[quote name='Anexanhume']On a side note, how does everyone feel about the story of ME2 versus ME1? Personally, I feel it's a step down.[/QUOTE]
I'll have to wait for ME3 to come out to render a final verdict, but as of right now ME2's narrative seemed near worthless. You spent so much of the game recruiting people for missions and making them loyal that you only spent 5 or 6 missions on things related to the overarching story of the series. Now, if they somehow manage to work in those choices you made, who lives and dies, and so on, into the story of ME3 better than they worked in ME1's choices into ME2, then it might be quite good and relevant. I'm not entirely optimistic about that though.
The books are very canon and related to the story. The first book is a true prequel to ME1 since Saren is one of the main characters. It really helps flesh out what could have been a two-dimensional villain. Cmd. Anderson and a certain ship make an appearance.
I'm about half-way through the new book, haven't had much time for reading lately. But I'll be posting thoughts too when I'm done.
I was not a fan at first of the story of ME2, but that was due to the Shepard resurrection thing. It felt like a good bridge story though. The identity of the Collectors, increased Reaper threat, and you could feel things building for the finale. It was more action movie scenes, which I think worked. I could feel my pulse increasing during intense battles and the cutscenes where I kept thinking I was about to lose a squadmate. ME1 had some great sci-fi moments, like talking to Vigil on Ilos. I'm hoping the third game really hits that balance of both, I think it could make for a very satisfying end to the story of Shepard.
I hope a new appearance pack comes out along with the Liara DLC. New weapons are awesome but I need some more costume variety.
I think the story in both games is excellent. They definitely changed up ME2 to be more character-focused and less plot-focused, and I can appreciate that some people might have been looking for a little more forward momentum with the main storyline, but I really like what they did with it. It's a good place for a middle chapter to be. I do agree that ME2's squad members need to factor more heavily into ME3 than Liara/Wrex/Ash/Kaidan did in ME2, or the whole team building emphasis is going to seem misplaced in retrospect. I'm pretty confident that Bioware isn't going to let us down.
I'm doing another playthrough with my Engineer (with the difficulty turned down from Insanity to Veteran so I can move at a little faster pace) and I think it's definitely my favorite class, especially once you get the sniper rifle training. Given that I like the Engineer powers so much and also favor the sniper rifle so heavily, I feel like Infiltrator should be an obvious choice for me, but for some reason it feels like it just doesn't fit right. I can't really find a way to fit Tactical Cloak into my playstyle effectively, so I just never use it and it feels like a big waste, like playing as a Vanguard but never charging.
[quote name='Salamando3000']I'll have to wait for ME3 to come out to render a final verdict, but as of right now ME2's narrative seemed near worthless. You spent so much of the game recruiting people for missions and making them loyal that you only spent 5 or 6 missions on things related to the overarching story of the series. Now, if they somehow manage to work in those choices you made, who lives and dies, and so on, into the story of ME3 better than they worked in ME1's choices into ME2, then it might be quite good and relevant. I'm not entirely optimistic about that though.[/QUOTE]
It's not just that for me. The story felt like a tack-on almost.
LOL it's a human, but it's also a reaper! Copying the anatomy of a human makes no sense for a space-faring entity you say? Hogwash! Look at those scary red eyes!
After spending some time chewing on what I learned during my Insanity playthrough, I posted some tips on TrueAchievements.com. I know some of you guys are ME2 gurus so if you want to check it out, comments/feedback/positive votes would be appreciated. It's fairly Engineer centric so some of you Vanguard players might not like what I have to say.
[quote name='Anexanhume']Yes, the books are cannon. That's why they avoid Shepard's gender.
On a side note, how does everyone feel about the story of ME2 versus ME1? Personally, I feel it's a step down.[/QUOTE]
Definitely was a step down. ME1 had a great, epic sci-fi/fantasy story. ME2 was more about building a new team, learning a bit more about reavers etc.
It's basically just a bridge from ME1 to ME3 story wise and doesn't do a whole lot to advance the plot dramatically compared to the first game, nor the third one I expect/hope.
