(no subject)
Feb. 16th, 2010 02:47 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
geebsAs I've said before, I'd like to try the Mass Effect series if I had the time to dedicate the appropriate amount of time. I mean, sure, I have time, but not the amount of time I'd want to give it. And I guess one of the problems is having to play the first one for certain story paths to occur in the second one, so you have to play one game to play another.
For example, if you want Urdnot Wrex to live from the first game, you have to play his whole loyalty thing out in that game, otherwise the game assumes you ended up having to put him down after arguing over the genophage cure Saren was working on. I mean, it doesn't really affect the story that much in the second game, other than you get an icy reception on the Krogan homeworld, but basically if you Wrex did end up dying in the first one, some other Krogan basically accomplishes the same thing he does had he lived.
Which is a complaint some have, that the different choices are an illusion- like no matter which ending you got in the first one, be it paragon or renegade, things work out so you're in the same boat. That being the case though, while the outcome may be pretty much the same, I think you do feel more attached if the way you got there fits with your personality and preferences. So, while the Krogans end up being in the same state they would be either way, Wrex is cool, so I think you'd prefer if he leaves.
Plus, there's the whole romance thing. Yeah, there's a whole slew of people you can hook up with in this one, if you want to carry over you relationship with Ashley (or Kaiden if you're playing a chick Shephard), you have to work on all that to have it carry over. And while things seem to have cooled in this one, since you can choose to still pine for them in this one, it'll prolly matter for ME3 if you stay loyal to them throughout the first two games.
But I digress, it wouldn't be too bad if the games weren't different play styles. I mean, the original Mass Effect is close to other Bioware games like the KotORs or Dragon Ages, where its still an RPG. ME2 however, is basically a shooter with RPG elements. In fact, if you choose to be the Soldier class, you basically are playing it as a shooter, relying on your aim and reflexes to get the job done, relegating the special stuff to the rest of your time squad. There's no increasing your hit percentages, you're basically leveling up your physical stats to enhance your survivability, but in terms of killing, that's all you.
It seems to me it and the Vanguard (which is basically a soldier with less firepower but with cooler biotic tricks and focusing on close combat, i.e., a Jedi-type) seem to be the more popular classes I've seen being played, since it involves less thinking and more killing. The Sentinel seems more support-ish (but with the defensive stats of a tank), which is fine if you're into that, but some people aren't in to playing the support role and relying on the AI to make the best of the advantages you're giving them.
The engineer, adept, and infiltrator all also seem to require you to be a little more creative in how you play, which may be a little too much thinking for those more drawn to the shooter rather than RPG aspect of the game. Plus, as much as I love sniping and invisibility, it takes work, and a lot of times never works out as smoothly as you want it to in actual game. Like in "sneaky" games like the Assassin's Creeds, Metal Gear Solids, and Splinter Cells, when a plan comes together and you set up the perfect sneak kill, its a work of art. The problem is setting it up like that. There's always the chance of messing up before your plans come to fruition, and you end up with an ugly kill that gets the job done, and you end up having to fight your way in and out anyways, so you feel like you wasted all this time sneaking and trying to finesse it when it woulda been just easier to go in guns blazing and brute forcing the matter.
I mean, the finesse way is cooler, and people want to do things in a cool way, but some people just aren't as skilled as others when it comes to it. It sounds like the newest Splinter Cell tries to get around that with its marking system- where you stay hidden, then "mark" several targets, and with a push of a button, you quickly do a bunch of cool-looking 24-ish sneak kills in succession without having to be as dexterous. Which I'm definitely curious how it will be received by gamers. Because on the one hand, some people might like the simplicity, but those with l33t gaming skills might not like the "dumbing down" of the game.
Anyways, back to ME, I think the best thing about it is the whole paragon/renegade thing and being able to play a saint, a dick, and anything in between. So instead of you just being along for the ride, you feel like you really are making the choices in the game, for better or for worse. Interestingly enough, I'm kinda curious how many people play it the way they feel they would act if they were such a character, how many people just want to be an evil SOAB, and how many people are used to playing the good guy so they try to be the shining example of goodliness, a paragon of heroism and virtue. Like, are they choosing choices that resonate with them, or do they pick choices they think will get a certain outcome?
I think that's what gives the game replay value, being able to go down these different paths. Of course, for me, I would find it hard to make the choices I don't like, "just to see what happens", because they just wouldn't feel right to me. For me, party unity and everyone feeling right psychologically and emotionally (in the long run) is tantamount. Then comes the opportunities for knowledge and scientific advancement, then what's best for political stability.
So, Jack and Miranda get on each other's nerves because the latter is a line-towing Cerberus operative, and the former was experimented on by them. Tali and Legion obviously would not get along, given their species are mortal enemies. In both situations where you run into THE conflict where you have to favor one or the other, its hard to choose. I see both sides, so the actual best choice is to work on getting enough paragon/renegade points to get the third "best" option to appear and give an impassioned speech where you appeal to both of them and diffuse their argument so they both stay loyal.
