124 réponses à ce sujet

[legion999]

The Citadel has has more variation to me.

[Mclouvins]

Turran wrote...

Rushed?! How can you say it was rushed?!

I feel that people who throw these claims about did not actually take the time to play the game to its most full potential.
Sure the ending was bad, but it was not rushed.
The dialogue, story and characters through-out the game were amazing. There were jokes that made me laugh and a LOT of scenes which made me feel upset.
It was a brilliant game, it fully delivered an amazing experience and just sheer amazement.

^This. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean if was rushed or incomplete. I'm sort of stuck on how this is a more lifeless citadel than the sterile ME1 one that had people just chatting while I fired an assault rifle all over the place. All of the different permutations within the story seem to be handled well, sure some people are upset over such and such ME2 romance but that doesn't mean they were rushed. The attention to detail was pretty excellent, sure there were things like the intro cruiser being called a dreadnaught but come on that's so minor.

Even with the endings the game is still complete, sure they suck and have plotholes but that doesn't mean the game in it's entirety is incomplete or rushed. A lot of people are just letting a 5 minute span taint their perception of everything else unfairly.

[Skypezee]

Well aside from bugs and glitches (seriously, only recently did I find out that I missed out on meeting certain people from past ME games only to realize that they for whatever reason never showed up despite the fact that they were suppose to) I also agree that the journal system was a pain int eh ass to go through. Especially when it came to looking up what quests I had left since everything got bogged down by having missions and assignments all on one page.

I don't mind a smaller squad because it does give better opportunities to form tighter relationships with them, but at the same time it was still rather lacking with all characters now spouting one liners like Zaeed and kasumi in ME2.

I also didn't like the fact that there weren't enough side quests that took you planet or space station side. Most of the quests just had you running all over the Citadel and galaxy map via scanning for whatever it is a person is looking for. I mean, I like the scanning system a lot more in ME3 than ME2 but they just had us do a lot more of it as part of the side quests.

I get why there's only one hub but at the same time I can't ignore the fact that not all civilized planets or clusters have been reaper invaded (at least not right away).

I was also a little disappointed in the lack of crew missions. When Kaidan was talking about his team and asking EDI about their locations I actually thought that he would find out about their whereabouts and ask Shepard to go on a rescue mission for them; thus obtaining a war asset.

[HKR148]

The quality of the ending tells me that instead of a rush job, it is more likely a collection of bomb-shell mistakes the writers have made without thinking about the overall series and individual elements composed within.

[Mixxer5]

skyworkeralan wrote...

I think the op got a point here. The overarching main quest is fine and there are many emotional moments carried on since the first game. However decisions does not weigh in properly in this game in many occasions as the op mentioned. I struggled a lot at the end of ME 2 whether to destroy the collector base or not and decided to destroy it because the games major theme is that reaper's tech is the shackle of galactic potentials and we cannot follow their trail in order to achieve the ultimate victory (of course I made other saves just in case). But apparently in ME 3, it doesn't really matter if u destroyed it or not...plot goes on. The changes might be subtle (as indicated by ems?) but I did not feel the impacts of my decisions well. And the dreadful ending...I admit I got really depressed on it to be the least

I've finished ME2 three or four times until at last I decided to destroy this base. I was sure that mistake will be costfull- for Shepard and galaxy. And everything was reduced to points. I've gathered all those fleets not to see how they fight for whole galaxy but... Well it seems it doesn't mattered.

[UnbornLeviathan]

Turran wrote...

Rushed?! How can you say it was rushed?!

I feel that people who throw these claims about did not actually take the time to play the game to its most full potential.
Sure the ending was bad, but it was not rushed.
The dialogue, story and characters through-out the game were amazing. There were jokes that made me laugh and a LOT of scenes which made me feel upset.
It was a brilliant game, it fully delivered an amazing experience and just sheer amazement.

http://playstation.maxupdates.tv/bioware-to-revise-mass-effect-3-script-after-leak/

Read it and weap. They re-wrote the whole ending script in a few months, which probably meant they had to trash a lot of the already worked on in game material.

[demin8891]

Idunno. I liked ME3 more than ME2 and 1 up 'til the last five minutes. I beat it in 30 hours, so it was a tad on the short side, especially when it took me 60 hours to beat ME2. Until the ending, though, I was perfectly happy with ME3.

