I'm Commander Shepard and this is my favourite thread on Obsidian

[Hurlshort]

I'm not sure why you would be against the recent DLC for ME2. It's fairly awesome and fairly inexpensive. It adds a lot of flavor to the lore of the universe.

[Volourn]

"it was so bad, I had to take a break from it midway through "

 

If it was so bad, justs top playing it. Games are suppsoed to be fun, so if it's not fun put it down and play something you enjoy. Gaming shouldn't be a form of torture. that's what work and marriage is about.

[Gorth]

I thought that the ME2 minigames were quite ok

Don't encourage them!

 

Connecting dots was tolerable exactly once. The three piece puzzle game was tolerable twice, maybe three times. Planet scanning was hate at first sight. None of them were ever fun, just time sinks to space out story points and prolong the game a bit.

[Oblarg]

I thought that the ME2 minigames were quite ok

Don't encourage them!

 

Connecting dots was tolerable exactly once. The three piece puzzle game was tolerable twice, maybe three times. Planet scanning was hate at first sight. None of them were ever fun, just time sinks to space out story points and prolong the game a bit.

 

The planet scanning was made even worse by the fact that all that remained of the gear progression and much of the end-game reactivity was directly linked to it. Terrible, terrible design. Bring back the ME1 inventory over that crap any day.

 

I replayed ME1 recently, and it became even more apparent just how much better of a game it is than ME2. Really, I can pretty much count on one hand the things that improved, but I could rant for pages about the things that became worse.

My opinion is just the opposite, could you throw in a short list of things that you think became worse? The only things that were better in ME1 in my opinion:

 

- I'd take the boring Mako over the brain damaging planet scanning any time

- The hacking minigame was better in ME1, the minigames in ME2 got rather old rather quicly for me

 

.. and that's it. Nothing else comes to mind.

 

 

Minigames blew in both, but at least there was a skill-check in ME1, while they were pure tedium in ME2. On that note, the entire character progression system was gutted - ME2 was Gears of War in space with biotics, except the biotics were also gutted and lost the visceral, awesome feeling they had in ME1. The inventory was removed instead of streamlined. ME1's plot, while certainly not a masterpiece, was engaging and coherent. ME2's plot was, in addition to being completely absent from the majority of the game, paper-thin and full of holes and inconsistencies. The art direction was positively awful - they took the beautiful universe they had made in ME1 and threw black paint all over it while turning the contrast up, and topped it off with a bunch of ugly environments. This is compounded by the inferior soundtrack, which takes a notable move away from the really unique synth-driven direction of the original towards a generic Hollywood-esque orchestral "epic" score. Also, the ammo system and global cooldowns can **** off and die.

 

The only things that really improved for me were the character writing and the cover system.

Edited October 30, 2010 by Oblarg

[Tale]

Apparently Maria was right when she said everyone complained about newer Bioware games but still talked about them months later.

But I liked ME2. It's ME1 that I want to round up all the copies of and burn.

[Nepenthe]

I thought that the ME2 minigames were quite ok

Don't encourage them!

 

Connecting dots was tolerable exactly once. The three piece puzzle game was tolerable twice, maybe three times. Planet scanning was hate at first sight. None of them were ever fun, just time sinks to space out story points and prolong the game a bit.

 

Obviously I both did not include planet scanning as a "mini game" (it's neither mini, nor really a game), and it was in comparison to ME1, and any other comparable mini games I've seen

 

Also agree with Oblarg on the score, ME1 was a lot better (as was Kasumi, where they seemed to be returning to the synth/orchestral fusion), but disagree vehemently on the unified cooldowns, and less so with the rest.

[Oblarg]

I thought that the ME2 minigames were quite ok

Don't encourage them!

 

Connecting dots was tolerable exactly once. The three piece puzzle game was tolerable twice, maybe three times. Planet scanning was hate at first sight. None of them were ever fun, just time sinks to space out story points and prolong the game a bit.

 

Obviously I both did not include planet scanning as a "mini game" (it's neither mini, nor really a game), and it was in comparison to ME1, and any other comparable mini games I've seen

 

Also agree with Oblarg on the score, ME1 was a lot better (as was Kasumi, where they seemed to be returning to the synth/orchestral fusion), but disagree vehemently on the unified cooldowns, and less so with the rest.