Garrus and Zaeed are both out for revenge. I'm sure some people will call shenanigans on this, but honestly, I wouldn't let them actually kill their targets. I think people mix my love of violence with wrathfulness- but I like fighting because its fun, not out of some deep seated anger. Well, okay, its partly from pent up aggression. But honestly, while I can come of like a crazed lunatic when I do get angry, once I get over that initial bluster, I don't really hold grudges. But still, you're thinking, not kill someone, who is this doppleganger who has replaced Geebs?
But really, if you let Zaeed go after Vido, you're basically condemning a whole refinery of innocent workers to die in pursuit of petty revenge. And the guy Garrus is trying to get revenge on for betraying him and his team and leading to their deaths, Sidonis, is pretty remorseful. And getting that closure, hearing that Sidonis is truly sorry is both better for Garrus emotionally than just putting a bullet in that guy's head, and better karma for his fallen comrades, I think. Better to let the targets live and talk with your squadmates why that outcome is better!
And if you thought the Garrus and Zaeed thing is weird, you'd flip on my opinion of Samara and Morinth. I mean, you'd think I'd like Morinth better- not an uptight zealot like her mom, likes to have fun and indulge her desires (not that her having fun with you would be good for you, since her mating with you kills you). And part of me feels sorry for Morinth. She didn't choose to be an Ardat Yakshi. She was basically born into a cursed life, its not her fault.
But, choosing Morinth over Samara, she kills her mom and pretends to be her, with no one but you and her being the wiser. And to me that just seems sick and wrong to lie to everyone else like that. See, if they had a choice where you choose Morinth because you feel she kinda got a raw deal in all this, I'd be okay with that. I'd prefer not to kill either as both have powerful abilities that would be most useful, but if Samara ends up dying because she wouldn't give up her quest for "justice" and not listen to reason, so be it. I mean, I guess Morinth has done some pretty bad things, killed a lot of people, particularly through mating, because it makes her more powerful. But what if you instead turned such aggression towards the right enemies as a sort of penance? If they were gonna have Morinth replace Samara like that, I woulda like the option to be up front with my crew and try to convince them of my choice, rather than just lying to their faces.
It does kinda suck, because Morinth's mind control is more unique and interesting than Samara's powerful biotics. I mean, they already have a powerful "blaster" in Jack, why do you need two?
But lest you think all my choices are paragonish, the final choice, I still don't see what's so bad about saving the station! It could be very useful, like why the hell would you destroy all that technology that could help you in fighting these reapers?! It just makes no sense to me at all!
For example, if you want Urdnot Wrex to live from the first game, you have to play his whole loyalty thing out in that game, otherwise the game assumes you ended up having to put him down after arguing over the genophage cure Saren was working on. I mean, it doesn't really affect the story that much in the second game, other than you get an icy reception on the Krogan homeworld, but basically if you Wrex did end up dying in the first one, some other Krogan basically accomplishes the same thing he does had he lived.
Which is a complaint some have, that the different choices are an illusion- like no matter which ending you got in the first one, be it paragon or renegade, things work out so you're in the same boat. That being the case though, while the outcome may be pretty much the same, I think you do feel more attached if the way you got there fits with your personality and preferences. So, while the Krogans end up being in the same state they would be either way, Wrex is cool, so I think you'd prefer if he leaves.
Plus, there's the whole romance thing. Yeah, there's a whole slew of people you can hook up with in this one, if you want to carry over you relationship with Ashley (or Kaiden if you're playing a chick Shephard), you have to work on all that to have it carry over. And while things seem to have cooled in this one, since you can choose to still pine for them in this one, it'll prolly matter for ME3 if you stay loyal to them throughout the first two games.
But I digress, it wouldn't be too bad if the games weren't different play styles. I mean, the original Mass Effect is close to other Bioware games like the KotORs or Dragon Ages, where its still an RPG. ME2 however, is basically a shooter with RPG elements. In fact, if you choose to be the Soldier class, you basically are playing it as a shooter, relying on your aim and reflexes to get the job done, relegating the special stuff to the rest of your time squad. There's no increasing your hit percentages, you're basically leveling up your physical stats to enhance your survivability, but in terms of killing, that's all you.
It seems to me it and the Vanguard (which is basically a soldier with less firepower but with cooler biotic tricks and focusing on close combat, i.e., a Jedi-type) seem to be the more popular classes I've seen being played, since it involves less thinking and more killing. The Sentinel seems more support-ish (but with the defensive stats of a tank), which is fine if you're into that, but some people aren't in to playing the support role and relying on the AI to make the best of the advantages you're giving them.
