Arena Test I -- Dead, but being used to test thingsSpace War 0: Free Space (Still alive, just busy elsehwere)
Site
GTX0 AnnouncementsFeedbackHelp | SandboxNewest Posts | Replies | Hottest
Activities GTX0 Mafia | AutoMafiaGTX0 Adventure | NIFESpectator GamingThe Flowvamp
Topics
Communities NostalgiaAxemsDrunjkPointless
Communities RPG ChatTerraria & IndiesJedi SithCovenant
Entertainment Computer Help & ChatSports | Entertainment & MusicWrestlingCreative Outlet
Special Topics World & PoliticsReal LifeSpiritualityScience & Math
Games
Game Genres StrategyMario WorldPokémonFinal Fantasy/RPGs
Superforums Video Game News & DiscussionsLegend of ZeldaAnimated/JapaneseDueling Cards
Popular Games OverwatchSuper Smash BrosMass EffectHalo


Mass Effect


Flammable! Or, inflammable? Forget which. Doesn't matter!
I started ME2 last night
Posted: Posted March 17th
Edited March 17th by Vandy

I played a little over two hours. I got to the part where I'm supposed to be recruiting new members for my team. I went and spoke with the council who were smug and disbelieving as ever - hey guys remember when you were wrong the last time I tried to save the world? I told them I deserved better and left. Anyway now I'm at the Purgatory to pick up Billy who is apparently a woman. I ended the night just after they tried to scam me into willfully walking into a cell - ha! No thanks.

The opening sequence with the Normandy getting destroyed was pretty cool.

So far the combat seems more fluid than ME1 and I'm following the story a bit more easily. I do prefer having ammo opposed to the heating mechanism (though I think it's funny how they still try to tie the ammo clip to prevent overheating).

Any time they mention the smoking, mysterious man as "the illusive man" I want to roll my eyes, but I don't because that gives me headaches! I recognized him as Martin Sheen right from the start! Not so illusive.

There are 55 Replies

Ah ME2, the best one of the series. I love how if you didn't play the game right, everyone including Shepard could die. Definitely encouraged you to do all of the loyalty missions and upgrades for your ship.

Posted March 17th by Q
Q

I didn't know that.

Posted March 17th by Vandy
Vandy

Oooppss........uhh

Though they do tell you in the game to do these things early on so I didn't spoil too much for you.

But seriously, take the time to do everyone's loyalty missions. You'll miss out on alot of the game content if you don't.

Edited March 17th by Q
Q

One of my gripes about the dialogue system is that once you choose whether you're going to be a goody-two-shoes or the douche, you have to stay on that path during all conversations in order to be able to have access to the extra dialogues in the future. So even if I like a line in particular or I don't like a particular person, if I'm on the paragon path I have to pretend like I like them to get Paragon points, because having just a few renegade points is useless.

EDIT: I just decided that I should have used this resurrection to come back with a vengeful attitude and been a jerk to everyone! Like Lady Stoneheart.

Edited March 17th by Vandy
Vandy

Yeah, let's try to avoid being too detailed with stuff about the game around folks new to it!


I don't remember dialogue options locking you into paragon/renegade options for the duration of the conversation. I know of a few times that can happen, but a lot of conversations allow you to go all over the place (or just even completely restart the conversation).

The combat is much cleaner than ME1's, but it also is still slightly clunky compared to other third person shooters. (I don't know if they ever did cover super well, but it's waaaaay better in 2 than in 1).

Posted March 17th by Jet Presto
Jet Presto

I don't remember dialogue options locking you into paragon/renegade options for the duration of the conversation.


You're not locked, there are other options to choose from. But what I'm saying is that if you want actual game-changing perks later in the game, you have to do all-paragon or all-renegade to build up enough of either. If you go 50/50 on renegade and paragon I don't feel like you would have enough of either to influence anyone later in the game. Or am I wrong? This is primarily based on my experience in ME1 when I couldn't prevent Wrex from being killed because I hadn't gone 100% one way or the other.