 

The result of unified cooldowns was using an uneventful power every 3-6 seconds instead of using a few awesome powers once a minute. It robbed biotics of all viscerality made made them completely pedestrian and boring.

 

Yeah, they were overpowered in ME1, but there were other ways to fix that without neutering them.

 

Plus, the unified cooldowns makes power synergy utterly worthless unless you have two biotics in the group. I suppose this isn't as big a problem as it could be seeing as seemingly every other person in ME2 has biotics (simply another symptom of them becoming pedestrian and boring).

[Humanoid]

Got to admit I metagamed a little and when I played ME2 without having ever played ME1, I used someone's maxed out import file so I could skip a fair bit of the planet scanning. I'd have no problem just cheating here if it could be done easily. In the end I'll call both planet-scanning and mako-driving both mostly skippable and therefore approximately equal in awfulness. I'll give ME2 a marginal win over ME1 (PCs) hacking/lockpick/whatever minigames mainly because of the ubiquity of the latter - it pops up everywhere and is probably done ten times for every time you have to do one in ME2. On the other hand it's offset of course by the trivial availability lock-melting acid so maybe it's not all that clear cut...

 

 

 

Now I know I've made my ambivalence about combat in RPGs often enough, but despite that, I do prefer the sequel when it comes to combat. When I played the original some time later it felt like a substandard generic third person shooter (not helped by the no jumping thing) - and when taken as the third-person shooter it feels like, the design is about twenty years behind the likes of Max Payne or other 'honest' shooters. Now don't get me wrong, I didn't enjoy ME2's combat much either, but it was easier to be lazy with. I do agree that the various cooldowns were a bit underwhelming on a short timer - didn't feel a huge point to them when they mostly feel like an anemic Zidane headbutt.

 

 

 

On DLC - I somewhat selfishly hope that they're all crap so I don't feel like I'm missing out. I do realise this is an irrational position though since it would deny other more financially liberal individuals the chance to have something nice - it's tough balancing a dislike for the business model versus the commonsense idea that release of good content is never a bad thing.

Edited October 31, 2010 by Humanoid

[Nepenthe]

I thought that the ME2 minigames were quite ok

Don't encourage them!

 

Connecting dots was tolerable exactly once. The three piece puzzle game was tolerable twice, maybe three times. Planet scanning was hate at first sight. None of them were ever fun, just time sinks to space out story points and prolong the game a bit.

 

Obviously I both did not include planet scanning as a "mini game" (it's neither mini, nor really a game), and it was in comparison to ME1, and any other comparable mini games I've seen

 

Also agree with Oblarg on the score, ME1 was a lot better (as was Kasumi, where they seemed to be returning to the synth/orchestral fusion), but disagree vehemently on the unified cooldowns, and less so with the rest.

 

The result of unified cooldowns was using an uneventful power every 3-6 seconds instead of using a few awesome powers once a minute. It robbed biotics of all viscerality made made them completely pedestrian and boring.

 

Yeah, they were overpowered in ME1, but there were other ways to fix that without neutering them.

 

Plus, the unified cooldowns makes power synergy utterly worthless unless you have two biotics in the group. I suppose this isn't as big a problem as it could be seeing as seemingly every other person in ME2 has biotics (simply another symptom of them becoming pedestrian and boring).

Sounds like your issue is more with the changes in biotics (though I'm not really remembering this viscerality you keep bringing up, I'd call nostalgia, but I could just be forgetting) than with the universal cooldown itself.... as it looks like you'd be just ok with it, if you had stronger powers with a longer cooldown to balance?

 

Because I defintely agree that they botched biotics in ME2, but personally think that it's only tangentially related to the universal cooldown... One of the reasons I think so highly of this game is that I wasn't a big fan of biotics in the first game (warp/lift was pretty much all I used), so this deficit is a lot smaller for me than a lot of people...

[Oblarg]

Maxed throw was quite awesome and fun to use in the first game.