[xeNNN]

FINALLY someone said it. thank you ever so much. ive been wanting to say all this but im new to the forum so i dont want to over step my bounds xD

yeah the side quests are a joke, remeber the "scan the keepers" side quest from mass effect one? lmao.

[Mixxer5]

Mclouvins wrote...

Turran wrote...

Rushed?! How can you say it was rushed?!

I feel that people who throw these claims about did not actually take the time to play the game to its most full potential.
Sure the ending was bad, but it was not rushed.
The dialogue, story and characters through-out the game were amazing. There were jokes that made me laugh and a LOT of scenes which made me feel upset.
It was a brilliant game, it fully delivered an amazing experience and just sheer amazement.

^This. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean if was rushed or incomplete. I'm sort of stuck on how this is a more lifeless citadel than the sterile ME1 one that had people just chatting while I fired an assault rifle all over the place. All of the different permutations within the story seem to be handled well, sure some people are upset over such and such ME2 romance but that doesn't mean they were rushed. The attention to detail was pretty excellent, sure there were things like the intro cruiser being called a dreadnaught but come on that's so minor.

Even with the endings the game is still complete, sure they suck and have plotholes but that doesn't mean the game in it's entirety is incomplete or rushed. A lot of people are just letting a 5 minute span taint their perception of everything else unfairly.

In most of games if You kill somebody You've to pay for it... Mostly 100 gold coins per person. Sure no one rushed to stop when You shot everybody around- but on the other hand- in ME3 You can only stop the Reapers. Joining Cerberus or helping Reapers. Crazy? Maybe but even in ME you can't do everything. Which means that you are saviour of galaxy and nothing change it. You can't shoot anybody? Here You can't even have a weapon on Citadel except one mission. In ME1 there was some serious fight at the beginning- and citadel was something more than few terraces.

[Logain77]

ME3 is a good game. (<-and this is where the reviewers all stop).

Its hard to be taken seriously for criticizing a good game like ME3, or DA2 for that matter. To me, calling a Mass Effect game 'good' is like having Usain Bolt turn up to a high school athletics competition and finish 2nd in the 100m. Its a 'good' performance to come second in a race. The issue is that this is Usain Freaking Bolt, World Champion and a good performance for him should still make everyone else's 'good' look like they were running in quicksand.

ME3 was good, great even, but ME1 and 2 raised the bar through the stratosphere. They are so far beyond good that they can't even catch a glimpse of good without their binoculars. This is why we are disappointed. Bioware wasn't loved because it made games that were good.

[Turran]

UnbornLeviathan wrote...

http://playstation.m...ipt-after-leak/

Read it and weap. They re-wrote the whole ending script in a few months, which probably meant they had to trash a lot of the already worked on in game material.

They re-wrote the ending, how does that change the in game material?
Did they go back and change all the dialogue options in the Citadel because of it? 
Did it affect the N7 or Priority missions through the game?
No it wouldn't of. Sure they changed the ending, but the OP is not talking JUST on the ending, he is quite clearly claiming ME3 as a whole was rushed and incomplete.

EDIT:

ME3 was good, great even, but ME1 and 2 raised the bar through the stratosphere. They are so far beyond good that they can't even catch a glimpse of good without their binoculars. This is why we are disappointed. Bioware wasn't loved because it made games that were good. 

 

See I don't agree with this, when looking back at ME1 and ME2 they had very unique characteristics, sure they were good, they were even great, but ME3 is on par with them. The combat is better, more involved and in this game it actually made me think about where I should set up and what powers to use on which enemy.
The story telling was also amazing, sure it missed the neutral option, but the amount of fine details put into the game was far better. The places we visited felt more alive as people spoke to each other and the dialogue changed each time we visited.
Squad members wern't just sat around the Normandy in their usual spots, they were dotted around talking with others and socialising with crew.
I don't understand why people have something against ME3, it is clear a lot of effort was put into the game and it did deliver in nearly all parts.

Modifié par Turran, 12 mars 2012 - 07:54 .

[SaladinDheonqar]

I happen to agree with you. I know many here think up until the final momemts, ME3 was a masterpiece, but I could clearly see a game that was rushed. I saw many elements from the previous games cut away, and whether that was due to time constraints or creative reasons, we don't really know. However, you could tell that a lot of the manpower went into the gameplay & level design, and that naturally means the other areas suffer. Just imagine what they could've achieved with another year of production. Taking time get things right is quickly becoming a lost art in the industry.

