Opinion: Because of Saren ME 2&3 Will Never Outplay ME1

Recommended Videos

Geo88

Nerdy Wordsmith
Jul 20, 2010
122
0
0
Spoilers ahead for ME1 and 2, though I'd hope anyone talking here already knows what I'm about to say.

I think what they tried to do with ME2 is try to make the entire Reaper race (if it can be called that) appear more like a threat, instead of just two or three people -- Sovereign, Benezia and Saren.

Fappy said:
At least my main point hit home. I guess I shouldn't expect everyone to think "Saren made ME1 better than the rest", but rather, ME1 has a more focused story because of Saren. Hopefully they come up with something clever for ME3.
I absolutely agree that ME1's main campaign felt more focused because of the threat the main villains posed. Even if they weren't always onscreen, you could see their machinations at work. But at the same time, I felt like they were trying to grow from that in ME2. I don't think they could have had a couple of Reaper representatives appear like much of a threat again. After all:

I took out an asari matriarch who was using an army of rachni and had an arsenal of biotics at her disposal.

I took out the most elite Spectre in the corps who was at the helm of a sentient robotic fighting force that usurped its creators.

I led the charge against the herald of the Reapers, a race of dreadnoughts bent on exterminating everything I hold dear.

I'm Commander Goddamned Shepard. Accept no substitutes.

Also, this is my favorite store on the Citadel.

If you're a Reaper, who the heck else are you going to throw at me? I've already beaten the best mortals in existence. I mean, after their lieutenants from ME1, who else could they possibly toss at you that would seem like a credible threat? I suppose they could just make some guy up, but that would feel a bit lackluster, too.

Would it have been better if Harbinger had been involved in ME1? Absolutely. It would make him seem like a bigger threat, and when you went against his direct subordinates in ME2, it would have made it seem like you were climbing the ladder to get to him. While the rest of the galaxy deals with the other Reapers in ME3, Shepard and the team would be focused on ending that creep once and for all.

But they didn't, so I'm not going to worry about it.

All things considered, while it wasn't an amazing adversary, I thought a Reaper directly controlling the last major civilization from the most recent extinction cycle was pretty cool.

And as for ME3, those faceless giant squids being faceless giant squids are exactly what make them frightening to me. There is no mercy, no hope for a stalemate. These sentient starships want nothing more than to destroy everyone, and the fact that they're so dehumanized is just a plus for me. There's no negotiating with them or avoiding them. You certainly can't talk to them and hope to weaken their resolve. The most you'll do is just open yourself up to their Indoctrination, which is scary in its own right. It's just going to be me rallying every mortal race in the galaxy that I can in an attempt to crush them.

In the end, it's us against them. It's one of the oldest tales in existence, and it never really gets old. The cunning and brave heroes versus the overwhelming brute force of the enemy.

Plus, I really want to see a segment of the Flotilla and a geth fleet jump into a system and fucking destroy everything Reaperish together. Call me shallow, but damn... Really want that to happen. Doubt it will, but that would be pretty awesome to me.
 

vrbtny

Elite Member
Sep 16, 2009
1,959
0
41
Fappy said:
Saren lost all interest for me when it was revealed he had been indoctrinated, and didn't truly believe in what he was doing. Far more interesting if the bad guy is actually a proper bad guy.

Aside from that, yeah, he was a far more compelling bad-guy than the ME2 one/ones.

It also didn't help that in ME1 the bad-guys were obvious from the beginning. In ME2 you spend 80% of the game dicking around with a bunch of mechs/mercs/loonies/rouges units, before getting to the real bad-guys.
 

boag

New member
Sep 13, 2010
1,623
0
0
Fappy said:
I think I am reading too far in to this. TL;DR Saren was a boss and I really don't see how they will top him.
He also had like 10-15 minutes of dialogue and screen time as whole in the entire?
 

Adam Jensen_v1legacy

I never asked for this
Sep 8, 2011
6,651
0
0
While I agree that Saren was awesome and that ME2 lacked a real villain, you have to admit that finding out what really happened to Proteans was pretty freakin' awesome. Especially after hearing so many things about them in ME1.
 

