Well, completely changing the nature of an established organization for the sequel isn't exactly "minute." Neither is Shep being forced to act out of character by the plot.Sparrow said:
What?s Wrong with Mass Effect 2?
- Thread starter Shamus Young
- Start date
Reading this article made me relize that Cerberus sounds oddly like Aperture Science. Especially the "At one point they fed colonists to the thresher maw in order to test the effects of feeding colonists to a thresher maw." part. That's something I'd expect GladOS to do...
You make it sound so... pants on head retarded.
Seriously though, couldn't get through 10 hours of ME1, and got ME2 for free for having DA2 and have next to zero interest in playing it... especially now.
BioWare, IMO, does not make very good games anymore. Mediocre games, I think. DA2? It has it's moments, but it's not good. BioWare has really, completely, fallen off my list of competent devs I pay attention to.
Seriously though, couldn't get through 10 hours of ME1, and got ME2 for free for having DA2 and have next to zero interest in playing it... especially now.
BioWare, IMO, does not make very good games anymore. Mediocre games, I think. DA2? It has it's moments, but it's not good. BioWare has really, completely, fallen off my list of competent devs I pay attention to.
Honestly the plot hole is at the very beginning when you "die" so Cerberus can bring you back... it's still faceplamingly bad, from then on it was a game of "Fuck with Cerberus as much as is humanly possible"cynicalsaint1 said:
But your remark about reaper tech is well taken and was missing from Shepard's reasoning for destroying the station, but was certainly my reasons.
I'm a "new" BioWare fan, mostly because I play approximately two or three unique games per year (for time reasons, and because, when I really enjoy it, I want to replay it), but I have to say, that the series of complaints you provided in this essay are vastly more coherent than the quick dig in and subsequent firestorm surrounding the most recent Stolen Pixels strip.Shamus Young said:
(... and yeah... Cerberus is variously hyperorganized and managed by bumbling idiots, sometimes both at the same time.)
The problem isn't a binary choice, it's a false binary choice. How about we take the smart option, like...cynicalsaint1 said:
"Hey, Citadel. This is Shephard. I am standing on a dead reaper fetus in the middle of a reaper factory right now. I'm sending you a picture and coordinates. Cerberus wants this place too, so if you don't want the pro-human superterrorist group building reapers you should probably send someone over here."
Seems like Shamus and I have the same opinion on the Mass Effect 2 story. It's obvious they didn't have the trilogy planed out when they started development on the first game, otherwise things like Cerberus and the act 2 twist (which was really cool in theory, but came across as weak due to a lack of buildup) would have been properly built up from the beginning. Making things up as you go along isn't really the ideal way when you're making a trilogy, not saying it's always a bad idea, but it's clearly not working out for Mass Effect.
Still, I'll save the final judgment for when the third part comes out. It's possible some things will make more sense or at least come off in a better light once you have the entire context.
Still, I'll save the final judgment for when the third part comes out. It's possible some things will make more sense or at least come off in a better light once you have the entire context.
I definately agree with this and think that only a bit of a rewrite for cerberus would have made the story that much more compelling. I don't see why the organisation couldn't have still been the shambling group of terrorists that Shepard repeatedly mowed down in the first game. The could have chanced upon Collector intel from an abandoned outpost and just beleive that they have the ability to make use of alien technology, maybe with one good scientist to accomadate other story points. I would have much preferred a charasmatic fanatical leader to the white-eyed demigod of the Illusive Man.
Its a bit of an overused trope, but why not give Cerberus some sort of ability to instantly kill Shepard, tied to his regeneration? Along the lines of 'they restored his genetic code, they can cause it to break down', maybe with a remote signal. This gives a story-relevent reason for his 'death', and a reason for him to work for Cerberus.
Not perfect, but that's half the logical problems solved right?
Its a bit of an overused trope, but why not give Cerberus some sort of ability to instantly kill Shepard, tied to his regeneration? Along the lines of 'they restored his genetic code, they can cause it to break down', maybe with a remote signal. This gives a story-relevent reason for his 'death', and a reason for him to work for Cerberus.
Not perfect, but that's half the logical problems solved right?
Is it a problem to be constantly critical? Or is that a character trait? And I don't think calling someone a git for being critical is a good way to get them to side with you. For the record, Shamus did mention that despite being one of Bioware's worst stories, it is still better than most out there.sravankb said:
OT.
Shamus, even if Bioware had junior writers working on Dragon Age 2, that still doesn't absolve them from having their Lead Writer David Gaider act like a jerk online. The story is still disjointed, dull, and in the end meaningless (IMO), so it would be nice if he accepted some of the blame instead of shouting "fuck you I can do what I want and Leliana is still alive regardless."