[GuardianAngel470]

Mixxer5 wrote...

clonedoriginzero wrote...

it was not rushed at all, it was even delayed for months.
just because you don't like the results doesn't mean it was rushed.

aside from the endings it was better in every way than ME2. dialogue, humor, ect.

And how does this relate to Mvin post? I agree completely with him. I can be wrong... But don't You see how poor is it in comparison to previous ME?

No, I don't. Squadmates move around and can be found interacting with other squadmates and talking with them is more organic and feels less scripted. Humor is off the charts, I have no idea how you could possibly feel differently.

Emergency Induction port anyone? Or how about Ashley's drunk stupor or Shepard beating Garrus at sharpshooting or dancing with Jack like an idiot. This stuff just isn't meme worthy, it's laugh your @ss off at the mere recollection of it funny.

I was amazed by Bioware's cameos as I couldn't imagine them being any better. Entire missions dedicated to returning squadmates? Seems bold, and in my opinion they pulled it off. Getting to help save Samara's daugther and then Samara herself was amazing, especially because that mission was so well done.

Seeing Jack teaching those biotic kids was equally amazing and the banter between her and Shepard was awesome. She was still Jack but had developed suffieciently.

Curing the Genophage was my favorite mission by far because of Mordin's impressively done sacrifice.

This game lived up precisely to the tone it should have been. There were no contrived tragedy hammers and your choices affected the game enough to give you the illusion that it was your game while at the same time progressing the intended story.

It was amazing in all respects (except that ending). Did they cut corners? Yes, yes they did. But in my opinion those cut corners were in the minority against the greater whole of this game.

[Mixxer5]

Turran wrote...

UnbornLeviathan wrote...

http://playstation.m...ipt-after-leak/

Read it and weap. They re-wrote the whole ending script in a few months, which probably meant they had to trash a lot of the already worked on in game material.

They re-wrote the ending, how does that change the in game material?
Did they go back and change all the dialogue options in the Citadel because of it? 
Did it affect the N7 or Priority missions through the game?
No it wouldn't of. Sure they changed the ending, but the OP is not talking JUST on the ending, he is quite clearly claiming ME3 as a whole was rushed and incomplete.

They've changed more than ending. I've those leaked script on my mail still. It differs. For example Prothean is Catalyst. Which means that he's not in DLC. Which means he was planned and done long time before and they really cut him from ME3.

Logain77 wrote...

ME3 is a good game. (<-and this is where the reviewers all stop).

Its hard to be taken seriously for criticizing a good game like ME3, or DA2 for that matter. To me, calling a Mass Effect game 'good' is like having Usain Bolt turn up to a high school athletics competition and finish 2nd in the 100m. Its a 'good' performance to come second in a race. The issue is that this is Usain Freaking Bolt, World Champion and a good performance for him should still make everyone else's 'good' look like they were running in quicksand.

ME3 was good, great even, but ME1 and 2 raised the bar through the stratosphere. They are so far beyond good that they can't even catch a glimpse of good without their binoculars. This is why we are disappointed. Bioware wasn't loved because it made games that were good.

 



That's how I felt when I saw ending. It's good, ok... But it sould be best game I've ever played. Also in ME1 and 2 we gathered informations about Reapers. It was mostly speculations but piece by piece we knew something more. And the "truth" we get... Is disappointing. Plot is flat. We don't know almost anything most of time and when we get those knowledge we decide that's better not to know...

[Sesshomaru47]

Doomhams wrote...

Sesshomaru47 wrote...

You forgot buggy and glitchy.

There was one point, think it was after I beat Kai Lang, where my shepherds eyeballs clipped through his eye lids. THAT was weird as hell to watch.

Oooh I prefer the ones that skip conversations, has audio cut out in the DAII style convos, have people not appear where the map says they are and don't allow you to finish quests that will result in another war asset. But facial twitches and distracing VI are also good.

[Mixxer5]

Sesshomaru47 wrote...

Doomhams wrote...

Sesshomaru47 wrote...

You forgot buggy and glitchy.

There was one point, think it was after I beat Kai Lang, where my shepherds eyeballs clipped through his eye lids. THAT was weird as hell to watch.

Oooh I prefer the ones that skip conversations, has audio cut out in the DAII style convos, have people not appear where the map says they are and don't allow you to finish quests that will result in another war asset. But facial twitches and distracing VI are also good.