Posted March 17th by Vandy
Vandy

"Yeah, let's try to avoid being too detailed with stuff about the game around folks new to it!"

Yeah I didn't realize Vandy was new to ME2. Shoulda asked first.

"The combat is much cleaner than ME1's, but it also is still slightly clunky compared to other third person shooters. (I don't know if they ever did cover super well, but it's waaaaay better in 2 than in 1). "

ME3 probably has the smoothest gameplay of the 3, but ME2's is still pretty good.

Edited March 17th by Q
Q

@Vandy, I like how you said Billy instead of Jack.



Posted March 17th by Moonray
Moonray
 

Oh oh oh. I see what you mean. Yeah, you're right. That's definitely one of the less good aspects of the game's design. (I had this conversation with my co-worker literally last night, actually, where I was arguing that I looooove Mass Effect, but I'm not sure I'd consider them examples of "good design" or call them "great games" when talking about design.)

But yeah, if you want to unlock alternative options or see better results in ME2 or ME3, you do need to play all paragon or all renegade. I thought you could sort of just do whatever in ME1, since you can put experience points into Charm or Intimidate stats, which would do the unlocking. But I realize that I'm not sure how to access the "next block" of, well, blocks you can put points into.

Posted March 17th by Jet Presto
Jet Presto

I went and spoke with the council who were smug and disbelieving as ever - hey guys remember when you were wrong the last time I tried to save the world?

I wish they could have figured something better out for those guys. But I guess the plot of ME2 sorta tied their hands and required an excuse.

But what I'm saying is that if you want actual game-changing perks later in the game, you have to do all-paragon or all-renegade to build up enough of either.

This has always been annoying. You can't play some middle-of-the-road guy if you want the 'best' options. You need to be Space Jesus or Space Hitler.

I do prefer having ammo opposed to the heating mechanism



Edited March 17th by Count Dooku
Count Dooku

I've actually come around to the Council to some extent. I don't think it was necessarily handled well, but each time I play through the series, I kind of "get it" more and more.


hey guys remember when you were wrong the last time I tried to save the world?


'Cause the thing sorta is...we think that way because we were in on it all. Shepard finds evidence, and thus the game explicitly tells us as the player that you're right about everything. The Council is supposed to be annoying, because of course bureaucracy is annoying, right? And it wants you to feel like it's basically up to you and you alone (er, your crew alone) to save the galaxy.

At the same time, if you can look at it removed from your perspective as the player, what proof does Shepard ever actually provide them that there is an impending Reaper invasion? Almost every piece of hard evidence gets destroyed. I mean, they literally went into a hearing with "visions" as their main piece of evidence. WE know we're right, but there isn't much of a reason why the Council should believe us. Even when you start saying, "Yeah, but Sovereign showed up and attacked the Citadel," there's still a fundamental difference in what each person knows. Shepard/You know/s Sovereign is a Reaper, because we found evidence of that (and also they tell us themselves). But the Council doesn't get to see any of that. Given what information they have available, I don't think it's so unreasonable that they would doubt Sovereign is a Reaper per se. They have no real hard proof it was, and certainly no real proof that there are more.

So I know the game presents it as such, but when you really think about it, it kinda does make sense that the Council would be highly suspicious of every one of Shepard's claims, and they wouldn't risk a galactic war going into the Terminus systems just because this one dude was right about one thing. That's a pretty low standard of proof for a diplomatic body to act upon.

(Of course, that doesn't explain why they didn't get more involved in studying the tech from the post-battle. I know Anderson says something about how not much ultimately survived to be scavenged because of the keepers and whatnot, but still.)

Posted March 17th by Jet Presto
Jet Presto

Thing with the visions is, aren't we ultimately vindicated on that front? Without them we'd have never found Ilos, and therefore not stopped Saren.

