The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
edit - I think the problem comes from people thinking it means you can do anything, which isn't true. But what you can do... you could play the game half a dozen times, and apart from the basic narrative, you play the game completely differently.
This. I consider this incredibly fun. I understand that the game remains the same, but my interaction with it feels different enough that I have fun playing through again and again. Like going through a fighting game/rts as a different character/race.
Okay then, different example - what to do with Grunt. Grunt is not a choice, it's a problem, because waking him up offers you a far more tangible reward - another squad member, access to discounts, extra experience and equipment, and a new bonus talent. Or you can just never wake him up. This isn't a choice because a choice should be between two things of equal or incomparable value, which this isn't.
According to what?
Incoming semantics argument.
There's no semantics to argue.
He's just making up conditions in order for his opinion to be right.
Okay then, different example - what to do with Grunt. Grunt is not a choice, it's a problem, because waking him up offers you a far more tangible reward - another squad member, access to discounts, extra experience and equipment, and a new bonus talent. Or you can just never wake him up. This isn't a choice because a choice should be between two things of equal or incomparable value, which this isn't.
... wut?
OK, how about this choice.
You can live for 30 years, get married, have 8 kids, get a great house and career, and live life to its fullest.
Or you put a gun to your head and blow your shit all over the walls.
Honestly, these distinctions just seem silly. Something suddenly isn't a choice all because one decision turns out to be "better".
And part of what made me like ME2 as much as I did is because I was into it enough to not min/max my decisions and actually roleplay to the situations. Zaeed didn't get revenge because Shepard wasn't going to let him burn a foundry of slave-workers to death, not because I wanted this resource or that.
But if you take the renegade route, you can increase your AR DPS by at least 12.2845623% by the end of the game.
Pancake on
0
smof[Growling historic on the fury road]Registered Userregular
Honestly, these distinctions just seem silly. Something suddenly isn't a choice all because one decision turns out to be "better".
And part of what made me like ME2 as much as I did is because I was into it enough to not min/max my decisions and actually roleplay to the situations. Zaeed didn't get revenge because Shepard wasn't going to let him burn a foundry of slave-workers to death, not because I wanted this resource or that.
Exactly this
Like the choice between
waking up Legion or selling him to Cerberus. Obviously waking him up is superior because you get more content, but if you're roleplaying a geth hater then you can choose to sell him to Cerberus. You miss out on some stuff but it adds to that unique game.
I don't follow your logic Dunxco. Since when is a choice only a choice if the two things to choose from are equal?
the argument is that when a binary choice has unequal outcomes, it's not a choice at all because player preference will always dictate the "choice" be made in a certain way. Nevermind that players' preferences aren't uniform or constant and are often subsumed in favor of "role-playing" a character.
edit: also, this reasoning applies just as much to supposedly "equal" choices as it does to "unequal" ones.
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
hold your head high soldier, it ain't over yet
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
Well if you meta-game everything of course there's no choices. What are you expecting?
Indeed, I never liked that video, it was stupid. His exact example (little sisters in bioshock) is in fact a choice, since whether or not you take it depends on how much you WANT those extra resources. The value of the reward is controlled by you. I chose not to kill them, since it seemed insanely brutal, and could still finish the game.
In Mass Effect, there are hundreds of true choices, which if you save and reload all the time can become problems. But if the player doesn't care about the worlds story there can be no choices, since choices demand story.
edit - And Grunt is a choice, as is Legion. While from a metagame perspective you should always wake them up, if you are playing a role it could definately seem more logical to leave them asleep.
Honestly, these distinctions just seem silly. Something suddenly isn't a choice all because one decision turns out to be "better".
And part of what made me like ME2 as much as I did is because I was into it enough to not min/max my decisions and actually roleplay to the situations. Zaeed didn't get revenge because Shepard wasn't going to let him burn a foundry of slave-workers to death, not because I wanted this resource or that.
Exactly this
Like the choice between
waking up Legion or selling him to Cerberus. Obviously waking him up is superior because you get more content, but if you're roleplaying a geth hater then you can choose to sell him to Cerberus. You miss out on some stuff but it adds to that unique game.
And there's perchance a reward somewhere down the line that you can't really expect.
Honestly, these distinctions just seem silly. Something suddenly isn't a choice all because one decision turns out to be "better".