[quote name='KingBroly']Oh, and less awkward walking away from conversations.[/QUOTE]
That just wouldn't be Mass Effect. One of the best lines in ME2 was the prisoner who responds to "I should go" with "Wish I could go."
I've probably said it a hundred times in this thread (if so, sorry to make it 101) but I enjoyed ME2 more than ME1. Storywise, ME2 is the next logical step for the series to take after the events of the first game. So far the series has been the classic battle between two sides:
ME1 features Saren and the Reapers making a strong effort to assert themselves throughout the galaxy after killing numerous people, attacking various locations, attempting to create their own (Krogan) army, and trying to pave the way for complete galactic destruction.
--They pushed, but we (as Shepard) pushed back.
ME2 is the same type of scenario, only that we (as Shepard) gather much stronger allies so that we may respond to an even bigger threat with the Collectors.
--They push harder in this game, we spend the duration of the game gathering the means to push back even harder.
The whole series so far has almost been like a big tug-of-war match between the two sides. When one side seemingly grows stronger, so does the other.
The major differences have been:
In ME1, regarding the Reapers, the game was all about the idea of discovery. Who are these sentient machines? How are they created? What is their purpose? These ideas, combined with the planetary travel that was ever present in ME1, really fed into this idea of being part of this mysterious new galaxy and gave you a sense of wonder, etc.
In ME2, with regard to the Reapers, we start getting some answers to our questions about this seemingly all-powerful beings. We witness firsthand how they are created. We start to see how they think, and how they affect the minds of people (Overlord) and machines (the last ally you can recruit). We learn what they did with the
Protheans
so many years ago. The sense of being in a completely new place is gone in this game, and is replaced with a sense of being more in the "underworld", so to speak. You visit places like Omega and Illium that are notorious for harboring some of the more dangerous people in the galaxy. You see how things are run in back alleys versus the safe quarters of the Presidium. Where ME1 was somewhat characterized by being a bright, flourishing, starry-eyed journey through this new galaxy, ME2 has proven to be a much darker tone.
Also, while the story in ME2 is not filled with as many surprises as ME1, it does what any second chapter of a story/saga should do: show the effects of the first (ME1) and set up the third (ME3). I think the main problem that some people have is that they look at ME1, ME2, and ME3 like it's supposed to be 3 different stories all centered around one main idea; or 3 different books. In reality, Mass Effect is the book and ME1-3 are just the chapters. ME2 does a great job at being the middle chapter of the two stories, and we can only hope and pray that BioWare delivers some epic ending to the story as a whole.
Can you guys really say that ME2 does a worse job at extending the story of ME1 and setting up ME3 than other "second chapters" of popular series/sagas - like Matrix: Reloaded, LotR: The Two Towers, Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back, etc.? For me, the action in ME2 is on the same level as Reloaded and The Two Towers and the revelations of
the Collectors being the incarnation of Protheans and the showing of the Human Reaper
are of the same magnitude as "No...I am your father." was for T.E.S.B.
[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']The sense of being in a completely new place is gone in this game, and is replaced with a sense of being more in the "underworld", so to speak. You visit places like Omega and Illium that are notorious for harboring some of the more dangerous people in the galaxy. You see how things are run in back alleys versus the safe quarters of the Presidium. Where ME1 was somewhat characterized by being a bright, flourishing, starry-eyed journey through this new galaxy, ME2 has proven to be a much darker tone.[/QUOTE]
Totally agree with everything you've said there. I really liked how they turned the tables on Shepard-- in ME1 he is in a position of respect and authority, with the backing (mostly) of the most powerful and influential people in the galaxy, then in ME2, he's working out of the underground, forced to ally himself with unsavory and dangerous people because all of his old friends think he's an asshole now.
[quote name='Ryuukishi']Totally agree with everything you've said there. I really liked how they turned the tables on Shepard-- in ME1 he is in a position of respect and authority, with the backing (mostly) of the most powerful and influential people in the galaxy, then in ME2, he's working out of the underground, forced to ally himself with unsavory and dangerous people because all of his old friends think he's an asshole now.[/QUOTE]
What influential people did he have backing him in the first game? I don't think you can count the council, considering they would butt heads with him every time they spoke and rarely (never?) believed a word he said about the Reapers. In ME2 he has Cerberus on his side, who for the most part fully back him in everything he does and actually acknowledge the threat at large and as for an organization, are one of the biggest and influential of them all.