The council would have to accept that our visions were correct enough to let us save the day, but then draw a rather arbitrary line at the Reaper-related stuff.

At the same time, if you can look at it removed from your perspective as the player, what proof does Shepard ever actually provide them that there is an impending Reaper invasion?

Pretty sure mandatory Vigil dialogue explains the whole Reaper plan. Seems odd that that wouldn't be included in whatever reports he surely had to make on the whole incident. Vigil also confirms that Sovereign is a Reaper, which corroborates Shepard's report from Virmire where the council claims Sovereign/Saren was lying about it.

Even with Vigil deactivated by the time they go to investigate, they'd literally have to suspect that the guy who was right enough to save the day was actively lying to them for some reason.

Posted March 17th by Count Dooku
Count Dooku

Thing with the visions is, aren't we ultimately vindicated on that front? Without them we'd have never found Ilos, and therefore not stopped Saren.


For us as the player, sure. Kind of hard to argue that the Council should have accepted that as evidence at the point it is provided to them, however. Also not really sure anything in ME1 or ME2 actually, sufficiently proves the vision to anyone that isn't Shepard/the player/the crew that is completely faithful to Shepard Commander, though. A single Reaper ship, that they can't really definitively prove is a Reaper given they have nothing to really base it on other than Shepard's testimony, is not necessarily evidence of a massive armada of sentient machines that wipe out all galactic civilization. There still isn't much proof the Reapers ever existed either. (I mean, even Liara who studied Protheans all her life said she'd never come across them in her studies. She pretty much just jumps right on board with the facts from the vision, which again, outside the perspective of the player, it isn't hard to take that with a grain of salt.)


Pretty sure mandatory Vigil dialogue explains the whole Reaper plan. Seems odd that that wouldn't be included in whatever reports he surely had to make on the whole incident. Vigil also confirms that Sovereign is a Reaper, which corroborates Shepard's report from Virmire where the council claims Sovereign/Saren was lying about it.


Right, but again, that is evidence that never makes it to the Council. So again, it's "evidence" that the Council themselves cannot see and must therefore simply take Shepard's word for it. He did include it in the reports, but is that really sufficient evidence? I mean, if someone reported that they stumbled upon a den of bigfoots (bigfeet?), but had no one to actually back it up other than, "They howled at me themselves!" Would you immediately just go, "Ok! I believe you!" Or would you be like, "Ok...sure...sure..."


they'd literally have to suspect that the guy who was right enough to save the day was actively lying to them for some reason.


Well, it wasn't so much that they thought he was lying as much as they thought he was being tricked by Saren, who was the primary reason Shepard saved the day. He followed Saren, and Saren attacked the Citadel. That's definitive. That is a quantifiable reality seen by everyone. The existence of Reapers, the plan to wipe out civilization, an armada just out in dark space - that is all only revealed to Shepard, crew, and the player. The Council at that point can't actually know how right Shepard was about any of that stuff, because they literally only have his word to go on. And even then, the only clear connection is Saren. I don't think it's that unreasonable that they would doubt the focus of Shepard at that point.

We are, clearly, not meant to agree, of course. We as players are in on it the entire time, hence we feel frustration with the Council as well. And certainly, it is strange the way they handled post-Sovereign attack stuff in general, even without accepting that an army of sentient machines were coming to destroy all intelligent life. But I think if you actually step back and identify what actual, hard evidence they actually have versus what evidence and knowledge you obtain as the player, I don't think they're behaving so irrationally.

Posted March 17th by Jet Presto
Jet Presto

Kind of hard to argue that the Council should have accepted that as evidence at the point it is provided to them, however.

I think you misunderstand me. I'm talking about after the fact, not during the chase.

The council cannot logically explain how we got to Ilos without accepting the visions as at least partially true. Without the visions, we don't get to Ilos.

So again, it's "evidence" that the Council themselves cannot see and must therefore simply take Shepard's word for it.