And part of what made me like ME2 as much as I did is because I was into it enough to not min/max my decisions and actually roleplay to the situations. Zaeed didn't get revenge because Shepard wasn't going to let him burn a foundry of slave-workers to death, not because I wanted this resource or that.
But if you take the renegade route, you can increase your AR DPS by at least 12.2845623% by the end of the game.
*chambers sniper heat sink* I'll live.
Frosty the Snow Plow on
0
DunxcoShould get a suitNever skips breakfastRegistered Userregular
I don't follow your logic Dunxco. Since when is a choice only a choice if the two things to choose from are equal?
By tying them into other game mechanics.
Call it "meta-gaming" or "min/maxing" if you want, people will deliberately go for, say, waking up Grunt, or going Paragon on Zaeed's mission (this one is a tad more of a stretch, I admit, but it is as far as I know the only way to get a two-shot Cain, at least for now) because you are looking at the situation and saying "Which one has the more beneficial outcome?"
Or with regards to Grunt - say you know that you have to assemble the team for the suicide mission, and you know that waking him up for your team will obviously have tangible benefits over ignoring him and keeping him in his tank. The goal of the game is to proceed to the end, and more teammates means more options and a better chance at handling the situations that present themselves.
There are choices in the game. There's lots of them. Some of the situations being pitched as choices are coming off as problems, however. There are situations where rewards being attached to choices boil it down to problem solving.
I don't follow your logic Dunxco. Since when is a choice only a choice if the two things to choose from are equal?
By tying them into other game mechanics.
Call it "meta-gaming" or "min/maxing" if you want, people will deliberately go for, say, waking up Grunt, or going Paragon on Zaeed's mission (this one is a tad more of a stretch, I admit, but it is as far as I know the only way to get a two-shot Cain, at least for now) because you are looking at the situation and saying "Which one has the more beneficial outcome?
1) I don't think you addressed his question at all.
2) Regardless, I was an assault rifle using soldier who used a heavy weapon maybe 5 times throughout the game. I went paragon on that quest, passing up the extra assault rifle damage. So what did I do there, if I didn't make a choice?
I don't follow your logic Dunxco. Since when is a choice only a choice if the two things to choose from are equal?
By tying them into other game mechanics.
Call it "meta-gaming" or "min/maxing" if you want, people will deliberately go for, say, waking up Grunt, or going Paragon on Zaeed's mission (this one is a tad more of a stretch, I admit, but it is as far as I know the only way to get a two-shot Cain, at least for now) because you are looking at the situation and saying "Which one has the more beneficial outcome?"
Or with regards to Grunt - say you know that you have to assemble the team for the suicide mission, and you know that waking him up for your team will obviously have tangible benefits over ignoring him and keeping him in his tank. The goal of the game is to proceed to the end, and more teammates means more options and a better chance at handling the situations that present themselves.
There are choices in the game. There's lots of them. Some of the situations being pitched as choices are coming off as problems, however. There are situations where rewards being attached to choices boil it down to problem solving.
These only become problems if you know the future. As far as you know, if you wake up legion, he hacks the ship and kills Tali immediately before fighting alongside Harbinger in the final boss. By your logic (ie that of a time traveller) reality only has problems, not choices.
I don't follow your logic Dunxco. Since when is a choice only a choice if the two things to choose from are equal?
By tying them into other game mechanics.
Call it "meta-gaming" or "min/maxing" if you want, people will deliberately go for, say, waking up Grunt, or going Paragon on Zaeed's mission (this one is a tad more of a stretch, I admit, but it is as far as I know the only way to get a two-shot Cain, at least for now) because you are looking at the situation and saying "Which one has the more beneficial outcome?"
Or with regards to Grunt - say you know that you have to assemble the team for the suicide mission, and you know that waking him up for your team will obviously have tangible benefits over ignoring him and keeping him in his tank. The goal of the game is to proceed to the end, and more teammates means more options and a better chance at handling the situations that present themselves.
There are choices in the game. There's lots of them. Some of the situations being pitched as choices are coming off as problems, however. There are situations where rewards being attached to choices boil it down to problem solving.
This argument only holds any water if the only "goal" is to proceed to the end as quickly and efficiently as possible and the player already knows every outcome. Which are both pretty silly stipulations.