He's "pissed" because the main character's actions don't make any sense. He can solve the problem driving the plot but he doesn't for no reason. If you're paying attention at all, you should be going '???'.Sparrow said:
What's everybody's deal? He's just pointing out some plot holes and concerns. I thought the article was pretty mild.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 15,012
- 3,875
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
this does a good job of illustrating why Im worried about me3, none of the promo vids for it look like it will have a good plot, they make it look like it will have a summer block buster movie plot, which means a stupid plot with some good action scenes and Im worried that me3 will be just that, a stupid stupid plot with good voice acting and some decent action, really I would prefer it the other way around, a really good plot with good voice acting and some ok action scenes since there are tons of good action games out there but they almost all have shitty plots
I have raged against the railroading (I have to work with Cerberus?), and plot before (TIM runs a very loose and destructive ship). My main reason for liking ME better than ME2.
I agree the secondary character stories seem better written than the man plot (same for Dragon Age II, which I haven't finished yet).
I'm also worried about ME3, especially with the recent announcement.
There was a lot of sloppiness in ME 2. The fiction and the mechanics clashed a lot.
The planet scanning felt like they had tried 2-3 things, nothing worked, so they hacked in no mini-game at all. Why are we scanning planets anyway... Can't Cerberus the ultimate company fed-ex us some metal?
While we are at it. All other Cerberus projects have a budget. Miranda is in charge of it. Where is Shepard's salary, and the budget for buying intel / supplies/ etc. Besides paying the rest of the crew. Everything is Scavenged or bought with Sheps' personal bankroll.
The fiction / mechanics around the gun heat sinks makes no sense at all:
-Universal heat sinks make guns able to shoot more/ faster (I don't remember)
- have to carry around heat sinks (I'll shoot slower to have the unlimited ammo if ME1 thanks.) The entire Alliance Military and companies bought into this? What are they all idiots? Functionally unlimited ammo (justified by the fiction of the first game)... chucked out the window for scatterbrained reasoning
-In addition, nobody seems to carry a lot of them, and Shep CAN'T carry a lot. He/she used to have unlimited ammo and a lot of field time. Now I can carry a small number of heat sinks for dubious firepower enhancements (see above point).
-Picking up a heat sink gives you 1 "unit" of heat sink across all your weapons. So I pick one up and get 6 pistol shots 15 SMG rounds and 5 sniper rounds (numbers not accurate to actual in-game weapons probably). How does that work? Why can't I take that sink out of my sniper rifle and put it in the SMG? How did I split it in 3 in the first place? How does this make any sense other than as a way to make you use secondary weapons?
For all the removal of equipment from ME1 to ME2, a lot more of the game is forced by mechanics. How you fight, when you fight, where you fight, what you are allowed to fight with... (a lot more "trap"/ "set-piece" / "boss" fights with limited cover or no real options).
The stores in-game were kinda silly with 4 whole items in them. (DA II has a lot more stuff, even though only Hawke can use 70% of it).
In the end I care a lot more about the characters than the story in ME2, while I enjoyed both in ME1. Your team, the secondary missions for them = awesome. The Shadowbroker DLC was excelent. Overlord really moved me at the end (and reminded me of "old Cerberus" from ME1) Ripping off the Arms guy was a nice "bank caper" type event. It was even nice to get a tank back in DLC too. The last
DLC was ehh... No friends... for no really good reason. Too much of a lead-in for ME 3, not enough people.
Characters = value in Mass Effect...
Saving the universe... ehhh not so much.
-T
-
I'm also worried about ME3, especially with the recent announcement.
There was a lot of sloppiness in ME 2. The fiction and the mechanics clashed a lot.
The planet scanning felt like they had tried 2-3 things, nothing worked, so they hacked in no mini-game at all. Why are we scanning planets anyway... Can't Cerberus the ultimate company fed-ex us some metal?
While we are at it. All other Cerberus projects have a budget. Miranda is in charge of it. Where is Shepard's salary, and the budget for buying intel / supplies/ etc. Besides paying the rest of the crew. Everything is Scavenged or bought with Sheps' personal bankroll.
The fiction / mechanics around the gun heat sinks makes no sense at all:
-Universal heat sinks make guns able to shoot more/ faster (I don't remember)
- have to carry around heat sinks (I'll shoot slower to have the unlimited ammo if ME1 thanks.) The entire Alliance Military and companies bought into this? What are they all idiots? Functionally unlimited ammo (justified by the fiction of the first game)... chucked out the window for scatterbrained reasoning
-In addition, nobody seems to carry a lot of them, and Shep CAN'T carry a lot. He/she used to have unlimited ammo and a lot of field time. Now I can carry a small number of heat sinks for dubious firepower enhancements (see above point).
-Picking up a heat sink gives you 1 "unit" of heat sink across all your weapons. So I pick one up and get 6 pistol shots 15 SMG rounds and 5 sniper rounds (numbers not accurate to actual in-game weapons probably). How does that work? Why can't I take that sink out of my sniper rifle and put it in the SMG? How did I split it in 3 in the first place? How does this make any sense other than as a way to make you use secondary weapons?