I also feel that he has more respect in the sequel, considering that he saved the Citadel and possibly the council depending on your actions. I don't recall finding one character that treated him harshly because of that.
[quote name='Ryuukishi']After spending some time chewing on what I learned during my Insanity playthrough, I posted some tips on TrueAchievements.com. I know some of you guys are ME2 gurus so if you want to check it out, comments/feedback/positive votes would be appreciated. It's fairly Engineer centric so some of you Vanguard players might not like what I have to say.[/QUOTE]Comments/feedback:
I would have personally mentioned Kasumi's Flashbang Grenade ability and the fact that it completely shuts Harbinger down and makes him an open target. Also, towards the end you say something about Engineer being a better choice than Biotics or Soldiers because of both classes limitations (in terms of biotic effectiveness and ammo). I'd say that both those classes are easier than Engineer on Insanity - Biotics with Warp detonations and Soldiers with the M76 Revenant (a gun that you can almost never run out of ammo with). Engineer's more fun, though.
That's just my opinion. I liked your post and thought it was a pretty good way of setting someone up for their Insanity run.
[quote name='Indignate']What influential people did he have backing him in the first game? I don't think you can count the council, considering they would butt heads with him every time they spoke and rarely (never?) believed a word he said about the Reapers. In ME2 he has Cerberus on his side, who for the most part fully back him in everything he does and actually acknowledge the threat at large and as for an organization, are one of the biggest and influential of them all.[/QUOTE]
I guess I am thinking more about perception-- the Council may have butted heads with Shepard in private, but as a Spectre he was perceived by the galaxy at large as doing their business and having their full backing. Whereas Cerberus has a reputation as terrorists and lowlifes that follows him everywhere he goes in the second game. It's like he switched sides from the police to the mafia.
[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']I would have personally mentioned Kasumi's Flashbang Grenade ability and the fact that it completely shuts Harbinger down and makes him an open target. Also, towards the end you say something about Engineer being a better choice than Biotics or Soldiers because of both classes limitations (in terms of biotic effectiveness and ammo). I'd say that both those classes are easier than Engineer on Insanity - Biotics with Warp detonations and Soldiers with the M76 Revenant (a gun that you can almost never run out of ammo with). Engineer's more fun, though.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the input. Adept is the one class I haven't really touched at all, so I don't have any experience with biotic detonations. And I've only played as a Soldier as high as Veteran, where the enemies don't have much protection to speak of. On Insanity I leaned so heavily on Overload and especially Incinerate, it's hard to imagine getting through a fight without them. But I'll be running through the Liara DLC with a Soldier character, so maybe I'll crank the difficulty and give it a try.
[quote name='gryphter']nothing beats when you accidentally ask the same thing twice in a row:
Shephard: Who taught you that?
Whoever: It was my father.
Shephard: Who taught you that?
Whoever: It was my father.
Or how about:
Shephard: Do you have a moment?
Kelly: Always have time for you, captain!
Shpehard: It was nice talking to you.[/QUOTE]
Personally, I love this. I was doing this on purpose in my last play-through for comedic effect. Commander Shepard, hero of the battle for the Citadel, gets killed and rebuilt.....but with a few glitches in the synapses. A little brain damage is to be expected right?
Try it. It's even better if you insert a long pause between asking the question again.
[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']
Can you guys really say that ME2 does a worse job at extending the story of ME1 and setting up ME3 than other "second chapters" of popular series/sagas - like Matrix: Reloaded, LotR: The Two Towers, Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back, etc.? For me, the action in ME2 is on the same level as Reloaded and The Two Towers and the revelations of
the Collectors being the incarnation of Protheans and the showing of the Human Reaper
are of the same magnitude as "No...I am your father." was for T.E.S.B.