Thing is, I struggle to believe that the council would elevate someone like Shepard to a position as important as 'Galactic Rules Don't Apply Policeman' if they have a problem taking his word for things. Now sure, if he's making outlandish claims some skepticism is warranted. But if they're so skeptical that they think he's making it up in the case of things like Vigil (hard to argue that Saren used a Prothean VI to trick you when it literally gives you the data packet to stop Saren/Sovereign) then their selection criteria needs some serious work.

I mean, if someone reported that they stumbled upon a den of bigfoots (bigfeet?), but had no one to actually back it up other than, "They howled at me themselves!" Would you immediately just go, "Ok! I believe you!" Or would you be like, "Ok...sure...sure..."

Thing is, in the case of Vigil, you've got three people coordinating the story. They were right there. Even if they didn't see the visions, it's hard to wave this one away.

Any one piece of 'evidence' here is admittedly flimsy. The issue is that when you string it all together it's pretty apparent that there's more going on.

Well, it wasn't so much that they thought he was lying as much as they thought he was being tricked by Saren

That's fair early on, but again, examine the evidence and reports post-attack and Vigil's testimony, corroborated by three people, should at least give them pause:

Visions from a prothean beacon lead us to Ilos, a place we nor Saren could have located without them.

We have a conversation with Saren's ship, wherein it claims to be a Reaper. This is later corroborated by Vigil.

On Ilos, a Prothean VI explains how the Reaper vanguard opened the citadel relay to dark space in order to let the invasion fleet through.

As this is explained to us, the Geth do something very un-geth-like, and Saren's ship tries to do something suspiciously similar to what the Reapers did, as per Vigil.

The Prothean VI, which confirms to us that the Protheans died to the Reapers, gives us a special program to allow us to override the station and stop Sovereign. Even if Saren had somehow 'compromised' this VI, it makes no sense for him to aid us.

There are parts here where Saren simply could not have 'tricked' us. For the council to dismiss it out of hand, they must think us fools, liars, or perhaps both.


Posted March 17th by Count Dooku
Count Dooku

A little bit further in, I rescued Billy (Jack, but she'll always be Billy to me) and then went on to the Archangel mission. Yay Garrus! Now, we'll need to put a hold on all other missions and prioritize finding Wrex so we can get "the band" back together!

Also, I'm unashamedly attempting to romance all women on my ship.

Posted March 19th by Vandy
Vandy

Thing is, in the case of Vigil, you've got three people coordinating the story. They were right there. Even if they didn't see the visions, it's hard to wave this one away.


I dunno, man. If my three siblings told me they definitely saw a ghost, I don't think I'd be any more likely to believe them without any evidence that actually makes it to me. If the Council, due to a lack of concrete evidence, thinks Saren is playing Shepard, I don't see why they would suddenly stop believing that because Shepard's loyal crew is on his side. Shepard is sort of a stand in for the entire party. They're all being played by default, if the only evidence the Council has is that Saren is in charge.


Any one piece of 'evidence' here is admittedly flimsy. The issue is that when you string it all together it's pretty apparent that there's more going on.


But I still think you're exclusively looking at this as the person who acquired all of the evidence. That evidence "strings together" to Shepard and the player, but quite literally, none of it makes it to anyone outside Shepard or crew. They don't see it as a "string" because none of it actually makes it to them.


Visions from a prothean beacon lead us to Ilos, a place we nor Saren could have located without them.


A vision that only Shepard and Liara see, and that takes a loooooong time to reveal itself as Ilos. Not hard to imagine, if you're the Council, that your long chasing of Saren is what leads you to Ilos and not a "vision."


We have a conversation with Saren's ship, wherein it claims to be a Reaper. This is later corroborated by Vigil.


A conversation that only Shepard and two loyal crew mates have.


On Ilos, a Prothean VI explains how the Reaper vanguard opened the citadel relay to dark space in order to let the invasion fleet through.