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
hold your head high soldier, it ain't over yet
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
0
smof[Growling historic on the fury road]Registered Userregular
edited February 2010
I suppose it depends on how you want to play your game.
My last playthrough, on Zaeed's mission, my choice was between getting the AR upgrade, or doing the paragon resolution which was more fitting to my character. I ended up sacrificing the AR because it was more important to me to play the 'right' kind of Shepard. But that was a proper choice, I had to decide if the story was more important than the game.
These only become problems if you know the future. As far as you know, if you wake up legion, he hacks the ship and kills Tali immediately before fighting alongside Harbinger in the final boss. By your logic (ie that of a time traveller) reality only has problems, not choices.
By his logic, the only time there's a choice is if you know the outcomes are the same. For example, if someone offers you one $20 bill or two $10 bills. Now that's apparently a choice because the outcomes are equal.
Wet Bandit on
0
smof[Growling historic on the fury road]Registered Userregular
I don't follow your logic Dunxco. Since when is a choice only a choice if the two things to choose from are equal?
By tying them into other game mechanics.
Call it "meta-gaming" or "min/maxing" if you want, people will deliberately go for, say, waking up Grunt, or going Paragon on Zaeed's mission (this one is a tad more of a stretch, I admit, but it is as far as I know the only way to get a two-shot Cain, at least for now) because you are looking at the situation and saying "Which one has the more beneficial outcome?
1) I don't think you addressed his question at all.
2) Regardless, I was an assault rifle using soldier who used a heavy weapon maybe 5 times throughout the game. I went paragon on that quest, passing up the extra assault rifle damage. So what did I do there, if I didn't make a choice?
I think the whole problems versus choices thing is a bit pedantic, but the Grunt thing is kind of one sided, at least to me. If you're hardcore roleplaying, then sure, but otherwise I can't imagine why you would neglect a party member that was a large part of the advertising and box and disc art.
Goomba on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
BethrynUnhappiness is MandatoryRegistered Userregular
edited February 2010
Sorry, what? I was busy rolling my face all over my keyboard with my Warp Ammo Engineer and her Geth Pulse Rifle.
I think the whole problems versus choices thing is a bit pedantic, but the Grunt thing is kind of one sided, at least to me. If you're hardcore roleplaying, then sure, but otherwise I can't imagine why you would neglect a party member that was a large part of the advertising and box and disc art.
Pretty much, choices are not created equal when playing a Bioware game. This doesn't relate to negative or positive result so much as it more comes down to having content or not.
Not really conducive to roleplaying. If you play enough of these type of games , its sort of like being a mouse and having cheese dangled in-front of you that is set to shock you ever time you go for it. After a while your going to realize going for that cheese just isn't fun.
Egos on
0
ChaosHatHop, hop, hop, HA!Trick of the lightRegistered Userregular
I think the whole problems versus choices thing is a bit pedantic, but the Grunt thing is kind of one sided, at least to me. If you're hardcore roleplaying, then sure, but otherwise I can't imagine why you would neglect a party member that was a large part of the advertising and box and disc art.
This also irritated me. You were presented a choice to open up Grunt which was presented as risky, but because of those little character testimonial videos they put out, I knew what was going on. I also knew Okeer wasn't the Krogan I was recruiting. I mean, it's a small thing (like Jack's gender, which they apparently wanted to be a surprise) but it kind of killed it. Couldn't they have showcased Samara and Jacob on those videos and kept the surprise?
I think the whole problems versus choices thing is a bit pedantic, but the Grunt thing is kind of one sided, at least to me. If you're hardcore roleplaying, then sure, but otherwise I can't imagine why you would neglect a party member that was a large part of the advertising and box and disc art.
This also irritated me. You were presented a choice to open up Grunt which was presented as risky, but because of those little character testimonial videos they put out, I knew what was going on. I also knew Okeer wasn't the Krogan I was recruiting. I mean, it's a small thing (like Jack's gender, which they apparently wanted to be a surprise) but it kind of killed it. Couldn't they have showcased Samara and Jacob on those videos and kept the surprise?
I totally agree with that.
I was like, who the hell is Warlord Okeer? Where's Grunt? And the entire situation with Jack... yeah.