I understand that it's all subjective, though [/QUOTE]
That's my problem with it. What possible function does a Reaper with an exaggerated human anatomy possibly have? There's no reason to believe it's an efficient ship form, nor does it seem logical that they'd go around unleashing these on planets when they they clearly have superior methods of destruction/indoctrination via the reapers like Sovereign that we saw. It just makes no sense to me.
[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']I've probably said it a hundred times in this thread (if so, sorry to make it 101) but I enjoyed ME2 more than ME1.)[/QUOTE]
I enjoyed ME2 more as well, just not the story part. Now the story wasn't bad by any means, just didn't live up to the first which is my favorite game story of all time. I also liked that side quests in ME1 had more plot to them than most of those in ME2 (especially those anomaly missions).
But the combat, no Mako, less RPG tweaking etc. made me enjoy ME2 more as a whole.
[quote name='Anexanhume']
That's my problem with it. What possible function does a Reaper with an exaggerated human anatomy possibly have? There's no reason to believe it's an efficient ship form, nor does it seem logical that they'd go around unleashing these on planets when they they clearly have superior methods of destruction/indoctrination via the reapers like Sovereign that we saw. It just makes no sense to me.
[/QUOTE]
Yep, I found that a tad lame as well for pretty much the same reason.
That's my problem with it. What possible function does a Reaper with an exaggerated human anatomy possibly have? There's no reason to believe it's an efficient ship form, nor does it seem logical that they'd go around unleashing these on planets when they they clearly have superior methods of destruction/indoctrination via the reapers like Sovereign that we saw. It just makes no sense to me.
[/QUOTE]
I'm sure Xecutioner will have plenty to say, and we had a similar conversation waaaaaaay back. So I'm going to repost my little thoughts. I think part of the fun here is bouncing theories and seeing of we get more answers in ME3.
[quote name='Lord_Kefka']
So why make a human reaper? My guess is to try and activate the relay and at bare minimum instill distrust and fear in humanity among the other species. There is some already, but a giant human looking Reaper? Humanity would be on a sh-t list with everyone. And since Shepard rallied everyone and killed a Reaper, they may see an opponent that needs to be crushed. In any case, I'm psyched for ME3.
[/QUOTE]
[quote name='Lord_Kefka']
So I guess the reason I threw out the question was to form theories on the master plan of the Reapers. The Collectors had learned how to neutralize humans via the swarms, and Mordin made note that the plague running through the part of Omega was likely from Collectors/Reapers. And it didn't affect humans. Why? Again, spreading distrust and fear through the rest of the galaxy maybe? So was the human reaper meant for attack alone? To join the rest of the Reapers if they fly in by the time of ME3? I'm not sure about another attack on the Citadel to activate the relay, security was still increased even if politics and fear led the other Council races to dismiss the Reapers as a theory. If the Collectors had gathered enough information on the other races, could they have unleashed the Swarm on the Citadel and activated the relay?
I should stop and note that I'm strictly throwing out questions and theories because it's got me very intrigued and into the story and I'm not looking for plot-holes or anything. I'm still trying to convince some friends to pick up the game so I can talk about this more.
That's my problem with it. What possible function does a Reaper with an exaggerated human anatomy possibly have? There's no reason to believe it's an efficient ship form, nor does it seem logical that they'd go around unleashing these on planets when they they clearly have superior methods of destruction/indoctrination via the reapers like Sovereign that we saw. It just makes no sense to me.
[/QUOTE]I'm not sure if you're wondering why the
Human Reaper looks human
or why
the Collectors used humans specifically for its creation
, but I think my explanation from a few months back will answer both.
*dusts the cobwebs off of much earlier post*
I know a lot of people think the Human Reaper Embryo at the end of the game didn't make too much sense and/or seemed kind of awkward, so I'll try to make some sense out of it (from what I understand):
With the fall of Sovereign at the end of Mass Effect 1, the Reapers plan to unlock the Citadel and pave the way for galaxy-wide destruction was halted. The Collector's, who've been compiling research for the Reapers on all of the Citadel races since their transformation from being Prothean, were ordered to start gathering human test subjects. The reason why the Reapers wanted human was because after the destruction of Sovereign, it was clear that the humans were the strongest race in the galaxy - something that the Reapers consistently look for to gain their advantage. All that sets into motion the story of ME2.