Again, that only Shepard and two loyal crew mates. There's virtually no way for the Council to confirm any part of that story, even after the fact. All the outward evidence points to Saren being in charge and responsible for everything.

As this is explained to us, the Geth do something very un-geth-like, and Saren's ship tries to do something suspiciously similar to what the Reapers did, as per Vigil.


Right, something similar to a race of sentient machines few people have ever even heard of, doing something virtually no one up until this point even knew happened.


I'm just saying, the concrete evidence provided makes it pretty hard for the Council to commit their full "national" resources to the fight. They have access to surprisingly little to actually go on, other than outwardly circumstantial evidence. It's not that unreasonable that they would have concerns about the kind of evidence provided and the reaction you are hoping to gain.


Posted March 19th by Jet Presto
Jet Presto

The problem with circumstantial evidence and the council is that this is exactly how it's proven Saren has gone rogue. A voice recording. We're already able to replicate voices, and yet in the future this is labeled as concrete. The same evidence that they claim is irrefutable also mentions Reapers.

My problem isn't so much that they didn't want to fully commit, it's that they're so dismissive. Even if they don't believe it's Reapers, it was still witnessed just how damaging the tech was, and should be more concerned about there being more of it.

Posted March 19th by Hugo
Hugo
 

The recording definitively proves that he had gone rogue, but Benezia mentioning Reapers doesn't definitively prove anything about their existence.


I don't mind the dismissiveness at all in ME2 - especially considering you are working with a known human terrorist organization - but I agree that the ultimate issue is that they seem so unfazed by the technology of Sovereign.

Posted March 19th by Jet Presto
Jet Presto

Is this your first play through? If so you are in for a treat.

Posted March 19th by S.o.h.
S.o.h.
 

If you go 50/50 on renegade and paragon I don't feel like you would have enough of either to influence anyone later in the game. Or am I wrong? This is primarily based on my experience in ME1 when I couldn't prevent Wrex from being killed because I hadn't gone 100% one way or the other.

In ME1 the only thing guiding those choices was whether or not you had enough Charm or Intimidate points.

Every P/R coloured option in ME1 had a number assigned it (1-12) that corresponded with the amount of points you put into Charm or Intimidate. The actual amount of Paragon or Renegade points didn't dictate what response you could give; however, in order to get more Charm or Intimidate slots you had to minmax P/R.

In ME2 they eschewed Charm and Intimidate as skills, and instead the coloured dialogue options are derived from both your P/R levels and a slightly ambiguous 'percentage' stat which the game calculates as a hidden value each time you engage in conversation. From what I understand, it gives you an effective P/R score depending on how many possible points you accrued with each conversation (i.e. the more Renegade points you gain out of a possible Renegade total in an interaction, the better the percentage score). Which is closer to what you described.

You can play a mixed morality character that isn't either Space Jesus or Space Dick. You just need to have an imported ME1 character with a sufficient amount of morality points and generally resolve all other peripheral dialogue options in a consistent manner. You could also wear the Death Mask when you get it later in game if you want to improve dialogue success rates.

I had a Shep who was a Renegade when it came to nearly every interaction, but took the Paragon route out of the big set pieces and dilemmas - there was only ever one greyed-out option throughout that char's entire trilogy playthrough, and that was an interaction in a ME2 DLC. This was despite the fact he had enough Renegade points as I was doing this post-game; the percentage wasn't strong enough to make that one choice.

Posted March 19th by Arch
Arch
 

Journal entry #3

I recruited Mordin last night. He seems like an interesting character. I like that he's a professor with military background. I'll probably start running with him and Garrus on most missions.

I also learned a bit more about probing planets and resource gathering. I didn't know that you needed them for most of the upgrades until I spoke to Miranda about possible upgrades for the ship.

I did a few side missions - one stemming from a message I got from Cerberus and the other I came across a transmission while probing for resources.

