This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Does Mass Effect start to speed up soon? It's kind of getting boring atm

#31GreenMage7Posted 3/3/2014 1:02:11 PM(edited)
DV8ingSources posted...
The only problem I had with the citadel in ME1 was the horrible travel pace and load screens. It made moving around such a chore. Give us a turbo button for traveling or something similar. Walking around was so slow and to get from the night club to the armory just took way longer than is 'fun', even with the taxi like system.


Or, you could use the fast travel system to travel directly to the night club from the armory...

I don't understand how a loading screen is longer than fun, it loads in like 3 seconds.
#32wizardmonPosted 3/3/2014 1:11:19 PM
SlashmanSG posted...
Ok, first of all, REAPER. Say it with me now. "Reaper".

I don't wanna.

SlashmanSG continued to post...
Secondly, "I really wish the later games could have focused a lot more on you know, doing important things like investigating the reaver threat, confronting reaver forces and unraveling the mysteries of the ancient species." What do you think fighting the Collectors was doing?

"I'm using the second part of this quote to reply to the first part of the quote, even though it's not related."
Clearly, I'm being edgy with my insults.


What was there to understand? There are already a ton of reavers out there in space, why even care about one human shaped one that wouldn't be any more powerful than any of the others? What's even the point of that whole scenario other than to be filler in the longrun?
"Oh hey, we are this super advanced race that evolved into biomachines that constantly restart & harvest the universe, we want a new buddy so we are just going to take a few people of this race and melt them into goo so we can have one new buddy to play god with." Well that's swell, I guess the whole point of the second game was to tell the player that the reavers create more of themselves really slowly, and that the universe restarting was there way of expressing reproductive behavior. Didn't we learn that from the first game that they harvest the Galaxy every 50,000 years in the discussion with Vigil? Seems like this one discussion with a single AI in the first game revealed more info than the entire second game did - which only seemed to add one sentence of reasoning behind the harvesting to that discussion.


To sum up my post since you apparently missed my original point, I understand the second game, but I don't understand how the second game's of any real importance to the overall ending of the series.
Actually, the only effect the ending even has on the third game seems to be: Saving the base gives you 110 points towards your Galaxy at War score compared to 100 for destroying it. Wow, a ten point difference for gameplay and a zero point difference in storyline.
---
I think I'm the only person on gamefaqs with a daughterboard - ToastyOne
New with a moderation history more plentiful than karma. - Fossil (Moderator)
#33PoorCountryPosted 3/3/2014 2:23:14 PM
You should play it just to see how the rest of its spectacular story plays out. Watch as Bioware tries pass off the Spectre coronation ceremony as a universally-important and inspirational event, with only 6 random NPCs in attendance. The game screams, "I am up my buttocks."
#34BigB0ss13Posted 3/3/2014 4:32:03 PM(edited)
pothocket posted...
Skip the first game and move onto the second. The first game barely even functions as a playable game. It's a mess.


Never listen to dumb advice like this. Story is part of a game and Mass Effect 1 has the best and most epic story BY FAR in the series. And the gameplay is good enough. Not good but good enough