For all the removal of equipment from ME1 to ME2, a lot more of the game is forced by mechanics. How you fight, when you fight, where you fight, what you are allowed to fight with... (a lot more "trap"/ "set-piece" / "boss" fights with limited cover or no real options).
The stores in-game were kinda silly with 4 whole items in them. (DA II has a lot more stuff, even though only Hawke can use 70% of it).
In the end I care a lot more about the characters than the story in ME2, while I enjoyed both in ME1. Your team, the secondary missions for them = awesome. The Shadowbroker DLC was excelent. Overlord really moved me at the end (and reminded me of "old Cerberus" from ME1) Ripping off the Arms guy was a nice "bank caper" type event. It was even nice to get a tank back in DLC too. The last
DLC was ehh... No friends... for no really good reason. Too much of a lead-in for ME 3, not enough people.
Characters = value in Mass Effect...
Saving the universe... ehhh not so much.
-T
-
Your selling yourself short by not playing Mass Effect 2 (or finishing Mass Effect 1). Don't let some insanely sketchy nitpicks defer you from most people's GOTY.Wolfram01 said:
I'll say this... I acknowledge there are some holes in Mass Effect's plot.. but only because the nature of the game is too big to thoroughly tie up every loose end and because great gameplay trumps asinine reasons for good gameplay.
More over, Mass Effect 2 having some plot holes and flaws is NOT a sign of their "incompetence" or that they have junior writers panicking and trying to make it all make sense. I would venture to say nearly every single game ever made, from Final Fantasy to Bioshock to Shadow of the Colossus to Red Dead Redemption to even prior Bioware games, has some gaping plot holes due to the very nature of gameplay-driven design.
Even what many consider to be the "greatest movie ever", Citizen Kane, is rife with plotholes and inconsistencies if you research it.
My point being is Mass Effect 2 was JUST fine. Was it perfect? No, far from it. It did have some stupid moments (MY moment was when everybody got onto the shuttle for... some reason... and the Collectors attacked while they were all away). But I do think it's a bit unfair to pick on Mass Effect 2 as the go-to-example of bad storytelling or plotholes when it, by and large, has very few and the overwhelming majority of the game is insanely well written and the characters supremely developed. For the sake of gameplay, however, you need a certain level of suspension of disbelief.
How does everyone hear alien dialogue in their own language, including lips and mouths that vocalize perfect English? Why does the crew only wear oxygen masks instead of helmets in sub-temperature, atmosphere-free environments? Why are mono-gendered Asari 100% feminine instead of androgynous? How can EVERY store on the citadel be Shepard's favorite? If Cerberus is paying Zaeed, and you betray them, wouldn't his loyalty be to the people who write his checks? Why do Kaiden, Ashley, or Liara never even acknowledge a prior teammate if they're in your party when you meet them? How exactly CAN Shepard and any of his or her alien partners make sweet, hot, alien love? How many calibrations does Garrus have to do before he talks to me again?
I adore a good story as much as the next person, but if you're so bent out of shape on a few minor inconsistencies instead of enjoying a game as a construct doing the best it can in the limitations of its medium, then you need to take a break from story-driven games and just play Angry Birds or Bejeweled. Otherwise, you may go mad asking yourself questions that simply have no justifiable answer because a decision was made to make the gameplay during those portions a priority over the narrative and they lacked either the time, skill, motivation, or resources to ensure it was satisfactory to everyone.
I don't demean Bioshock for the idiotic scene where you jam a strange, glowing syringe into your arm without knowing what it does, or Dead Space 2 where you slide into a machine that jabs a needle into your eye, or Final Fantasy VII for not having Vincent and Yuffie show up in the ending cutscene, or Resident Evil 4 having some strange merchant follow you everywhere and never questioning why. At the end of the day, it's a video game, and one must suspend disbelief to ever enjoy or immerse themselves into a game world. Don't give the flaws a free pass, mind you, but don't let the sum of ultimately trivial flaws sour one's perception of a game that outright succeeds in nearly every single area that is vastly more important.
Nobody is telling you to join the conversation with that 4%. Instead of talking about how annoyed you are at people who are annoyed at a game, just ignore the thread. Let the dissenters talk amongst themselves. Calling them gits will earn you no favor. And like I said, Shamus pointed out that Mass Effect 2 is still a good game. A person can be critical and still enjoy something.sravankb said:
And not worried at all still. Gamers have become such a bunch of children. Wah not enough story, too much gunplay. Jesus its like you all forgot the 90s games that most of us grew up on. Games do not need a complex story in all of them, ME and DA are no exception. If Bioware tried something else with a game(that actually made it better) then whats the problem? Sure you remember Bioware for story, but something else is good too. Just enjoy the game and if you can't do that, then I am sorry. Liked ME 1, loved the hell out of ME 2, and now insanely looking forward to ME 3.