Just like many movie previews, all of the videos and previews and etc. of ME2 spoiled a lot of different parts of the game for people.
Hillean on
0
DunxcoShould get a suitNever skips breakfastRegistered Userregular
edited February 2010
Look, all I was saying was this:
Mass Effect 2 has a lot of choices. Like on Thane's recruitment quest, involving a certain paragon interrupt at the start? Or a certain renegade interrupt involving a window? Those are choices. And they're great. Love those situations. Yay, more of those, that's why I love the series, because there's a scope of choice that is pretty high up there on the ladder of freedom.
Mass Effect 2 has a lot of problems. Like how to clear a room to proceed, hacking stuff, upgrades etc. And those are fun too because it keeps the player on his or her toes. It adds pacing, and spices things up a little, and being a game it's largely what it's built around - one way or another, how to get from A to B, whether A is where you come in and B is the exit, or A is the start of a bypass and B is the room on the other side.
There exist, within the game, choices that stop being choices because there is a clear, tangible benefit over one option than the other. You guys are throwing around min/maxing like it's a dirty word, but we've all been in situations where we play games like that. We hold onto a weapon a bit longer because we know a section coming up will be easier to pass because of it, or you get a quest out of the way earlier because it reaps a substantial reward that will in general make life a bit easier later on.
I'm going to shut up about this now because I find myself unable to properly convey the message I want to through my own shortcomings, so let's change the topic, yes?
Pretty much, choices are not created equal when playing a Bioware game. This doesn't relate to negative or positive result so much as it more comes down to having content or not.
Not really conducive to roleplaying. If you play enough of these type of games , its sort of like being a mouse and having cheese dangled in-front of you that is set to shock you ever time you go for it. After a while your going to realize going for that cheese just isn't fun.
I didn't really notice that except with Grunt and Legion, and not waking up Legion makes sense moreso than Grunt. I wonder if there's any Legion and EDI stories.
This mission is "recruit a squad member," not "recruit some monster who kills your shepard for no reason." So I guess I have a hard time caring that it wasn't actually "risky."
I mean, it's like going through the omega 4 relay. In the "reality" of the game world there's a nontrivial chance that you're DOA, but the player knows that's probably not what happens.
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
hold your head high soldier, it ain't over yet
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
There was some decent surprises with Grunt. I mean I really doubt anyone expected an engineered Krogan, or his backstory. Also his loyalty mission was great and not spoilered by anything.
Pretty much, choices are not created equal when playing a Bioware game. This doesn't relate to negative or positive result so much as it more comes down to having content or not.
Not really conducive to roleplaying. If you play enough of these type of games , its sort of like being a mouse and having cheese dangled in-front of you that is set to shock you ever time you go for it. After a while your going to realize going for that cheese just isn't fun.
I didn't really notice that except with Grunt and Legion, and not waking up Legion makes sense moreso than Grunt. I wonder if there's any Legion and EDI stories.
Yeah I'm pretty much addressing the more major choices as opposed to ones like in Mirandas loyality
where you tell her to talk to the sister or not and such
There was some decent surprises with Grunt. I mean I really doubt anyone expected an engineered Krogan, or his backstory. Also his loyalty mission was great and not spoilered by anything.
I think the issue is more that you knew Okeer
was definitely not gonna join you and was gonna exit the stage one way or another, as soon as you saw Grunt in that tube. If you were following ME2 at all
Mass Effect 2 has a lot of choices. Like on Thane's recruitment quest, involving a certain paragon interrupt at the start? Or a certain renegade interrupt involving a window? Those are choices. And they're great. Love those situations. Yay, more of those, that's why I love the series, because there's a scope of choice that is pretty high up there on the ladder of freedom.
Mass Effect 2 has a lot of problems. Like how to clear a room to proceed, hacking stuff, upgrades etc. And those are fun too because it keeps the player on his or her toes. It adds pacing, and spices things up a little, and being a game it's largely what it's built around - one way or another, how to get from A to B, whether A is where you come in and B is the exit, or A is the start of a bypass and B is the room on the other side.
There exist, within the game, choices that stop being choices because there is a clear, tangible benefit over one option than the other. You guys are throwing around min/maxing like it's a dirty word, but we've all been in situations where we play games like that. We hold onto a weapon a bit longer because we know a section coming up will be easier to pass because of it, or you get a quest out of the way earlier because it reaps a substantial reward that will in general make life a bit easier later on.