Uh... I had 5 save/load until I could give some Turian artifact. Don't even remember what it was but it pissed me of pretty badly. I standed next to him and couldn't talk...

[FROST4584]

clonedoriginzero wrote...

it was not rushed at all, it was even delayed for months.
just because you don't like the results doesn't mean it was rushed.

aside from the endings it was better in every way than ME2. dialogue, humor, ect.

Mass Effect 3 was delayed to add multiplayer.

[Baryonic-Member]

The fact that the Citadel is sapient is freaking stupid and completely
undermines the plot of the first game. Why have Sovereign evaluate the
state of galactic civilization if the Catalst can just do it and
activate the relay when the time is ripe. And since the Citadel has
control of the relay network, why didn't it shut it down and isolate
every system?

The fact how the crucible just casually flies in
and docks in the middle of a battle with Reapers all around ignoring it
is stupid.

And why did the Catalyst suddenly help Shepard
destroy/control the Reapers? And why did the fact that Shepard was there
prove that its solution wouldn't work anymore? If for some reason the
solution would be obsolete, why didn't the Catalyst just order the
Reapers to retreat or whatever (since it controls the Reapers)? Why let
Shepard choose.

And if we were to assume that the Catalyst can't
shut down the Mass Relay network, why didn't the Reapers invade the
Citadel first and do it, like Sovereign planned in the first game?
People defended the Reapers' reluctance to invade the Citadel by the
fact that the council species could supposidely shut the wards and seal
the station, but that wasn't a problem when the Reapers moved it above
Earth. I think that the Reapers should have hit the Citadel first and shut down the relay network and then move on to Earth to begin constructing a human Reaper. Shepard would be on Earth when this shut down occurs and the Reapers invade soon after. You escape like you did in ME3. But since the Normandy possesses a Reaper IFF (from the derelict reaper) we would still be able to use the relay network. We would monkey about the galaxy and recruit other species not much differently from now, and somehow replicate our reaper IFF. We latur discover that the 12 prothean scientists who were on the Citadel somehow deviced a weapon to destroy ME tecnology (which is based on the Reaper), yes. The scientists didn't have the resources to build the weapon themselves--being isolated without any ships and slowly starving to death. Since they didn't have any beacons, they didn't know how they could broadcast their solution to the next cycle. They then found out a way to store the information in the mass relays themselves (they were close to unlocking their secrets, and build the conduit), and Shepard somehow discovers this when boarding a mass relay with the IFF to try and replicate the IFF, and stuff.

I'm fine with a dark ending, like all the Mass Relays
getting destroyed in order to destroy the Reapers, but only if it makes
sense, not this Catalyst crap with no explanation on how the Crucible
works. If they would have explained that it released a pulse that
destroyed all Mass Effect technology (which is based on the Relays and
therfore the Reapers) and that it was relayed by the Mass Relays, then
that would sort of made sense. I would have forgiven BioWare for the
Crucible deus ex machina purpose if the Catalyst was just removed from
the story and the original dark energy would replace it. The choice
should have been between destroying the Reapers and all Mass Effect
technology and potentially destroying the galaxy if we can't find a
solution to the dark energy problem, or join with the Reapers and make a human Reaper, and find a definitive solution to the problem. That
would at least have made sense, (not really). 

[Saile]

While there are some parts of the game I disliked (really just the ending) I believe the team put a lot off effort into the entire game, and even if there are parts that look less refined than others, I think it was very well written and nearly jerked a tear in my case (which is hard). :I Yes, I disliked the ending, but overall this was the best game I've played in a year (last game I enjoyed this much was Portal 2 so yeah...er..)

[AtreiyaN7]

I feel that the game was neither rushed nor incomplete, and it was a very emotional experience. I even saw Jenna from Chora's Den in ME1, so I would argue that a lot of things (even if if they're minor) do come through (she suddenly showed up after saving Conrad's butt). I agree that the journal could have been organized a bit better, but sorting alphabetically worked out for the most part since I could keep my Citadel missions grouped and recognize Priority missions, etc. without going insane.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 12 mars 2012 - 08:39 .

[Mixxer5]

Baryonic-Member wrote...