EDIT: I didn't realize the recruitment phase would take up so much time. I thought within a few hours I would have everyone assembled. But I actually like taking the time and building my team. I feel a bit more connected to each member after going through a full mission to recruit them.

Edited March 20th by Vandy
Vandy

" I didn't realize the recruitment phase would take up so much time. I thought within a few hours I would have everyone assembled. But I actually like taking the time and building my team. I feel a bit more connected to each member after going through a full mission to recruit them. "

Basically the whole point of ME2 is to recruit your team and complete their loyalty missions.

Posted March 20th by Q
Q

Do you have to talk to them on the ship frequently to find out about their loyalty missions? Or will it come up after a certain amount of time?

Posted March 20th by Vandy
Vandy

it's a combination of Both I think. I would usually talk everyone after every mission and after a while their dialog would expand to where they would open up and tell you about themselves which usually leads to a loyalty mission. Some characters take a few times of talking to them before you get their loyalty missions. I think Miranda and Jack where a couple that took a while to get.

Posted March 20th by Q
Q

Loyalty missions are scripted to show up after you recruit them and you complete any primary mission by one stage.

Yeoman Chambers will always say something along the lines of "X wanted to talk to you btw" and the log should then appear in your journal.

Posted March 20th by Arch
Arch
 

Having said that, certain loyalty missions are tied to an Act, so will appear much later then when you first recruited the character.

Basically so long as you recruit everyone sooner rather than later, the loyalty missions will appear eventually.

Posted March 20th by Arch
Arch
 

Ah there you go. it's been about 4 years since I last played through the ME series.

Posted March 20th by Q
Q

On the debate about the council I'd like to add a few thoughts to consider.



Edited March 20th by Moonray
Moonray
 

Something that bothers me about ME2 every time I play it, on Illium (spoilers here because if Vandy's just recruiting Mordin, then he hasn't likely been to Illium).




Boy, if Vandy is just recruiting Mordin, he's got so much more to do! (But yeah, the entire game is basically a giant assembly quest.)

Posted March 20th by Jet Presto
Jet Presto

Oops. Hopefully Vandy didn't read my reply since it did have me2 spoilers.

I forgot for a moment that Vandy was playing it for the first time.

Posted March 20th by Moonray
Moonray
 

Well good job Moonray, you ruin everything!

Posted March 21st by Q
Q

I went to recruit the Krogan last night, who got gassed but made sure I took his "perfect" Krogan warrior. I talked to Mordin afterward and learned about his involvement with the Krogan genophage, which I had to read about to understand because I went through ME1 pretty quickly. So the Salarians developed a biological weapon to make it difficult for Krogans to reproduce, but the Turians were the ones to actually use it?

After I spoke with Mordin my assistant told me the elusive man wanted to speak to me. Then I was sent to a planet where Ashley Williams was at. She was stung by a bug along with many others and frozen in place.

I was pretty tired at this point so I decided to quit there.

Posted March 21st by Vandy
Vandy

"I talked to Mordin afterward and learned about his involvement with the Krogan genophage, which I had to read about to understand because I went through ME1 pretty quickly. So the Salarians developed a biological weapon to make it difficult for Krogans to reproduce, but the Turians were the ones to actually use it?"

I think that's how it went down. Basically the krogan were used to fight a bunch of wars as cannon fodder because they were tough, aggressive and could reproduce very fast. But after the wars were over the krogan kept reproducing and started to be aggressive towards everyone so the genophage was developed and used to lower their numbers and stop their aggression.

I'm pretty sure there is more to it but that's what I can remember about it.

And Grunt is cool and all, but Wrex was so much more interesting.

Posted March 21st by Q
Q

I'm pretty sure what happened was the Salarians uplifted the Krogans to deal with the Rachni, and that the Krogans subsequently expanded and spread, leading to the Krogan Rebellions, of which the Turians were one of the primary military parties.

