Following It's time to recognize the people who were sorely disappointed by Mass Effect 2. Page 4

    Next Last
  • Ienjoysquid 8 May 2020 11:04:21 374 posts
    Seen 20 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    I loved all the Mass Effect games. What was the ending to ME3 that everyone got so upset about? I remember being confused by it, but can't remember what it was.
  • Darth_Flibble 8 May 2020 11:08:15 4,185 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 16 years ago
    Ienjoysquid wrote:
    I loved all the Mass Effect games. What was the ending to ME3 that everyone got so upset about? I remember being confused by it, but can't remember what it was.
    you had a blue, red or green ending or they added one where everything gets wiped out if you didn't select one
  • DrStrangelove 8 May 2020 12:19:10 15,091 posts
    Seen 24 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Real talk, people always act as if ME2 had great characters and ME1 didn't. Yes, ME2 went deeper and I loved it for that, but ME1 gave you characters to care about, notably Wrex, Liara, Tali and Garrus. It's not like that didn't exist.

    The real problem is that what made ME1 stand out most in the history of gaming is its the superb main storyline, masterful storytelling and world building and attention to detail etc. The relationships between the civilisations, the politics, and of course the Reapers. How the game builds up this immense dread. How the game makes you feel like an autonomous actor on a galactic journey.

    Naturally, the continuation of this story was what I longed most for in a sequel. I understand if a sequel may shift focus and I understand if it doesn't give me all I want. However I don't understand if it just brushes it aside entirely and does absolutely nothing with it.

    The character missions are probably 80% of the game. You can even do that if you fill the 20% part of overarching plot with something interesting, something that at least advances the overarching ME story a little. But it didn't do any of that.

    ME2's "main plot" is just some tacked on afterthought that received less attention than even the mid-range character missions, and none of it makes any sense. Somehow the clown terrorist organisation that only made an appearance before with idiotic failed nazi experiments can now revive you after being vaporised in a planet's atmosphere. How? Who cares. They can also build an improved, larger, better version of what was the most advanced ship through combined efforts of the Turian and Human fleet. How? Because he's got a lot of resources. Aha. Why do Joker and Chakwas have no issues joining an organisation that feeds people to Thresher Maws for fun? "At least they're doing something." Right.

    Did you save the council, one of the big decisions in the end of ME1? Doesn't make any difference, there you go choices with consequences. Reaper threat? What after the terrifying Sovereign? The new Reaper interacts by sporadically taking control of some pushover enemy taunting you like a 12-year-old in a multiplayer shooter.

    Why do you do stuff? Because TIM tells you to. Why do you listen to him even though he lies to you again and again? No explanation. What is the overarching plot actually? Bug people abduct colonists, go after them and eventually you'll get to fight a Terminator. The end. How has any of this advanced the overarching ME story? Chirp chirp.

    Plot needs all fighters to leave the Normandy so it can be boarded by the bugs? "Oh today all squadmates will fly with you to your next mission so you can pick them there because reasons." ME2's main story is a big plot hole made of smaller plot holes that are constantly just handwaved away. There are so many glaring issues and questions and it never even tries to explain anything. The contrast to ME1 couldn't be any more extreme.

    Is it better with characters than ME1? Yes. Is it more polished? Yes. Is combat smoother and easier to get into? Yes. But if you expected anything in terms of main story, it was necessarily a huge disappointment. It wasn't even there.

    Edited by DrStrangelove at 12:27:27 08-05-2020
  • Ienjoysquid 8 May 2020 12:42:14 374 posts
    Seen 20 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    @DrStrangelove All fair points.
  • Saul_Iscariot 8 May 2020 13:04:32 3,649 posts
    Seen 44 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    In Mass Effect 2 didnít EDI reveal that Cerberus was involved in the construction of the original Normandy? I know the books went into a lot of detail about how extensive, powerful and well resourced the group was. But that was kind of glossed over in the game. But I am sure she said that they, the Alliance and Turians all worked together on it.

    As for the Reaper threat, I thought that the Council felt that it had been dealt with. Sticking their heads in the sand about the scale of a threat is something we are seeing play out in the real world. So I could easily buy into it happening in the Mass Effect world.

    I am sure that they explain that this plays a part in Shepardsí decision to work with them, grudgingly. Because if he/she didnít ally with them, then nothing would be done about the threat that he/she knew was still coming.