 

It was completely worthless in the second game, as was shockwave.

 

That's not my main problem, though - my main gripes are twofold. The change in art direction is atrocious, and the plot is terrible.

 

Other than that, I simply don't care for most of the gameplay changes. I enjoyed ME1 combat more, even if it was more clunky.

Edited October 31, 2010 by Oblarg

[Guest Slinky]

That's not my main problem, though - my main gripes are twofold. The change in art direction is atrocious, and the plot is terrible.

Art direction was different in ME2? How so?

 

And the plot... as far as I'm concerned, the plot in both games is corny B quality crap that shouldn't be taken seriously

[Labadal]

The thing that bothered me the most: The ugly masks my team members were wearing, really lazy on BioWares behalf. It was extra funny(read:sad) to see team members wear those masks when you entered the collector ship.

[Nepenthe]

That's not my main problem, though - my main gripes are twofold. The change in art direction is atrocious, and the plot is terrible.

Art direction was different in ME2? How so?

 

And the plot... as far as I'm concerned, the plot in both games is corny B quality crap that shouldn't be taken seriously

 

i agree with you on both counts, I'm not seeing any great difference in the art direction between the two games. And I'm pretty sure we've gone over the "multitude of plot holes" with Oblarg before, even given time he could only think of one relatively ambiguous one. I'll be the first to agree with it clearly being a "middle" episode, that is either consummated or sunken by the third chapter of the story... So you could say that my stance with ME2's plot isn't "it roxors" or "it suxors", but that I haven't seen it all, yet.

 

And yeah, it's supposed to collect space opera tropes.

 

The thing that bothered me the most: The ugly masks my team members were wearing, really lazy on BioWares behalf. It was extra funny(read:sad) to see team members wear those masks when you entered the collector ship.

 

Well, there WAS some variety in headgear (I think Zaeed, Garrus and Grunt were all pretty good on that dept), but I'll give you that the see-through plastic breath-masks were pretty atrocious.

[Labadal]

Yeah, those were the ones I meant.

[Oblarg]

That's not my main problem, though - my main gripes are twofold. The change in art direction is atrocious, and the plot is terrible.

Art direction was different in ME2? How so?

 

And the plot... as far as I'm concerned, the plot in both games is corny B quality crap that shouldn't be taken seriously

 

The art direction in ME1 focused on bright, smooth, slick, bloom-filled environments. It was a really cool sci-fi look.

 

The art direction in ME2 focused on much darker environments, with the contrast cranked up. Everything was ugly.

 

As for the plots, ME1's plot may not have been superb, but it was coherent and kept me engaged. ME2's plot was absurd to the point of breaking immersion.

[Hurlshort]

I thought the art direction was exactly the same. I did feel like we went through some grimier locations in the sequel, but other than that I'm really scratching my head over Oblarg's beef. I also don't get the plot comment. I think a lot of people would agree that ME2 was light on actual plot progression and was more about developing a cast of characters and setting up the third game, but I'm not sure where the absurdity was.

[Gorth]

I found ME2 to be a mixed bag, not uniformly dark. Sure, Freedoms Progress seems to take place at night and Omega 4 had just the right atmosphere for a derelict space station (my favourite place in the game), whereas Illium, The Citadel, Horizon etc. was all shiny bright colours. Heck, even SR2 was much brighter and lighter interior design than SR1.

 

Whether it's absurd or not very much depend on how the consequences influence ME3. If they simply pretend it didn't take place or just send you the odd email/cameo, then it was indeed absurd. If you get to keep your surviving team members for a final showdown, much less so.

[Oblarg]

I thought the art direction was exactly the same. I did feel like we went through some grimier locations in the sequel, but other than that I'm really scratching my head over Oblarg's beef. I also don't get the plot comment. I think a lot of people would agree that ME2 was light on actual plot progression and was more about developing a cast of characters and setting up the third game, but I'm not sure where the absurdity was.

 

I don't know, the fact that the collectors are supposedly some huge threat but have a total of one ship that is defeated in combat by a frigate designed for stealth?

 

Or finding a reaper but not showing to to anyone and instead taking the IFF from it and hooking it directly up to the Normandy instead of studying and duplicating it?