Posted March 21st by Jet Presto
Jet Presto

The story was basically what Q said but there's a tad more to it that also explains why the council is opposed to humanity's "reckless" expansionism.

It starts because one of the races goes through a Mass Relay and encounters the Rachni (who you met the last survivors in ME1). The Rachni then began attacking the citadel races for unknown reasons (if you spared the Queen in ME1 then you can learn more about this in ME2 and ME3).

The Salarians then uplifted the Krogans (who at the time were not capable of space travel) to help fight in the war. This ultimately is what won the war as their rapid breeding & ability to survive in harsh environments allowed them to match the Rachni for numbers AND directly assault the Rachni's hives. The end result being the Rachni were wiped out to extinction (or so everyone though, but as it turned out in ME1 at least one queen survived).

After the war was over they're sorta treated as heroes and galactic saviours, until they started expanding. Eventually they start settling on worlds that have already been claimed by their "allies". Eventually they do this to an important world (forget which or who it belongs to) and the Council asks them to leave, to which the Krogran responded by essentially saying "If you want your worlds back, come and get them".

If I recall correctly the Krogan were on the verge of winning when the Turians were discovered. So the Citadel races asked the Turians for help and the end result is the Turians use the Genophage (developed by the Salarians) to devastate the Krogan's ability to reproduce and then the war is won by the Ctiadel races.

It's this entire chain of events that kinda defines politics on the Citadel during the first two games. In particular it's why they refuse to help humanity in ME2, because they warned us against going into that part of space.

Edited March 21st by Moonray
Moonray
 

Also there is a little bit more to it but I didn't want to include more because it could be spoilers for Vandy but:



Edited March 21st by Moonray
Moonray
 

I spared the Rachni queen so I'll be looking for that. It's pretty cool how that stuff carries over. I've had a few character encounters with people I spared in ME1.

Posted March 21st by Vandy
Vandy

The choices you make in ME2 have alot of consequences in ME3 also.

Posted March 21st by Q
Q

... Do they, though?

Posted March 21st by Orion Nebula
Orion Nebula
 

Maybe not on the macro level, but I still feel on the smaller scale, they mostly do.

Posted March 21st by Jet Presto
Jet Presto

I think a lot of choices in ME1 and ME2 have consequences in ME3, it's especially obvious if you load up a save game editor that allows you to modify the variables. The same is also true for the Dragon Age series, it's not immediately obvious how much personalised info Inquisition is pulling from the previous two games until you go to the website that lets you build your own backstory.

The issue is in ME3 they took the stance that they didn't want to restrict content behind these choices you were making. So a lot of the bigger events are still available but have characters swapped in or whatever.

There are a lot of little encounters you can have and NPCs that remember what you did previously. Sometimes it simply amounts to a line of dialogue or a change of tone in a discussion but they are there.

Posted March 21st by Moonray
Moonray
 

Still slowly making progress. Currently about ten hours in. I've unlocked Grunt and completed the loyalty mission for Jacob. I ended up sending Jacob's father to prison.

I just landed on Illium to recruit the Assassin and I believe Miranda's loyalty mission is here as well so I'll handle that, too.

Posted March 29th by Vandy
Vandy

... Do they, though?


Yes they do.



I just landed on Illium to recruit the Assassin and I believe Miranda's loyalty mission is here as well so I'll handle that, too.


Ah yes Thane Krios, one of the best characters in the game IMO.

Edited March 29th by Q
Q

Well, the ultimate problem is



I don't think the choices "don't matter," but




Thane was one of my favorites.

Replaying ME2, and I'm almost wondering if there are too many characters! Thankfully, they each have a loyalty mission so you have to use everyone at some point.




Posted March 29th by Jet Presto
Jet Presto

Replaying ME2, and I'm almost wondering if there are too many characters!


Sort of feel the same way. I like most of them, except I never really have an interest in bringing Jack on any missions. I love Garrus, but Mordin has become my favorite and I like having a Krogan along with me to pose as my muscle.