    As for the plot, isnít it that after Sovereign failed to activate the relay to summon the Reapers another one is being constructed to do that job? TIM plans to get hold of that technology and use it to protect humanity, but he fails to see the real scale of the threat. He thinks we can survive it.

    Building your team is a major part of how Shepard plans to deal with the task at hand. He cannot rely on the Council, as previously mentioned, and he doesnít trust Cerberus enough to work with their resources alone. It is a pragmatic approach to the problem.

    And that isnít too say that the game is a flawless gem, but there is a plot there to tie the series together.
  • AcidSnake 8 May 2020 13:11:06 8,293 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 14 years ago
    @DrStrangelove:
    I don't think anyone here said the ME2 story was better than ME1?

    I expected story and got some. And although that wasn't up to their standards the character stories more than made up for it. For me at least...

    Though I don't think it's particularly fair picking on ME2 for not having the council decision matter as ME1 by definition could not commit such an error.
  • Mola_Ram 8 May 2020 13:16:54 23,501 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    DrStrangelove wrote:
    Real talk, people always act as if ME2 had great characters and ME1 didn't. Yes, ME2 went deeper and I loved it for that, but ME1 gave you characters to care about, notably Wrex, Liara, Tali and Garrus. It's not like that didn't exist.

    The real problem is that what made ME1 stand out most in the history of gaming is its the superb main storyline, masterful storytelling and world building and attention to detail etc. The relationships between the civilisations, the politics, and of course the Reapers. How the game builds up this immense dread. How the game makes you feel like an autonomous actor on a galactic journey.

    Naturally, the continuation of this story was what I longed most for in a sequel. I understand if a sequel may shift focus and I understand if it doesn't give me all I want. However I don't understand if it just brushes it aside entirely and does absolutely nothing with it.

    The character missions are probably 80% of the game. You can even do that if you fill the 20% part of overarching plot with something interesting, something that at least advances the overarching ME story a little. But it didn't do any of that.

    ME2's "main plot" is just some tacked on afterthought that received less attention than even the mid-range character missions, and none of it makes any sense. Somehow the clown terrorist organisation that only made an appearance before with idiotic failed nazi experiments can now revive you after being vaporised in a planet's atmosphere. How? Who cares. They can also build an improved, larger, better version of what was the most advanced ship through combined efforts of the Turian and Human fleet. How? Because he's got a lot of resources. Aha. Why do Joker and Chakwas have no issues joining an organisation that feeds people to Thresher Maws for fun? "At least they're doing something." Right.

    Did you save the council, one of the big decisions in the end of ME1? Doesn't make any difference, there you go choices with consequences. Reaper threat? What after the terrifying Sovereign? The new Reaper interacts by sporadically taking control of some pushover enemy taunting you like a 12-year-old in a multiplayer shooter.

    Why do you do stuff? Because TIM tells you to. Why do you listen to him even though he lies to you again and again? No explanation. What is the overarching plot actually? Bug people abduct colonists, go after them and eventually you'll get to fight a Terminator. The end. How has any of this advanced the overarching ME story? Chirp chirp.

    Plot needs all fighters to leave the Normandy so it can be boarded by the bugs? "Oh today all squadmates will fly with you to your next mission so you can pick them there because reasons." ME2's main story is a big plot hole made of smaller plot holes that are constantly just handwaved away. There are so many glaring issues and questions and it never even tries to explain anything. The contrast to ME1 couldn't be any more extreme.

    Is it better with characters than ME1? Yes. Is it more polished? Yes. Is combat smoother and easier to get into? Yes. But if you expected anything in terms of main story, it was necessarily a huge disappointment. It wasn't even there.
    No, you're wrong
  • Bender-B-Rodriguez 8 May 2020 17:48:51 7 posts
    Seen 14 hours ago
    Registered 1 month ago
    Wow! This really turned into an amazing discussion.

    I absolutely agree with Mr Strangelove, seems like we had a lot in common experiencing these games.

    the_milkybar_kid wrote:
    I played 2 and 3 a few years before 1. Whilst the story was great and I enjoyed the nature of Shephard being this elite space cop, the gameplay and design were enough to make me want to drink bleach. Horrible game to play.
    I'm pretty sure first impression makes a huge difference here. But you played them out of order, so that's on you. Who knows what you would've thought if you played them when they came out.