The reason why, at the end of the game, the Reaper prototype looks human (or like a Terminator ) is because the Reapers take on the form of whatever species is predominately used in their construction. Humans were the strongest in the galaxy and mostly used in the embryo's construction, so the end of ME2 really does make an awful lot of sense that the Reaper looks very much human.
The reason why, at the end of the game, the Reaper prototype looks human (or like a Terminator ) is because the Reapers take on the form of whatever species is predominately used in their construction. Humans were the strongest in the galaxy and mostly used in the embryo's construction, so the end of ME2 really does make an awful lot of sense that the Reaper looks very much human.
[/QUOTE]
Aherm.
No, it does not make an awful lot of sense that the Reaper looks very much human. You say "Reapers take on the form of whatever species is predominately used in their construction." That's fine. We're all aware of that. Well, I think we are. But... why?
Why the cocks would you do that?
Why wouldn't you go with the design that was most efficient? The design that actually works the best? One not based on a very physically fragile creature with weak joints and exposed eyes and and and and...
Have you tried building a ship that looks like a giant hermit crab? Those guys seem to have a pretty good thing going on.
No, it does not make an awful lot of sense that the Reaper looks very much human. You say "Reapers take on the form of whatever species is predominately used in their construction." That's fine. We're all aware of that. Well, I think we are. But... why?
Why the cocks would you do that?
Why wouldn't you go with the design that was most efficient? The design that actually works the best? One not based on a very physically fragile creature with weak joints and exposed eyes and and and and...
Have you tried building a ship that looks like a giant hermit crab? Those guys seem to have a pretty good thing going on.
[/QUOTE]
You're assuming that they built the Reaper to look like a human, because they are big fans of their (human) work...or something. Reapers don't build new Reapers to look like the current strongest species, they only use the species' DNA in the new Reaper's construction. The fact that it ends up looking like said species is just a by-product of the Reaper engineering.
With regards to the efficiency of this Reaper's build - you have to remember that it was a larvae; or a very early build. It was nowhere near completion, which makes me believe that something that early in production could still have weak points such as the tubes or the eyes. Who's to say what the finished model would look like?
When you look at all the facts given to us via the dialog and the codex, it really does "make an awful lot of sense". Assumptions and crazy ideas are what hurt the believability of what transpires at the end of the game and with the Reaper cycle, in general.
They basically just cruise through space and use mind control to make other species do their bidding for them... As far as what they physically look like, why would any particular design be better than any other? If they have some mystical belief that taking the form of a human helps them absorb the strength of the human race, or whatever, I don't think that's notably absurd compared to anything else that goes on in the series.
As far as what they physically look like, why would any particular design be better than any other?
[/QUOTE]
Um. Because not all designs are equal? For the same reason that we make airplanes look like airplanes and not... I dunno, bags of skittles. I like bags of skittles a lot more than I like jets, but they'd be a pretty bad shape for an airplane.
One design is better than another for the same reason that we don't make vehicles that look like people. Humans are full of weak spots - ankles, knees, hips, shoulders, elbows, wrists, the whole damn face area... and while we're adapted decently to walking upright, we're still ungainly as all . Unless the Reapers are really hurting for the lack of giant opposable (not a word, according to the Firefox spell checker - you, Firefox spell checker) thumbs and/or bipedal locomotion, then looking like a giant metal person really does add nothing.
[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']
You're assuming that they built the Reaper to look like a human, because they are big fans of their (human) work...or something. Reapers don't build new Reapers to look like the current strongest species, they only use the species' DNA in the new Reaper's construction. The fact that it ends up looking like said species is just a by-product of the Reaper engineering.
[/QUOTE]
Damn straight I made that assumption. You're making the opposite assumption. Either's a possibility, but I'll stand by "robots being limited by the original form of their components" just being pretty shitty for the robots.