Twilight_guy

Sight, Sound, and Mind
Nov 24, 2008
7,131
0
0
I thought he was pretty generic. He was evil and killed who he wanted, he was mind-controlled and convinced he did the right thing. I don't see anything special about him to separate him from similar evil "trying to help the world" type villains.
 

evilneko

Fall in line!
Jun 16, 2011
2,218
49
53
Were the Borg better before or after Locutus? Were they better with or without a Queen?

You know who needs to be the Saren of ME3? Fucking Wrex. Turian Spectre, pfft, Asari Matriach, nothin. Krogan Fucking Battlemaster who helped defeat Sovereign in the first place? Oh, shit.
 

Jake0fTrades

New member
Jun 5, 2008
1,295
0
0
Fappy said:
The Illusive Man will be the central villain of ME3; he's now working for the Reapers just as Saren was, and he's plenty smart and talented enough to serve as Saren's equal. TIM may not be the final villain of the game, but he'll probably be the one we focus on for a good 3/4 of the game. I'm eager to see how he fits into the game's climax. We can't stop the Reapers while he's in the way.
 

RagTagBand

New member
Jul 7, 2011
497
0
0
Fappy said:
I've heard this observation before and I've got to say I definitely agree. The collectors were a pretty lame enemy and I don't know what the fuck Harbinger was meant to be...My best guess thus far was that it was a reaper which controlled a specific collector that controlled other collectors...very bullshit and wishy washy; Harbinger was little more than an annoying pest than an antagonist.

And that's the thing - Bad guys in all forms of entertainment, even real life, need a "Public face", a character, a person that embodies all the bad things that are happening. Saren fit this role beautifully in ME1 and his Tragically misguided character made him as interesting as he was threatening, Saren also demonstrated the power of the then-absent reapers by turning someones strength (a powerful will to save the galaxy) into a weakness to be exploited.

All of this was lacking in ME2, I had no public face of Evil, No interesting character for mine to grapple with both on the battlefield and off...And I wholeheartedly agree that ME3 sorely needs this magic back again.

Holmes needs his Moriarty.
 
Jan 13, 2012
1,168
0
0
< *cough* avatar *cough* but yeah i didn't think he was that good either but atleast he was better than harbinger. Also he had an awesome voice. Hopefully this kai leng character is better.
 

RatRace123

Elite Member
Dec 1, 2009
6,651
0
41
I agree completely, and I've had the same idea too.
Saren was the reason Mass Effect's story worked so well.

Unlike in ME2, where the collectors only show up a smattering of times in the middle and at the end, while the rest of the main story revolves around recruiting people and solving their personal crises.

Saren had a hand in every single story mission in Mass Effect 1, and even a few side missions. His presence was everywhere and his troops and minions made sure you felt it. And the lack of a proper antagonist (not a big bad, but someone to badger you throughout the story) is what really killed ME 2's story for me.

I really hope The Illusive Man proves to be a good antagonist, at least that's what it looks like he's gonna be according to the previews. The story needs a threat on a personal level to really push us and Shepard in a way that a faceless army, even one trying to destroy all life in the galaxy, can't.
 

Joshimodo

New member
Sep 13, 2008
1,956
0
0
Fappy said:
My thoughts exactly, which was hammered home even more after I finished ME2. Saren was one of the best videogame villains.

The Illusive Man is an interesting villain for similar reasons, but lacks the...I don't know, ferocity and depth of Saren. Still good, but too distant and not outwardly threatening enough.



SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Funny, I thought Saren was the most lackluster villain one could wish for. The twisted villain with what he thinks is good intentions has been so overdone over the years, it made ME1s main story feel like a lesson in cliches.

For all its faffing about, and even though nothing really happened, I found Mass Effect 2 much more engaging in that respect, because there was an air of mystery to the whole thing. In ME2, you have no idea what Ceberus really wants. In ME1, pretty much all is revealed from the get go.

Letting go the storylines that have been done thousands of times is a step in the RIGHT direction to me. No main bad guy? Good! I dont need one, I dont want one. Mass Effects story doesnt need one. Saren, generic villain number 54610, was holding the story down in my opinion. He had NOTHING that set him apart from the norm. Nothing.
This is wrong. Not from an opinionated stance, but 2 main factors:

-We know what Cerberus wants. Cerberus wants humanity to be as powerful as the other citadel races, if not totally dominant. They're also racist, so dominance/destruction is possible too. Yes yes, TIM may want to side with the Reapers to be the only surviving race, or want to make Human-Reapers, or whatever. We know his M.O., not much else to know.

