Mass effect 2 and Dying True Rpgs

[sorophx]

Read or watched many trilogies lately? In terms of plot, the middle one's always soft.

 

huh? I don't want to point out the obvious, but what about The Empire Strikes Back? Aliens? Terminator 2?

[Oner]

Aliens and Terminator weren't intended to be trilogies.

[Hassat Hunter]

Read or watched many trilogies lately? In terms of plot, the middle one's always soft.

Lemme see...

The Empires Strikes Back

Back to the Future 2

The Two Towers

 

Nope, not seeing them screw over the storyline like ME2 does. ME2 does some things well, but story ain't one of it.

[Morgoth]

You can't have a long main story and all the companion sidequest stuff in ME2, it would have gone over-budget and we all know that Bio knows it's accountancy homeworks.

[Oner]

LotR is one book, they just had to divide it into three because of it's length.

[Hassat Hunter]

LotR is one book, they just had to divide it into three because of it's length.

6 actually.

[sorophx]

I guess, it says in "The Complete Idiot's Guide To Writing Trilogies", that the second part has to be soft. but it doesn't. it has to be better than the first.

[Oner]

LotR is one book, they just had to divide it into three because of it's length.

6 actually.

6 it is then.

[Orogun01]

LotR is one book, they just had to divide it into three because of it's length.

6 actually.

18 actually, if you count the history of middle earth.

[Raithe]

LotR is one book, they just had to divide it into three because of it's length.

6 actually.

18 actually, if you count the history of middle earth.

 

But it was published as three volumes.. just each volume was a couple of 'books'.

[Nepenthe]

Read or watched many trilogies lately? In terms of plot, the middle one's always soft.

 

This.

 

And using a couple of movie series, most of which were certainly never planned as trilogies as examples to the contrary isn't exactly refuting the point here. In fact, ME2 is the 'classic' trilogy midpoint that builds into the final episode. Like Empire Strikes Back (which probably does it better than ME2, but still).

 

Overall, I've found both Mass Effect games rather enjoyable (in fact, extremely so), just as I have found Baldur's Gate 2, Deus Ex etc. in the past. I obviously have a different standard for games than most people here, I'm not looking for some (apparently nonexistent, as I don't think I've heard any game get universal praise here) 'perfect game', just having a good time for a while (a shorter while in the case of Modern Warfare 2, several weeks over a few playthroughs in ME2, or a really long time of less good time in the case of DAO )

[Purkake]

ME2 didn't really have a story, it was purely about gathering a bunch of psychologically stunted (but bad-ass) companions, fixing their personal issues by clicking through ten dialogue options and defeat the bad guys in ten minutes.

 

For ME3 I sincerely hope BioWare will include a bad ending where certain past renegade choices lead to either a Reaper victory, or a universe where the Illusive Man install himself as God-Emperor using the technology from the Collector base.

It's all starting to come together now, the Mass Effect trilogy is, in fact, a prequel to WH40K. The big war ends in a draw, the Reapers retreat to a neighboring galaxy, mr. Man becomes the God-Emperor and all the planets are ugly hellholes.

 

 

I didn't like the story or the extremely formulaic mission structure in ME2, but the writing was good, the combat decent and it provided some more awesome Shepard moments.

[Volourn]

ME series = awesome 'flaws and all'. It certainly beats the KOTOR series which no doubt many of which who bash ME somehow think is better. KOTOR series is a joke. ME series is one of the best RPGs ever. KOTOR series is not.

[The Transcendent One]

ME was a perfectly fine game. Engaging plot, passable combat, fantastic setting. The characters, however, were dull and 1-dimensional (with the possible exception of Saren), and the RPG mechanics were clunky and poorly implemented (wonky inventory, LOADS of duplicate items, not enough visible impact on performance, stupid dialogue choices). Still, I enjoyed it.

 

ME2 had notably better characters, some of whom had backstories I was actually interested in. The dialogue was improved, with the exception of the main character's lines which were still pretty godawful. Unfortunately, ME2 suffers from an incredibly shoddy plot which is left in complete shambles by the end of the game. There was also a fairly bad change in art direction, going from smooth and slick, bloom-filled, wondrous sci-fi to dark and drab with a serious lack of colors, which severely cramped the great feel first game's setting had. BioWare also threw out most of the RPG mechanics rather than fixing them, resulting in Gears of War-in-space gameplay which I don't particularly care for. Oh, and the biotics went from feeling badass to feeling completely ****ing irrelevant (almost every character has biotics for seemingly no reason, and the powers themselves were toned way down and lacked the visceral feel that they had in the first game). In fact, abilities in general sort of turned into a "shoot a colored missile at target," and the global cooldown sucked.

 

Overall, I'd say ME1 is the better game by far.

I agree.

Its like bioware didn t know Mass Effect is a Trilogy,Mass Effect 1 some flaws but great story.

Mass Effect 2 has a bad filler story.

[Maria Caliban]

ME series = awesome 'flaws and all'. It certainly beats the KOTOR series which no doubt many of which who bash ME somehow think is better. KOTOR series is a joke. ME series is one of the best RPGs ever. KOTOR series is not.

 

I like kittens. Kittens > NWN, KotOR, BG.

 

FACT.

[Volourn]

K.

[Meshugger]

I only heard about story and characters. What about it being an RPG? or the gameplay for that matter?

[Purkake]

I only heard about story and characters. What about it being an RPG? or the gameplay for that matter?

Well, you could try the demo.

[Hassat Hunter]

Not an RPG, but the 3rd person shooter gameplay works well...

[Volourn]

Action RPG, and it works very well. It has more in common with BG or BL than it does with shooters.

[WorstUsernameEver]

Action RPG, and it works very well. It has more in common with BG or BL than it does with shooters.

 

Volourn is both right and wrong. The structure of the game has nothing to do with shooters. The core gameplay is practically a shooter with RPG elements though.

[sorophx]

ME series = awesome 'flaws and all'. It certainly beats the KOTOR series

 

but ME1 is in fact KOTOR but with swapped models and names same story, same everything, only lightsabers get dumped for overpowered guns (I tested my handgun on the "tanks", it hit harder than the MAKO cannon)

[Volourn]

No, it's not the same story. It had different characters. It has a diferent combat system. Different everything.

 

ME is BIO's own space opera 'cause they were (temporarily) doine with SW, and done better.

 

KOTOR is overrated. ME is underrated.

 

ME > KOTOR

 

No contest.

 

Anyone who prefers KOTOR to ME or thinks they're the same just doesn't know what theya re talking about. Sorry, it hurts, but the truth often does.

 

 

[Orogun01]

KOTOR has a BAFTA award

 

Deal with it.

[Volourn]

ME has tons of awards too, and the ME series has outsold the KOTOR series. And, the KOTOROL game is gonna fall after a couple of eyars than BIO will make a ME MMO that will succeed. Because anyone with a brain knows that ME is a much improved version of KOTOR. Better, bigger, and ballsier.

 

Deal with it.

 

R00fles!

Edited September 4, 2010 by Volourn