[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']
With regards to the efficiency of this Reaper's build - you have to remember that it was a larvae; or a very early build. It was nowhere near completion, which makes me believe that something that early in production could still have weak points such as the tubes or the eyes. Who's to say what the finished model would look like?
[/QUOTE]
When I say "weak spots", I don't literally mean the glowing red thing that's weak against small arms fire. I meant more things like joints and what-not.
And yes, I'm assuming that it still looks human-like as an adult. If it's just a human shape with a hermit crab shell around it, then really, this is all moot.
Yeah, for one thing they are just floating around in space so aerodynamics isn't too important.
And, although we did see Sovereign in a close range stand-up fight, it seems like most of the time the Reapers' M.O. is to stay behind the scenes, manipulate others into doing their dirty work, and then launch a surprise attack with overwhelming force. I'm guessing that even when they show up to do some reapin', they're mostly nuking planets from orbit rather than duking it out face to face, so they're probably not too concerned about weak points and such.
If only they knew they were inside a videogame, they'd have known that weak points are all-important!
The crab-like design makes sense because it's structurally rigid and has a continuous length that is not plagued with joints. If reaper ballistics are anything like current bipedal species' technology in the galaxy, they need a long continuous length with which to accelerate their projectiles. Limbs, rather than a contained hull, are just begging to be blasted through, would be a nightmare to shield, and are utterly useless got any function a space-faring craft may have. The fact that the form of the reaper necessarily follows from its donor DNA is preposterous. We're dealing with a hyper-intelligent machine race that has aggregately engineered two distinct species (collectors and keepers), but they'll be damned if they can make a ship that doesn't look exactly like the donor race. On top of that, we've potentially got a formiddable race with thousands more coming and the ability to bend sapient creatures' will to their own, but they'd rather dick around experimenting with a gigantic cyborg man? Bioware would need one hell of an explanation for all that.
The crab-like design makes sense because it's structurally rigid and has a continuous length that is not plagued with joints. If reaper ballistics are anything like current bipedal species' technology in the galaxy, they need a long continuous length with witch to accelerate their projectiles. Limbs, rather than a contained hull, are just begging to be blasted through, would be a nightmare to shield, and are utterly useless got any function a space-faring craft may have.
[/QUOTE]
2 problems:
1. The cuttlefish design you're talking about isn't even a widely used design amongst the Reapers - there's maybe a handful that you can spot from the ending cutscene from the game, with scores of other designs present amongst them all. Are you saying that the other 1 million Reapers (the triangle-shaped ones, the beetle-shaped ones, etc.) are of faulty design and only Harbinger is built to Reaper perfection? If so, that's a pretty bold statement. The same as any statement regarding the faultiness of an incomplete model of a Reaper.
2. You're comparing Reaper ballistics to that of organic life. With regards to the Mass Effect lore, Reaper technology is far greater than anything organics have come up with. Who says that the Reapers are bound by the same limitations that organic technology is? I don't recall the Human-Reaper having any trouble with projectiles, despite not being built like a cuttlefish.
The fact that the form of the reaper necessarily follows from its donor DNA is preposterous. We're dealing with a hyper-intelligent machine race that has aggregately engineered two distinct species (collectors and keepers), but they'll be damned if they can make a ship that doesn't look exactly like the donor race.
On top of that, we've potentially got a formiddable race with thousands more coming and the ability to bend sapient creatures' will to their own, but they'd rather dick around experimenting with a gigantic cyborg man? Bioware would need one hell of an explanation for all that.
What's so absurd about the Reapers experimenting with or exploiting vessels that may/may not result in a means to their end - whether it be a Terminator look-alike, Saren, Grayson (from the books), etc.? You have to realize that this is the first time in thousands and thousands (etc.) years that they've been stopped in their attack. Is it really that illogical to want to study the one species who've held you back, when all others have failed? Is it really that crazy to experiment and see if there is some knowledge or advantage that can be gained?