 

Or working for Cerberus when they were unambiguously evil in the first game without any explanation?

 

The list goes on and on...

 

And yeah, the art direction is very different. Nothing is bright in ME2, even on the well-lit levels, and the contrast is turned way up. They wanted a darker atmosphere, so they threw black paint over all the environments instead of writing a suspenseful plot, and the result wasn't too great.

 

Compare a "light" environment in ME2:

 

 

To a dark environment in ME1:

 

 

Hell, even the sleek, futuristic look of the armor is gone in favor of a rough, angular, blocky alternative.

 

And the inside of the new Normandy is terrible.

[Maria Caliban]

The ME 1 shot isn't a dark environment. It's the set of open air gates you drive through on Virmire. That five shades of blue and grey environment is supposed to be illuminated by sunlight.

 

 

That's not my main problem, though - my main gripes are twofold. The change in art direction is atrocious, and the plot is terrible.

Art direction was different in ME2? How so?

 

It actually had art direction.

 

ME was visually bland outside of Ilos and a few dramatic flying spaceship moments. ME 2 attempted to inject a bit of style into the environment. Compare Cora's Den to the part of Afterlife where Aria sits.

Edited November 1, 2010 by Maria Caliban

[Tale]

Is Oblarq actually trying to argue that the "light" environment in ME2 isn't light? Hell, I see all three primaries in that shot alone.

 

Only way that shot could be any brighter is with a lens flare and excess bloom.

Edited November 1, 2010 by Tale

[Maria Caliban]

The image is also darker as there are very strong, black shadows. Notice how the armor covering the back of Shep's neck is very detailed but his chest is just one black mass. It's the same for difference between Shepard's two arms.

 

Alternatively, the ME 1 image has ambient lighting so there is far less shadowing.

[Oblarg]

The ME 1 shot isn't a dark environment. It's the set of open air gates you drive through on Virmire. That five shades of blue and grey environment is supposed to be illuminated by sunlight.

 

 

That's not my main problem, though - my main gripes are twofold. The change in art direction is atrocious, and the plot is terrible.

Art direction was different in ME2? How so?

 

It actually had art direction.

 

ME was visually bland outside of Ilos and a few dramatic flying spaceship moments. ME 2 attempted to inject a bit of style into the environment. Compare Cora's Den to the part of Afterlife where Aria sits.

 

ME certainly had art direction. Everything universally had a slick and smooth sci-fi look, and colors were light and pastel, maybe even to the point of being a bit washed out at times. There was also heavy use of bloom. I thought it worked marvelously to create a wondrous universe that the player was actually interested in - the atmosphere of the first game really drew me in and immersed me.

 

Unfortunately, the second game just seemed bland and dark, because BioWare decided that the best way to create a dark second installment was not to create a dark, suspenseful plot (in fact, ME2's plot is so hilariously contrived that I find it hard to take the games attempts at being suspenseful seriously at all), but to literally make most of the environments black and ugly. This is a very common trend in gaming graphics, and one that I absolutely detest. Yes, ME2's graphics were technically more impressive, but the change in art direction makes me prefer the visuals from the first game.

 

Also, I'd take the spandex-suit light armor of ME1 over ME2's armor any day.

[mr insomniac]

I don't know, the fact that the collectors are supposedly some huge threat but have a total of one ship that is defeated in combat by a frigate designed for stealth?

Would that be the "most advanced warship in the alliance navy" that was destroyed in minutes at the beginning of the game? Or would it be the one that could only defeat the collector ship after having its shields, weapons and armor upgraded and was nearly destroyed anyway?

Or working for Cerberus when they were unambiguously evil in the first game without any explanation?

I dunno, maybe you spacebar'd through the early conversations with TIM, and didn't realize that Cerberus was the only organization willing to go after the Collectors, let alone having the resources to do so. Whatever TIM's ultimate motives might have been, ie: wanting the Collector Base for himself, the explanations are there for why Shepherd should work for Cerberus. And you can play the entire game from the POV of not trusting Cerberus if you wish. And Cerberus is still seen as unambiguously evil by the council, by the alliance, by your old squadmates, and even some of the new ones.