I'm going to shut up about this now because I find myself unable to properly convey the message I want to through my own shortcomings, so let's change the topic, yes?
The problem isn't that you aren't being clear, the problem is that you are assuming every player automatically and consciously makes choices based on "what will get me to the end of the game as quickly and efficiently as possible."
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
hold your head high soldier, it ain't over yet
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
There was some decent surprises with Grunt. I mean I really doubt anyone expected an engineered Krogan, or his backstory. Also his loyalty mission was great and not spoilered by anything.
His presentation, backhistory, and loyalty mission were all awesome; the fact that the game tried to send you after Warlord Okeer, and everyone pretty much knew that was bullshit and 'he wasn't gon' make it', and you'd end up with Grunt somehow anyways.
There was some decent surprises with Grunt. I mean I really doubt anyone expected an engineered Krogan, or his backstory. Also his loyalty mission was great and not spoilered by anything.
His presentation, backhistory, and loyalty mission were all awesome; the fact that the game tried to send you after Warlord Okeer, and everyone pretty much knew that was bullshit and 'he wasn't gon' make it', and you'd end up with Grunt somehow anyways.
I had no idea. My first time through the game, I didn't know that I wouldn't have two krogans in my party. I had no reason to suspect that Okeer's mission would turn into Grunt's.
There exist, within the game, choices that stop being choices because there is a clear, tangible benefit over one option than the other.
I understand the distinction you're making, but it's a distinction that only you make. That's been the crux of the issue.
But yeah, we can certainly move on to talk about something else. But I'm not so sure that's safe around here anymore.
They are watching you!
Yeah, basically that's my opinion on some of the decisions in the game. Looking back there were times were I assumed and handwaved my way through things when I should've clarified "This is my perspective. I watched this, did some thinking and analysing my experience, and I personally came to this conclusion."
Regarding Grunt: I saw the video for him they released. Then I saw the Okeer dossier, and my gut reaction was "I'm going to have to make a choice between Grunt and Okeer aren't I?" or with letting Wrex live, I was convinced first time around "I'll bump into him and have to choose between Grunt and Wrex". Pleasantly suprised this was not the case either time and I got to keep such an interesting character around.
There was some decent surprises with Grunt. I mean I really doubt anyone expected an engineered Krogan, or his backstory. Also his loyalty mission was great and not spoilered by anything.
His presentation, backhistory, and loyalty mission were all awesome; the fact that the game tried to send you after Warlord Okeer, and everyone pretty much knew that was bullshit and 'he wasn't gon' make it', and you'd end up with Grunt somehow anyways.
I had no idea. My first time through the game, I didn't know that I wouldn't have two krogans in my party. I had no reason to suspect that Okeer's mission would turn into Grunt's.
Yeah there seems to be a general assumption that most people are like folks here in this forum and virtually live in certain threads consuming every scrap of info.
While I was pretty certain that Okeers mission was going to end up being Grunt; I still thought that maybe there'd be a surprise and you could choose one or the other.
I also had held onto hope that Grunt was a Wrex replacement should he not survive ME and you could get Wrex in ME2.
But then again I went on a ME2 media blackout awhile before release.
And I suspect a large number of the people who bought the game either did so on word of mouth, or had enjoyed ME enough but don't live on gaming forums to know all the spoilers so a lot of what is just "assumed' to be known (jack being a female, etc) here wasn't common knowledge for a lot of people.
You know, while I was glad to see a bunch of the assignment NPCs return, I was a little sad to disembark on the Citadel and not have Rear Admiral Mikhailovich standing there waiting to try and inspect my new Normandy.
And complain about how many cruisers they could have built if Cerberus hadn't rebuilt me, or added the leather chairs.
Kitten Swarm on
You may learn that one day to your sorrow.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Posts
This. I consider this incredibly fun. I understand that the game remains the same, but my interaction with it feels different enough that I have fun playing through again and again. Like going through a fighting game/rts as a different character/race.
There's no semantics to argue.
He's just making up conditions in order for his opinion to be right.
... wut?
OK, how about this choice.
You can live for 30 years, get married, have 8 kids, get a great house and career, and live life to its fullest.