1. The cuttlefish design you're talking about isn't even a widely used design amongst the Reapers - there's maybe a handful that you can spot from the ending cutscene from the game, with scores of other designs present amongst them all. Are you saying that the other 1 million Reapers (the triangle-shaped ones, the beetle-shaped ones, etc.) are of faulty design and only Harbinger is built to Reaper perfection? If so, that's a pretty bold statement. The same as any statement regarding the faultiness of an incomplete model of a Reaper.
[/QUOTE]
At no point did he say anything about Sovereign's design being "perfection". Merely better than, y'know, a gangly biped with a billion joints.
[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']
What's so absurd about the Reapers experimenting with or exploiting vessels that may/may not result in a means to their end - whether it be a Terminator look-alike, Saren, Grayson (from the books), etc.? You have to realize that this is the first time in thousands and thousands (etc.) years that they've been stopped in their attack. Is it really that illogical to want to study the one species who've held you back, when all others have failed? Is it really that crazy to experiment and see if there is some knowledge or advantage that can be gained?
[/QUOTE]
No! Of course not! There is nothing weird about their experimenting on humans.
But building a giant, metal replica of a human? Yes. I am calling that weird. That, my friend, is pretty ing weird.
Honestly, the ending ME2 used had so much potential
If the characters were done more effectively, I mean wow, this game... When everyone was dying I sat back in my chair, hands on head, "wahhhhh, if only i cared about any of youuuuu!!!" Seriously, I get emotional real easy with my games but Bioware has fallen flat with their character writing as of late, which wasn't helped by the cookie-cutter dialogue and mission designs as a way to "develop" the party members either. Garrus made me flinch though, and I was happy Tali survived.
Given that humans have the shortest life-span in the galaxy, that human reaper would probably die really quick. Since you know, it was powered by human corpses.
Given that humans have the shortest life-span in the galaxy, that human reaper would probably die really quick. Since you know, it was powered by human corpses.
At no point did he say anything about Sovereign's design being "perfection". Merely better than, y'know, a gangly biped with a billion joints.
No! Of course not! There is nothing weird about their experimenting on humans.
But building a giant, metal replica of a human? Yes. I am calling that weird. That, my friend, is pretty ing weird.
[/QUOTE]
But why is it weird? That's the question that no one is answering.
Is it really any weirder than the other Reapers being a giant, metal replica of the various cultures that they've wiped out before the time of the game? I don't see any uproar over the fact that Sovereign is a giant, metal replica of a race of cuttlefish that the Reapers destroyed hundreds of thousands of years ago. So...what is it about the human aspect of this one particular Reaper that makes it so much worse than all the others? This can't honestly be all about some engineering dispute that people have with a Human-Reaper.
But why is it weird? That's the question that no one is answering.
Is it really any weirder than the other Reapers being a giant, metal replica of the various cultures that they've wiped out before the time of the game? I don't see any uproar over the fact that Sovereign is a giant, metal replica of a race of cuttlefish that the Reapers destroyed hundreds of thousands of years ago. So...what is it about the human aspect of this one particular Reaper that makes it so much worse than all the others? This can't honestly be all about some engineering dispute that people have with a Human-Reaper.
[/QUOTE]
A hermit crab - or cuttlefish, or whatever the - makes some semblance of sense from an engineering standpoint. And, yeah, doesn't look goofy. Though "cuttlefish" kinda makes me giggle. I think that's why I call it a hermit crab. Heh. Cuttle.
Anyway.
How is "This is a step backwards in terms of functionality." not a valid complaint? We - humans - make bad spaceships.
And it looks goofy as . Is that just my opinion? No. No, it's not just my opinion. I'll prove it.
Picture that baby reaper flying through space. Does it have one/both arm(s) in front of it like it's Superman?
But why is it weird? That's the question that no one is answering.
Is it really any weirder than the other Reapers being a giant, metal replica of the various cultures that they've wiped out before the time of the game? I don't see any uproar over the fact that Sovereign is a giant, metal replica of a race of cuttlefish that the Reapers destroyed hundreds of thousands of years ago. So...what is it about the human aspect of this one particular Reaper that makes it so much worse than all the others? This can't honestly be all about some engineering dispute that people have with a Human-Reaper.