    Saul_Iscariot wrote:
    I cannot understand how you saying if people died in the suicide mission there was no impact. It played a massive part in 3.
    Great, but it had no impact on ME2! Which is the whole point. True, I skipped the next one, but I just didn't feel like there anything left for me hold on to, and I didn't see a reason to continue with the series. The story was just ruined.

    _Price_ wrote:
    Mass Effect 2 broke your ship, made you back into a compent-but-unremarkable merc, hiding behind walls and grinding down Shields and armour. It felt like by the end of the first you were ready to take on the Reapers only to get stuck learning how to make friends and influence people in order to reach exactly the same point again.
    I cheered reading this! Exactly. Imagine if they weren't broken into different games, this weird change in the story wouldn't make any sense. It was just there to kick out the old ME1 dust and start something new. I expected it to be a proper sequel, but got something different entirely with any relation to the previous title seeming like a pop reference to another franchise.

    Edited by Bender-B-Rodriguez at 17:49:10 08-05-2020
  • AcidSnake 8 May 2020 22:00:06 8,293 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 14 years ago
    Bender-B-Rodriguez wrote:
    I absolutely agree with Mr Strangelove
    Hey! You call him DR Strangelove, doll!

    the_milkybar_kid wrote:
    I played 2 and 3 a few years before 1. Whilst the story was great and I enjoyed the nature of Shephard being this elite space cop, the gameplay and design were enough to make me want to drink bleach. Horrible game to play.
    I'm pretty sure first impression makes a huge difference here. But you played them out of order, so that's on you. Who knows what you would've thought if you played them when they came out.
    Well, you played it in order, so that's on you. Who knows what you would've thought if you played them in the order they came out on the Playstation?


    Great, but it had no impact on ME2!
    Wait, what? Characters you've grown to like possibly dying has no impact?
    By the same token Sovereign going to town on the Citadel had no impact either in your eyes?
    It's part of the story. Your crew took on the mission knowing they might not make it out alive because you've grown closer as a team! It contextualises it...

    I'm fine with you enjoying ME1 more, but you're finding some weird reasons for it...
  • Duffking 9 May 2020 02:29:00 16,582 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 14 years ago
    MW2 is great hut its also the reason why 3s story is garbage. Because nothing actually happened in ME2. Collectors are abducting people, oh no. They work for the reapers, oh no. They used to be protheans, so what. They're building a human looking reaper, OK? The end. Plus the only reason they kill shep off at the start is presumably because there was no reasonable other way to make a paragon shep not tell the illusive man to get fucked right away.

    No actual plot progression so ME 3 just starts with a bunch of giant story ass pulls, starting with "yeah we know we said they needed the conduit to surprise attack the galaxy but fuck it they just flew here through dark space and magically arrived without anyone noticing because we need to move the plot forward" to "hey there's plans for a magic superweapon! And they happen to be on Mars! And we can somehow build it in secret with nobody knowing!".
  • Mola_Ram 9 May 2020 02:39:41 23,501 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I don't know, I liked the mini-plots with all your crew members. You gather people for a job to go somewhere completely alien and unknown, and then go do that. I don't know what plot would make other people happy, but I was happy with it.

    But anyway, this is just people arguing in circles about personal opinions and preferences about a decade-old game. Some people prefer the first one, some prefer the second. It's a bit weird to treat the ME1-lovers as a group that needs to be "recognised", as if they are some marginalised minority. You were disappointed with the second game? Good for you!

    Anyway, I don't think there's anything else I can say, really. I look forward to arguing more if/when the remasters come out and we can all play them again with fresh eyes.
  • FIFAfan 9 May 2020 04:47:02 268 posts
    Seen 9 hours ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Basically, there are a lot of unwelcome parallels between Mass Effect 2 and 3, and Star Wars VIII and IX. The random, go-nowhere middle part of the trilogy. And the desperate final save in the third part that is simply left with too much to do after the middle part derailed a promising opening so badly.
  • FIFAfan 9 May 2020 05:14:30 268 posts
    Seen 9 hours ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    I should add, not implying there are parallels between ME1 and Star Wars VII. ME1 was an unpolished gem. Star Wars VII is a polished turd!
  • DrStrangelove 19 May 2020 19:30:19 15,091 posts
    Seen 24 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Post deleted
  • DrStrangelove 19 May 2020 19:57:06 15,091 posts
    Seen 24 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Post deleted
  • Next Last
Log in or register to reply

Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.