 

Meh, in the end it seems kind of silly to argue plot in either game. I just happened to like ME2 more. Oh yeah, shockwave was actually kinda cool.

[Oblarg]

I don't know, the fact that the collectors are supposedly some huge threat but have a total of one ship that is defeated in combat by a frigate designed for stealth?

Would that be the "most advanced warship in the alliance navy" that was destroyed in minutes at the beginning of the game? Or would it be the one that could only defeat the collector ship after having its shields, weapons and armor upgraded and was nearly destroyed anyway?

Or working for Cerberus when they were unambiguously evil in the first game without any explanation?

I dunno, maybe you spacebar'd through the early conversations with TIM, and didn't realize that Cerberus was the only organization willing to go after the Collectors, let alone having the resources to do so. Whatever TIM's ultimate motives might have been, ie: wanting the Collector Base for himself, the explanations are there for why Shepherd should work for Cerberus. And you can play the entire game from the POV of not trusting Cerberus if you wish. And Cerberus is still seen as unambiguously evil by the council, by the alliance, by your old squadmates, and even some of the new ones.

 

Meh, in the end it seems kind of silly to argue plot in either game. I just happened to like ME2 more. Oh yeah, shockwave was actually kinda cool.

 

The only reason you couldn't get help from the alliance or the council is exactly because you were working with cerberus. Or did you spacebar through those conversations, too? It's kinda silly that you take everything TIM says at face value, the moment you meet him, too.

 

Shockwave may have been cool, but it was ****ing useless on any difficulty other than easy.

 

"the most advanced warship in the alliance navy" was not built for space combat, it was built for stealth. The new Normandy was built for stealth, too. In fact, it can destroy the collector cruiser even unupgraded, and upgraded it still only has "cruiser-class" firepower, according to the codex. Certainly, the alliance wouldn't have had a hard time dealing with the Collector's only cruiser if they ever tried to operate anywhere other than the Terminus systems.

 

Also, it's not clear why making a human reaper would do any better than Sovereign did in the first game at opening the Citadel relay, especially now that they wouldn't have Saren inside the control room to keep the arms open and let it in, and now that the humans and turians are developing weapons based on technology from Sovereign.

[mr insomniac]

The only reason you couldn't get help from the alliance or the council is exactly because you were working with cerberus. Or did you spacebar through those conversations, too? It's kinda silly that you take everything TIM says at face value, the moment you meet him, too.

Sure the council and the alliance don't like that Shepherd is working for Cerberus, but if he went to them and said, "hey I want to come back to you, I'm not gonna work for those terrorists anymore, blah blah blah, what can you do for me," what could they do? Give him his spectre status back? Okay, they did that, but it's like a Justicar trying to get by on reputation outside of Asari space. Everyone knows they're badasses but nobody really cares about spectres in the Terminus. Sure the alliance could re-instate him as a commander again. Then what? Give him a cruiser, send him into the terminus and make him a target for every pirate, smuggler, outlaw and who knows who else? Or with an army and start a war? No one in council space is willing to do that.

 

Cerberus has the Normandy mk II ready to go. It's the only way Shepherd can get around the Terminus unmolested.

 

I wouldn't say that Shepherd is taking everything that TIM says at face value. I just don't think there's much choice, and Shepherd knows it.

 

Shockwave may have been cool, but it was ****ing useless on any difficulty other than easy.

I didn't find it to be that exactly. It was quite good at throwing bad guys over the edges of long drops.

Certainly, the alliance wouldn't have had a hard time dealing with the Collector's only cruiser if they ever tried to operate anywhere other than the Terminus systems.

Probably why they don't. Besides, their operations have never been large scale enough for anyone to take notice before.

Also, it's not clear why making a human reaper would do any better than Sovereign did in the first game at opening the Citadel relay, especially now that they wouldn't have Saren inside the control room to keep the arms open and let it in, and now that the humans and turians are developing weapons based on technology from Sovereign.

Maybe the reapers thought a human reaper would have a better understanding of human behaviour, instincts, etc.