The fact that the Citadel is sapient is freaking stupid and completely
undermines the plot of the first game. Why have Sovereign evaluate the
state of galactic civilization if the Catalst can just do it and
activate the relay when the time is ripe. And since the Citadel has
control of the relay network, why didn't it shut it down and isolate
every system?

The fact how the crucible just casually flies in
and docks in the middle of a battle with Reapers all around ignoring it
is stupid.

And why did the Catalyst suddenly help Shepard
destroy/control the Reapers? And why did the fact that Shepard was there
prove that its solution wouldn't work anymore? If for some reason the
solution would be obsolete, why didn't the Catalyst just order the
Reapers to retreat or whatever (since it controls the Reapers)? Why let
Shepard choose.

And if we were to assume that the Catalyst can't
shut down the Mass Relay network, why didn't the Reapers invade the
Citadel first and do it, like Sovereign planned in the first game?
People defended the Reapers' reluctance to invade the Citadel by the
fact that the council species could supposidely shut the wards and seal
the station, but that wasn't a problem when the Reapers moved it above
Earth. I think that the Reapers should have hit the Citadel first and shut down the relay network and then move on to Earth to begin constructing a human Reaper. Shepard would be on Earth when this shut down occurs and the Reapers invade soon after. You escape like you did in ME3. But since the Normandy possesses a Reaper IFF (from the derelict reaper) we would still be able to use the relay network. We would monkey about the galaxy and recruit other species not much differently from now, and somehow replicate our reaper IFF. We latur discover that the 12 prothean scientists who were on the Citadel somehow deviced a weapon to destroy ME tecnology (which is based on the Reaper), yes. The scientists didn't have the resources to build the weapon themselves--being isolated without any ships and slowly starving to death. Since they didn't have any beacons, they didn't know how they could broadcast their solution to the next cycle. They then found out a way to store the information in the mass relays themselves (they were close to unlocking their secrets, and build the conduit), and Shepard somehow discovers this when boarding a mass relay with the IFF to try and replicate the IFF, and stuff.

I'm fine with a dark ending, like all the Mass Relays
getting destroyed in order to destroy the Reapers, but only if it makes
sense, not this Catalyst crap with no explanation on how the Crucible
works. If they would have explained that it released a pulse that
destroyed all Mass Effect technology (which is based on the Relays and
therfore the Reapers) and that it was relayed by the Mass Relays, then
that would sort of made sense. I would have forgiven BioWare for the
Crucible deus ex machina purpose if the Catalyst was just removed from
the story and the original dark energy would replace it. The choice
should have been between destroying the Reapers and all Mass Effect
technology and potentially destroying the galaxy if we can't find a
solution to the dark energy problem, or join with the Reapers and make a human Reaper, and find a definitive solution to the problem. That
would at least have made sense, (not really). 

ME story as integral whole is the hardest hit victim of plot changing by Bioware. It just don't fit with what we know from previous games. Things that should've impact on galaxy situation are JUST NUMBERS. And Reapers reasons to harvest galaxy every 50k years just doesn't make sense. 

[Mixxer5]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

I feel that the game was neither rushed nor incomplete, and it was a very emotional experience. I even saw Jenna from Chora's Den in ME1, so I would argue that a lot of things (even if if they're minor) do come through (she suddenly showed up after saving Conrad's butt). I agree that the journal could have been organized a bit better, but sorting alphabetically worked out for the most part since I could keep my Citadel missions grouped and recognize Priority missions, etc. without going insane.

Yeah it's nice to meet Jenna (I hadn't such "pleasure" during my play) but we meet her... And can't visit Chora's Den. Citadel is only hub in ME3 and is more restricted than ever. 

[lil_89]

I am sorry but how can people say that me3 has less squad-member dialogue than me2? In me2 you got to have a legit conversation 3/4 times with the crew (unless LI) and that was it. I can't tell you how many times I've heard "Can this wait a bit, I'm in the middle of some calibrations" and "There's a lot to do Shephard, maybe another time". At least in me3 the squaddies say something that is related to the situation before or after a mission, things that makes sense. In me2 there weren't any additional dialogue even before the suicide mission. Sure there are one liners and auto dialogue in me3, but you can't expect every single little line to be a cut scene.

[xrudix]

I agree, the game looks really rushed - lot of bugs, glitches, a lot of things feels cut and a lot of promised stuff is missing.

[OblivionDawn]

Yeah, it was short.

But I think the multiplayer makes up for it.