Posted March 29th by Vandy
Vandy

Garrus, I find, is one of the most useful party members. I had access to warp, Mordin's got incinerate, and Garrus has overload and concussive shot - two abilities I use among the most. But I also had an entire game of using him, so it just didn't quite feel right to use him so much in ME2.

I usually try to mix it up (especially now that I'm so familiar, I know exactly what type of enemies I'm about to face). Especially when you throw in DLC characters, I just don't ultimately think there's enough diversity in abilities. Not that there isn't, just that there isn't necessarily enough.

But I do appreciate that each character has their own side-quest. It is fun to experiment with your team and figure out new combinations of powers you never used before. (I never used to use Samara, for example, because I never really use pull or throw, but I'm throwing that in with concussive shot with Grunt, and I'm enjoying that team up!)

(Actually, this is something I'm really enjoying in ME2 that I really, really miss in Andromeda: I miss being able to bring up the power wheel and just unleash a plan of biotic attacks...)

Posted March 29th by Jet Presto
Jet Presto

I don't use powers enough. But I don't ever feel the need. I haven't had any trouble taking out any enemies just by using guns and cover. My team is on auto-power mode though so the enemies tend to end up frozen or floating helplessly at times.

So I tend to pick my team based on personality. Except for Grunt who is kind of a douche, but again if I'm running around with a scientist I kind of feel the need to have a muscle guy in the group.

Edited March 29th by Vandy
Vandy

Yeah, you don't really need to use powers, but I always found it more fun that way. On harder difficulties, especially, it's useful.

Posted March 29th by Jet Presto
Jet Presto

Made quite a bit of progress yesterday. Completed the loyalty missions for Mordin and Grunt. Recruited Samara.

Also the mission where the illusive man sends us to investigate a Collector ship that was shut down by Turians, which ended up being a trap. That was probably my favorite mission so far. It was pretty obvious that it was a trap going in, but I had a real feeling of suspense while there.

Posted April 3rd by Vandy
Vandy

Was that the mission that also reveals a secret about the Collectors?

Posted April 3rd by Moonray
Moonray
 

I think so.



Posted April 3rd by Vandy
Vandy

I am eager to see what you think of the ME2's ending Vandy.

Posted April 3rd by Q
Q

Yea that's the one Vandy.

I was always a bit "meh" about that revelation. The Collectors were good enough without needing to be the Protheans as well and I think I said this in another thread but it doesn't really go anywhere... The characters are just like "OMG THEY ARE PROTHEANS" and then we move on and nobody cares about it again. If they had played into it in some way it could've been interesting, but as it stands it's just a secret revelation for the sake of secret revelations.

Did love that mission though, the place is really eerie and you just know something will go wrong. I also remember thinking right before the mission "how did three Turian ships take that thing down". Then everything kicks off at the half way point when they spring the trap.

(Spoiler ahead so don't read this Vandy):



Edited April 4th by Moonray
Moonray
 

Shepard even expresses doubt going into that mission. I think s/he literally says, "How did a few turian ships take it down?" in the conversation with the Illusive Man. I don't think it was ever intended to be a "surprise" that an attack would happen, but I remember the first time going through it and wondering when it would, which is still tense.

Posted April 4th by Jet Presto
Jet Presto

Keep in mind that the SSV Normandy SR-1 was a Deep Scout frigate that specialized in speed and stealth, not a battle ship, and was ambushed. The SR-2 is still considered a frigate but it has better armament and defenses than the SR-1. Add in the fact that all of those things can (and need to be) upgraded, the SR-2 could probably have faired better against the collector ship's attack.

Edited April 4th by Q
Q
Reply to: I started ME2 last night

Enter your message here


Site Rules | Complaints Process | Register Complaint Facebook Page
GTX0 © 2009-2017 Xhin GameTalk © 1999-2008 lives on