The engineer, adept, and infiltrator all also seem to require you to be a little more creative in how you play, which may be a little too much thinking for those more drawn to the shooter rather than RPG aspect of the game. Plus, as much as I love sniping and invisibility, it takes work, and a lot of times never works out as smoothly as you want it to in actual game. Like in "sneaky" games like the Assassin's Creeds, Metal Gear Solids, and Splinter Cells, when a plan comes together and you set up the perfect sneak kill, its a work of art. The problem is setting it up like that. There's always the chance of messing up before your plans come to fruition, and you end up with an ugly kill that gets the job done, and you end up having to fight your way in and out anyways, so you feel like you wasted all this time sneaking and trying to finesse it when it woulda been just easier to go in guns blazing and brute forcing the matter.
I mean, the finesse way is cooler, and people want to do things in a cool way, but some people just aren't as skilled as others when it comes to it. It sounds like the newest Splinter Cell tries to get around that with its marking system- where you stay hidden, then "mark" several targets, and with a push of a button, you quickly do a bunch of cool-looking 24-ish sneak kills in succession without having to be as dexterous. Which I'm definitely curious how it will be received by gamers. Because on the one hand, some people might like the simplicity, but those with l33t gaming skills might not like the "dumbing down" of the game.
Anyways, back to ME, I think the best thing about it is the whole paragon/renegade thing and being able to play a saint, a dick, and anything in between. So instead of you just being along for the ride, you feel like you really are making the choices in the game, for better or for worse. Interestingly enough, I'm kinda curious how many people play it the way they feel they would act if they were such a character, how many people just want to be an evil SOAB, and how many people are used to playing the good guy so they try to be the shining example of goodliness, a paragon of heroism and virtue. Like, are they choosing choices that resonate with them, or do they pick choices they think will get a certain outcome?
I think that's what gives the game replay value, being able to go down these different paths. Of course, for me, I would find it hard to make the choices I don't like, "just to see what happens", because they just wouldn't feel right to me. For me, party unity and everyone feeling right psychologically and emotionally (in the long run) is tantamount. Then comes the opportunities for knowledge and scientific advancement, then what's best for political stability.
So, Jack and Miranda get on each other's nerves because the latter is a line-towing Cerberus operative, and the former was experimented on by them. Tali and Legion obviously would not get along, given their species are mortal enemies. In both situations where you run into THE conflict where you have to favor one or the other, its hard to choose. I see both sides, so the actual best choice is to work on getting enough paragon/renegade points to get the third "best" option to appear and give an impassioned speech where you appeal to both of them and diffuse their argument so they both stay loyal.
Garrus and Zaeed are both out for revenge. I'm sure some people will call shenanigans on this, but honestly, I wouldn't let them actually kill their targets. I think people mix my love of violence with wrathfulness- but I like fighting because its fun, not out of some deep seated anger. Well, okay, its partly from pent up aggression. But honestly, while I can come of like a crazed lunatic when I do get angry, once I get over that initial bluster, I don't really hold grudges. But still, you're thinking, not kill someone, who is this doppleganger who has replaced Geebs?
But really, if you let Zaeed go after Vido, you're basically condemning a whole refinery of innocent workers to die in pursuit of petty revenge. And the guy Garrus is trying to get revenge on for betraying him and his team and leading to their deaths, Sidonis, is pretty remorseful. And getting that closure, hearing that Sidonis is truly sorry is both better for Garrus emotionally than just putting a bullet in that guy's head, and better karma for his fallen comrades, I think. Better to let the targets live and talk with your squadmates why that outcome is better!
And if you thought the Garrus and Zaeed thing is weird, you'd flip on my opinion of Samara and Morinth. I mean, you'd think I'd like Morinth better- not an uptight zealot like her mom, likes to have fun and indulge her desires (not that her having fun with you would be good for you, since her mating with you kills you). And part of me feels sorry for Morinth. She didn't choose to be an Ardat Yakshi. She was basically born into a cursed life, its not her fault.
But, choosing Morinth over Samara, she kills her mom and pretends to be her, with no one but you and her being the wiser. And to me that just seems sick and wrong to lie to everyone else like that. See, if they had a choice where you choose Morinth because you feel she kinda got a raw deal in all this, I'd be okay with that. I'd prefer not to kill either as both have powerful abilities that would be most useful, but if Samara ends up dying because she wouldn't give up her quest for "justice" and not listen to reason, so be it. I mean, I guess Morinth has done some pretty bad things, killed a lot of people, particularly through mating, because it makes her more powerful. But what if you instead turned such aggression towards the right enemies as a sort of penance? If they were gonna have Morinth replace Samara like that, I woulda like the option to be up front with my crew and try to convince them of my choice, rather than just lying to their faces.
It does kinda suck, because Morinth's mind control is more unique and interesting than Samara's powerful biotics. I mean, they already have a powerful "blaster" in Jack, why do you need two?
But lest you think all my choices are paragonish, the final choice, I still don't see what's so bad about saving the station! It could be very useful, like why the hell would you destroy all that technology that could help you in fighting these reapers?! It just makes no sense to me at all!