-Mystery. Saren had it. Yes, he was never considered to be a nice person, but he was a good guy. A Spectre. Notably, a proud Turian who was racist against humans (backstory, hoooo). Yet, the first time you see him, he executes an old friend, a colleague - A Turian. Why?

He's also looking for something you're after and is in league with a newly-emerged Geth army and a giant super-ship. How?

Saren is also into some ancient doo-dads, yet despite the foreboding evil of everything around it, is trying to foil you. He's also masquerading as a good guy to the Council, and making you (and by extension, humans) look bad. He's clever, dangerous, underhanded and onto something big, and you need to find out what, why, and how to stop him. That's mystery.

Beyond that, he's clearly tormented and disturbed in many ways. You see him devolve into a mess, battling his own psychosis while trying to justify his actions, while simultaneously trying to save the universe and avoid being used himself. Plus, from a story standpoint - He's an equal and opposite to Shepard.

Compared with the Collectors and TIM, there's no contest. The Collectors were never interesting, especially when you find out they're just pawns anyway. They're two-dimensional. Mindless aliens with no characterisation, no real depth or intrigue. TIM is certainly more interesting, but he's no "villain". He's the aloof badguy, the man with the plan. Yes, that presents him as an ambiguous threat and fair-weather friend (and manipulative bastard), but it doesn't make him a stronger villain.
 

Joshimodo

New member
Sep 13, 2008
1,956
0
0
Wooh, double postage.


May as well use this double post:

RagTagBand said:
I've heard this observation before and I've got to say I definitely agree. The collectors were a pretty lame enemy and I don't know what the fuck Harbinger was meant to be...My best guess thus far was that it was a reaper which controlled a specific collector that controlled other collectors...very bullshit and wishy washy; Harbinger was little more than an annoying pest than an antagonist.


Harbinger is a Reaper. He directly controlled the Collector General (seen at the end, being un-controlled and killed), which in turn allowed him to ASSUME DIRECT CONTROL.


To those saying you don't see Saren that much - I've never seen many great villains that are paraded on screen every few moments. Villainy is empowered by two main aspects - Tearing the screen up when they are on there (either via dialogues/monologues or physically) or storyline-wise, being told about them (or in the case of games, being told or finding out yourself).

Here's a prime example - In Silence of the Lambs, Hannibal Lecter is on screen for about 8 minutes total.
 

Rad Party God

Party like it's 2010!
Feb 23, 2010
3,560
0
0
I can't complain about Saren in the first game, as cliche'd as he was, he was rightfully a punchable fella, up until Sovereign appears, wich the first time I saw him and knew about the Reapers, I thought "HOLY SHIT, how the hell am I supposed to kill these so called Reapers!??" and I felt Sovereign was a much more serious threat than Saren... even after his robo-frog transformation.

In ME2, although there wasn't a single, punchable main villain, beyond the vague idea of "The Reapers are coming", there were certainly a lot of things going on at once. I always had a certain air of distrust towards Cerberus and especially TIM, although The Collectors weren't as memorable (for better or worse) than Saren, they were certainly the closest to an immediate threat.

Also, the single thought of TIM doing almost anything "for the benefit of mankind", was quite scary too.
 

Zen Toombs

New member
Nov 7, 2011
2,105
0
0
I really liked both games, but I do agree that Mass Effect 2 lacked something for not having a punchable villain. However, I did kindof like
"They will be as we are."

"You prolong the inevitable."

"Embrace perfection."

"You will know pain, Shepard."

"Shepard, you could have been useful."

"You cannot escape your destiny, Shepard."

"Flee while you can, Shepard."

"You have no one left, Shepard."

"And now you stand alone, Shepard."

"I am the Harbinger of your ascendance."

"Your worlds will become our laboratories."

"You do not yet comprehend your place in things."

"We are the Harbinger of your perfection."

"Progress cannot be halted."

"This changes nothing, Shepard."

"You have only delayed the inevitable."

I found him ominous and there was something of a mystery surrounding him and his people.
 

Shock and Awe

Winter is Coming
Sep 6, 2008
4,647
0
0
While I agree that Saren was a truly great villain, the Reapers pretty much have to be different. They aren't so much as villains, but forces of nature. Impersonal, uncaring, completely bent on annihilation of organic life. Kind of like the Flood in Halo, which is how I bet they are going to be handled; with some face being given to the faceless enemy. In Halo this was the Gravemind, in ME2 it was Harbinger.
 