Or you put a gun to your head and blow your shit all over the walls.
Are they equal? No.
Is it a choice? YES.
But if you take the renegade route, you can increase your AR DPS by at least 12.2845623% by the end of the game.
Exactly this
Like the choice between
the argument is that when a binary choice has unequal outcomes, it's not a choice at all because player preference will always dictate the "choice" be made in a certain way. Nevermind that players' preferences aren't uniform or constant and are often subsumed in favor of "role-playing" a character.
edit: also, this reasoning applies just as much to supposedly "equal" choices as it does to "unequal" ones.
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
Indeed, I never liked that video, it was stupid. His exact example (little sisters in bioshock) is in fact a choice, since whether or not you take it depends on how much you WANT those extra resources. The value of the reward is controlled by you. I chose not to kill them, since it seemed insanely brutal, and could still finish the game.
In Mass Effect, there are hundreds of true choices, which if you save and reload all the time can become problems. But if the player doesn't care about the worlds story there can be no choices, since choices demand story.
edit - And Grunt is a choice, as is Legion. While from a metagame perspective you should always wake them up, if you are playing a role it could definately seem more logical to leave them asleep.
And there's perchance a reward somewhere down the line that you can't really expect.
*chambers sniper heat sink* I'll live.
By tying them into other game mechanics.
Call it "meta-gaming" or "min/maxing" if you want, people will deliberately go for, say, waking up Grunt, or going Paragon on Zaeed's mission (this one is a tad more of a stretch, I admit, but it is as far as I know the only way to get a two-shot Cain, at least for now) because you are looking at the situation and saying "Which one has the more beneficial outcome?"
Or with regards to Grunt - say you know that you have to assemble the team for the suicide mission, and you know that waking him up for your team will obviously have tangible benefits over ignoring him and keeping him in his tank. The goal of the game is to proceed to the end, and more teammates means more options and a better chance at handling the situations that present themselves.
There are choices in the game. There's lots of them. Some of the situations being pitched as choices are coming off as problems, however. There are situations where rewards being attached to choices boil it down to problem solving.
1) I don't think you addressed his question at all.
2) Regardless, I was an assault rifle using soldier who used a heavy weapon maybe 5 times throughout the game. I went paragon on that quest, passing up the extra assault rifle damage. So what did I do there, if I didn't make a choice?
These only become problems if you know the future. As far as you know, if you wake up legion, he hacks the ship and kills Tali immediately before fighting alongside Harbinger in the final boss. By your logic (ie that of a time traveller) reality only has problems, not choices.
This argument only holds any water if the only "goal" is to proceed to the end as quickly and efficiently as possible and the player already knows every outcome. Which are both pretty silly stipulations.
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
My last playthrough, on Zaeed's mission, my choice was between getting the AR upgrade, or doing the paragon resolution which was more fitting to my character. I ended up sacrificing the AR because it was more important to me to play the 'right' kind of Shepard. But that was a proper choice, I had to decide if the story was more important than the game.
By his logic, the only time there's a choice is if you know the outcomes are the same. For example, if someone offers you one $20 bill or two $10 bills. Now that's apparently a choice because the outcomes are equal.
Her question. But it doesn't really matter :P
Dammit - Now I wanna see Legion break free and round up the Geth to destroy Reapers/Collectors/Quarians/TIM/Shepard
NG+ with Insanity right? It's so hard.
Pretty much, choices are not created equal when playing a Bioware game. This doesn't relate to negative or positive result so much as it more comes down to having content or not.
Not really conducive to roleplaying. If you play enough of these type of games , its sort of like being a mouse and having cheese dangled in-front of you that is set to shock you ever time you go for it. After a while your going to realize going for that cheese just isn't fun.
This also irritated me. You were presented a choice to open up Grunt which was presented as risky, but because of those little character testimonial videos they put out, I knew what was going on. I also knew Okeer wasn't the Krogan I was recruiting. I mean, it's a small thing (like Jack's gender, which they apparently wanted to be a surprise) but it kind of killed it. Couldn't they have showcased Samara and Jacob on those videos and kept the surprise?
I totally agree with that.
I was like, who the hell is Warlord Okeer? Where's Grunt? And the entire situation with Jack... yeah.
