Jereel Hunter said:
Mise said:
Thing is, the universe is bending over backwards for her from the first minute of Mass Effect 1. She basically becomes a Spectre just because she asked to be one, she can read garbled mind messages just because she's Shepard, everyones completely gaga over her and her informed abilities from the word go when all you have to go on are a few paragraphs from the intro, and she is reconstructed and raised from the dead since humanity would either fall or isolate itself from the galaxy just because she died.
I know Shepard's a super-elite soldier and all, but goddamn.
Bear in mind one thing - Shepard is unique in additional ways after the first Mass Effect - due to his firts mission, he's the only human who has the Cipher, as well as Prothean memories from the beacons - he knows the single most about the Reapers out of anyone in the galaxy, this naturally makes him invaluable.
|
|
Apart from the Prothean language code and historical significance of their race memory, I don't think their knowledge will help Shepard at all (past avoiding Sarens first ambush), since the Reapers basically beat the living crap out of the Protheans in a very short order. The only thing that could benefit the good guys is the Prothean knowledge on mass relays, since they managed to build one - but I'm not so sure Bioware will remember that, come ME3.
And the resurrection thing makes Shepard look even more like Jesus - rising from the dead on the third day year, anyone?
I dunno, I would've preferred actually throwing grenades at entrenched enemies instead of casting bloody arcing Hadokens with the power of SCIENCE~ . Pyrokinesis is fine and all, but I would've still preferred proper grenades.
I don't know what you mean.
Mainly Incineration and Cryo Blast techs, along with most biotic talents - you can aim them to arc over or around cover to hit enemies behind them.
I still think throwing fireballs with the power of SCIENCE~ is somewhat silly, but meh.
I guess what I'm asking is to make the fights stand out from each other more, in terrain, tactical possibilities and enemy behaviour. Now, you can basically win every fight with the same tactics - the only variables that matter are your starting position, cover positions and boss enemies.
Fair enough, but ME is now a shooter, and shooters need a body count. As awesome as different and interesting fights would be, if they reduced the number of enemies in favor or more interesting ones, there'd be a lot of running and minimal action. I think they balance they chose, story to keep you involved, numerous enemies to provide action, was a good one.
Not every shooter needs to be like Doom in terms of pure bodycount IMO. Especially since ME2 at least appears to be more of a tactical group-based shooter than a pure frag fest.
Why not? The game is right smack in the middle of an epic story. It seems to me we're just playing a part of the story most games glaze over - you either start with a loyal, or encounter people and they join your merry band, end of story. Now you get a chance to assemble a best-of-the-best team, and it's not some arbitrary detail along the way. You're gathering strength and allies in preparation for a single, critical mission. That's the plot. Granted, it's not what ME1 was, revealing new and exciting things as the story grew larger and more interesting, but really, ME1 was the reveal, ME2 was preparing to strike back, and scoring a blow against the reapers and their allies, and it leaves room for an epic showdown in coming games.
Well, you still just encounter people that join your merry little band in preparation for a single critical task - like you do in a boatload of other games (Baldur's Gate 2 - stop Irenicus, Planescape: Torment - attempt to break your immortality, Mask of the Betrayer - end the spirit eater curse, Mass Effect 1 - stop Saren, etc.). Granted, Mass Effect 2 is like Dirty Dozen or Ocean's Eleven in that the game focuses on building your team for most of the time, but that still doesn't excuse the main plotline, no matter how interesting the team members are.
I don't really want to dissect the plot in detail ATM, so I'll leave it for a potential future post.
When I first got the reaper IFF, I wasn't done with all the side missions I wanted to do. This entire game took place in a relatively short time period, considering what was accomplished - and given the choice to twiddle their thumbs for hours, or complete a mission, taking a shuttle out didn't seem like a terrible idea. Yes, it was done to move the storyline, but it didn't really take away from it, it wasn't ridiculous.
I can understand adding a personal stake for Shepard to the mission . However, the execution's still pretty damn ham-fisted, especially since 1) outside of this incident, EDI never orders you to do anything, let alone in a tone that basically screams "plot point", 2) your entire team just goes SOMEWHERE - particularly jarring when you have n amount of actual missions available to you, and you've never taken your entire team with you until this point, 3) The Collectors actually bothering to take your crew hostage instead of, I dunno - actually ambushing the Normandy with several ships and attempting to destroy it on the spot.
As entertaining as it would have been to include a 3rd DVD, entirely filled by hour long conversations catching up on the last two years, hugging friends and family, telling them long stories about the Collector attack and his reconstruction, etc, Bioware remembered that people were playing a game, and that adding 10 minutes of explanations to literally every former acquaintance you run into would not make for a better game. Besides, he was a Spectre. If you knew a friend of yours was a high level government agent, and he vanished for a while, you might know there's more to it than your clearance entitles you to.
That's not the point - he basically tells them to their faces that he was physically dead for two years, and nobody gives a damn. I mean, is resurrection commonplace in the Mass Effect universe? Did they actually expect Shepard to rise from the dead just because she's, you know, Shepard, or am I missing something here?
The Spectre explanation makes some sense, though - if he would just tell them something like "you don't need to know" or "Top secret" etc.
This one suggests you acquire a sustained existence and begs one recall that this is merely video entertainment. (I know, I'm one to talk)
I think anyone ordering anyone else to get a life on a internet forum is at least slightly hypocritical, for obvious reasons. :p
On my personal scale, 6 is an average game, 7 is good, 8 is great, etc. I also grade them on a curve of sorts - it isn't that hard for a game to score a seven on my scale, but eight and above require quite a bit of work.
Still Sacriledge!
Meh, I don't usually give a damn about points anyway.