superior to ME1 in every way.
I think it'll be the last of this console generation, it will conclude with an epic battle against the Reapers but as long as the ME brand is popular, I'm sure that someone will be making them, even if it's not Bioware.
I believe that they announced that they were already getting started with work on ME3, I'm ready whenever they are but I still really want a meaty expansion for 2.
- Status