Just like many movie previews, all of the videos and previews and etc. of ME2 spoiled a lot of different parts of the game for people.
Mass Effect 2 has a lot of choices. Like on Thane's recruitment quest, involving a certain paragon interrupt at the start? Or a certain renegade interrupt involving a window? Those are choices. And they're great. Love those situations. Yay, more of those, that's why I love the series, because there's a scope of choice that is pretty high up there on the ladder of freedom.
Mass Effect 2 has a lot of problems. Like how to clear a room to proceed, hacking stuff, upgrades etc. And those are fun too because it keeps the player on his or her toes. It adds pacing, and spices things up a little, and being a game it's largely what it's built around - one way or another, how to get from A to B, whether A is where you come in and B is the exit, or A is the start of a bypass and B is the room on the other side.
There exist, within the game, choices that stop being choices because there is a clear, tangible benefit over one option than the other. You guys are throwing around min/maxing like it's a dirty word, but we've all been in situations where we play games like that. We hold onto a weapon a bit longer because we know a section coming up will be easier to pass because of it, or you get a quest out of the way earlier because it reaps a substantial reward that will in general make life a bit easier later on.
I'm going to shut up about this now because I find myself unable to properly convey the message I want to through my own shortcomings, so let's change the topic, yes?
I mean, it's like going through the omega 4 relay. In the "reality" of the game world there's a nontrivial chance that you're DOA, but the player knows that's probably not what happens.
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
Yeah I'm pretty much addressing the more major choices as opposed to ones like in Mirandas loyality
I think the issue is more that you knew Okeer
I agree Grunt had a nice backstory, though.
The problem isn't that you aren't being clear, the problem is that you are assuming every player automatically and consciously makes choices based on "what will get me to the end of the game as quickly and efficiently as possible."
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
His presentation, backhistory, and loyalty mission were all awesome; the fact that the game tried to send you after Warlord Okeer, and everyone pretty much knew that was bullshit and 'he wasn't gon' make it', and you'd end up with Grunt somehow anyways.
I understand the distinction you're making, but it's a distinction that only you make. That's been the crux of the issue.
But yeah, we can certainly move on to talk about something else. But I'm not so sure that's safe around here anymore.
I had no idea. My first time through the game, I didn't know that I wouldn't have two krogans in my party. I had no reason to suspect that Okeer's mission would turn into Grunt's.
I've only done one or two paragon things my entire renegade infiltrator run, and my paragon is still 3x higher than renegade.
It would have been nice though, with his spooky Darth Vader vibe.
They are watching you!
Yeah, basically that's my opinion on some of the decisions in the game. Looking back there were times were I assumed and handwaved my way through things when I should've clarified "This is my perspective. I watched this, did some thinking and analysing my experience, and I personally came to this conclusion."
Regarding Grunt: I saw the video for him they released. Then I saw the Okeer dossier, and my gut reaction was "I'm going to have to make a choice between Grunt and Okeer aren't I?" or with letting Wrex live, I was convinced first time around "I'll bump into him and have to choose between Grunt and Wrex". Pleasantly suprised this was not the case either time and I got to keep such an interesting character around.
Yeah there seems to be a general assumption that most people are like folks here in this forum and virtually live in certain threads consuming every scrap of info.
While I was pretty certain that Okeers mission was going to end up being Grunt; I still thought that maybe there'd be a surprise and you could choose one or the other.
I also had held onto hope that Grunt was a Wrex replacement should he not survive ME and you could get Wrex in ME2.
But then again I went on a ME2 media blackout awhile before release.
And I suspect a large number of the people who bought the game either did so on word of mouth, or had enjoyed ME enough but don't live on gaming forums to know all the spoilers so a lot of what is just "assumed' to be known (jack being a female, etc) here wasn't common knowledge for a lot of people.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
So now, in order to get the best ending, I finish Legion's loyalty quest and head straight for the next destination, correct?
Also, now that I switched from an Nvidia card to an ATI one (5770), is there an easier method to enable AA on the game without changing its file name?
Blog||Tumblr|Steam|Twitter|FFXIV|Twitch|YouTube|Podcast|PSN|XBL|DarkZero
And complain about how many cruisers they could have built if Cerberus hadn't rebuilt me, or added the leather chairs.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]