[/QUOTE]
I didn't see that much of an issue with the Human-Reaper. The reapers have technology advanced enough that they could make a Reaper resembling Wilford Brimley and still have it be both highly maneuverable and pretty deadly. So, why make it human shaped then? Cause the reapers are cocky little SOB's.
I saw the human-reaper as a totem of sorts....a symbol of what happens if you fark with the reapers. They'll take your race, make a space ship out of 'em, and give it the form of your race. Then, that reaper will serve as a reminder for the rest of time at how yet another race failed to destroy them.
Or maybe the reapers are just someones pawns for a galactic-scale battle royale pitting the forms and genetic material of space's all time baddest species against one another. I'd play that game.
All I know is that if they do repurpose ME1 using the ME2 engine, I want that re-ported back to 360 pronto.[/QUOTE]Agreed. ME1 on the ME2 engine would be worth a rebuy and another playthrough, since it would be a whole new set of achievements.
[quote name='js1']Well now PS3 owners get to experience the awesomeness that is Mass Effect 2.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, this is pretty cool. The more people that get to play one of the best games ever made, the better. It probably also bodes well for ME2 DLC being kept alive longer for all those fresh PS3 players-- maybe even more free DLC.
I was kind of hoping for an updated ME1 with ME2 gameplay retrofitted onto the original story though. That would have been even better.
I wonder how this work work for PS3 players-- Will they get more of a chance to define Shepard's backstory since they can't import from ME1, or are they just totally stuck with the default ME2 Shepard?
[quote name='Ryuukishi']I was kind of hoping for an updated ME1 with ME2 gameplay retrofitted onto the original story though. That would have been even better.[/QUOTE]
1. The cuttlefish design you're talking about isn't even a widely used design amongst the Reapers - there's maybe a handful that you can spot from the ending cutscene from the game, with scores of other designs present amongst them all. Are you saying that the other 1 million Reapers (the triangle-shaped ones, the beetle-shaped ones, etc.) are of faulty design and only Harbinger is built to Reaper perfection? If so, that's a pretty bold statement. The same as any statement regarding the faultiness of an incomplete model of a Reaper.
[/QUOTE]
However, they still share the common design trait of being largely one mass without limbs or other things flaring out. They're structural weaknesses and don't make any sense being human proportions. (Sovereign had short ones for docking capabilities, which makes sense.) We also know from the derelict reaper that they actually have internal accommodations for organic lifeforms, which also makes unorthodox designs nonsensical. The more compact the design, the less distance you have to travel to get around the ship.
2. You're comparing Reaper ballistics to that of organic life. With regards to the Mass Effect lore, Reaper technology is far greater than anything organics have come up with. Who says that the Reapers are bound by the same limitations that organic technology is? I don't recall the Human-Reaper having any trouble with projectiles, despite not being built like a cuttlefish.
And you're comparing a projectile big enough to kill a man with diminutive shields with one big enough to devastate a metal ship kilometers long. The sense of scale is borked.
What's so absurd about the Reapers experimenting with or exploiting vessels that may/may not result in a means to their end - whether it be a Terminator look-alike, Saren, Grayson (from the books), etc.? You have to realize that this is the first time in thousands and thousands (etc.) years that they've been stopped in their attack. Is it really that illogical to want to study the one species who've held you back, when all others have failed? Is it really that crazy to experiment and see if there is some knowledge or advantage that can be gained?
If this is a super-intelligent machine race that is millions of years old, you have to think that they've calculated every eventuality and built contingency plan within contingency plan. While it may make sense that they continue to experiment with organic life, actually ever depending on this research in the current cycle would mean that their contingency plans are getting flushed down the toilet. Sorry, but I have to imagine that they have more fail-safes than that.
If Bioware pulls any of this "exclusive content on the PS3" shit that other companies have, I'm out. Seriously. I've bought all these overpriced 1.5 hour DLC's for $7, weapon packs and all. I put full support behind a product, don't me because I'm not a two console household.
It's fairly Engineer centric so some of you Vanguard players might not like what I have to say.
. Unless the Reapers are really hurting for the lack of giant opposable (not a word, according to the Firefox spell checker - 