Joccaren

Elite Member
Mar 29, 2011
2,601
3
43
SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Funny, I thought Saren was the most lackluster villain one could wish for. The twisted villain with what he thinks is good intentions has been so overdone over the years, it made ME1s main story feel like a lesson in cliches.

For all its faffing about, and even though nothing really happened, I found Mass Effect 2 much more engaging in that respect, because there was an air of mystery to the whole thing. In ME2, you have no idea what Ceberus really wants. In ME1, pretty much all is revealed from the get go.

Letting go the storylines that have been done thousands of times is a step in the RIGHT direction to me. No main bad guy? Good! I dont need one, I dont want one. Mass Effects story doesnt need one. Saren, generic villain number 54610, was holding the story down in my opinion. He had NOTHING that set him apart from the norm. Nothing.
Really, the whole 'Mystery' thing has been way overdone too. Hell, I saw the whole thing coming from the start. Colonists have disappeared! Great, maybe its the Reapers! No? Its some Collector thing? Well, they'll be working for the Reapers. Oh, what do you know, they are! Thanks for spelling that out in case I hadn't picked up on the fact that its cliched to have a minor villain work for the major villains! Hrrm? Harbinger? Must be some Reaper considering that control speech. The Reaper in charge of the Collectors. Then there was some point that felt like it should have been a reveal that Harbinger was a Reaper, but it had been obvious from the second you met him. There is no depth to the whole 'Mystery' thing in ME2, ESPECIALLY when they make it so obvious. Saren, at least I felt a little connection to him. Whilst cliched, the villain who has been tricked is less used these days than a villain who thinks they are right, but that right goes against our morals, or even the villain who just plain knows he's wrong. It was refreshing to get a 'human' villain, rather than some overly evil person who knew he was in the wrong. Can't say I didn't see the Sovereign reveal coming, they made it quite obvious with the visions, but it took me longer to catch on to than the Harbinger trick.

Really comes down to personal taste, but IMO Saren was a far better villain than Sovereign or the Collectors, and likely will be a better villain than whoever shows up next.
 

LordFisheh

New member
Dec 31, 2008
478
0
0
I think a part of it is the role that Saren played. In the first game, you felt like a Spectre, detective-ing across the galaxy infiltrating hideouts and saving colonies, on the tracks of a rogue colleague while learning about an even greater threat.

Then in the second game, you build a team... not quite as good.

In the third, it appears you fight a war with the Reapers. Am I the only one who was hoping to go back to desperate hunts across the galaxy with the villain just a step ahead, unravelling the mystery and playing as special-forces-James-Bond IN SPACE? Instead, it looks like we recruit armies and fight giant robots... not the feel I was hoping for.
 

Teejonis Rahl

New member
Jan 18, 2012
14
0
0
Saren was pulled off quite well, but he really didn't have much screen time. Of course, this added to the mystery, but then again all the main villains had mystery around them. Too bad he was being controlled, but I think they should have stuck with him just wanting to save the world, because we have no chance against the Reapers, except to submit, like the Protheans had to...btw, I laughed so hard when Wrex goes over and shoots Saren in the head to check if he's dead
 

Sigmund Av Volsung

Hella noided
Dec 11, 2009
2,999
0
0
Saren's existence was just a way of giving the player a clear ultimate goal, which the catalyst in the RPG formula:
-Character development
-Varying set pieces & Locations, which will be visited in a linear order( some choice available, but limited)
-A clear ovjective
-A villain who is misunderstood/has a twist regarding his evil(ness)
etc.

The reason for as to why ME2(& ME3) feel different is because of the fact that the RPG formula is changing due to different gaming genres mixing with other gaming genres;
ME2 had a vast galaxy with very little linearity(i.e. you could choose which companions you recruit when, and you could dick about with side missions), it had no real overall goal(get to the collector base and then x), and very thin structure, and so will ME3, as RPGs are changing, and no longer need to conform with the RPG formula.

Another example of this is the Dragon Age series; Origins was a true blue RPG(in following the formula), and DA2 felt like a weaksauce sandbox RPG

Tl;Dr RPGs are changing, & so is the template for an RPG