The Bad
1.) Zero exploration this time outside of one hub and your ship, scanning is abysmal this go around.
2.)Almost zero neutral dialogue choices and a ton of automatic dialogue (good dialogue, but far too long winded before a choice is given)
3.)Terribly linear corridor shooting mechanics, worse than even ME2 imo.
4.)Pretty meh progression for friendships/LI's, which has been sort of a problem since the first. IMO the original Dragon Age was one of the best ever in this regard.
5.) Fully railroaded mission structure, which I can understand to a degree as the story progresses in a defined way, however, it discourages replayability immensely.
6.)Decisions from the past games, major decisions, really mean jack all outside of fanservice. Tali died? Oh heres a replacement, same with legion, mordin, etc.. Rachni Queen killed? Then here's the Rachni queen... with a contrived explanation that it's not really her, but a reaper constructed clone essentially.. Wrex gone? Here's Wrex, though he's called Wreave..
7.)Decisions from past games boil down to an increase or decrease of numbers on a UI screen. To be fair, there's a few that actually have impact, like the Heretic geth rewrite/quarian peace debacle, but most are simply for more or less numbers.. mmm, numbers..
8.)The numerous and off putting retcons/illogical narrative decisions such as the number of Ardat Yakshi, the length of time for galactic Reaper domination (Protheans = centuries, our cycle = what a month?) and of course the end (To save organics from synthetics, we kill all the organics... with synthetics.. But don't worry, your "essence" will "uplifted" into Reaper form, meaning your blenderized body will be pumped into a giant skeleton mold.. then it will be put into a squid machine, makes sense right?)
Now it wouldn't be fair if I didn't list
The Good
1.)A better defined Shepard (At least femshep for voice reasons.) Shepard was always sort of a brick, yet they've really allowed the character to show flaws and cracks in the armor, if you wish. Shepard has emotion finally, which is great. And although the ending is abysmally constructed, the emotion behind Shepard's voice, at least femshep, is perfectly portrayed. It's tragic and heartwrenching. Well done.
2.)Combat is overall better, if again, more linear. Although it feels like an enter random hallway, shoot bad guys move on type of shooter, the actual mechanics are much improved and the enemy types really make fighting a more cerebral experience. One now has to think about which enemies to take on first, who is the biggest threat, what strategies to use against certain types etc.
3.)Character customization is much better. Not much else to say, a bunch of choices are available, lots of differing playstyles based on the evolutions of powers, good job once again.
4.)Although lip sync feels off at times, the facial expressions themselves feel much improved, at least to me. Outside of the random animation ending prematurely or abruptly, the cinematic approach this go around looks stupendous.
5.)Lot's of big action moments, great location designs and a ton of cinematic setpieces that look fantastic and play out expertly (outside of the first mission in Vancouver, for some reason).
6.)Tons of easter eggs. Always a good thing.
Finally
The Ugly
The 1 and only 1.) Of course, it had to be, the ending. I have issues with how simplified the game is in general compared to the first (better than the second though) however, I can deal as long the story makes up for it. The end of ME2 was like a giant Nelson laugh as the "construct" which amounted to a giant terminator made of human slushies, was a huge disappointment. But I accepted that as simply a major case of writer's block and moved forward after arguing on the boards for a month. But this, oooh this ending. Here's my analysis, speak up if I have this wrong.
Basically, the Crucible is a MacGuffin. The MacGuffin, according to retcon peppered lore, was built by the head-trauma riddled populations of each cycle. Not knowing what it did was irrelevant as all of them, obviously from the story, had so little intelligence anyway, understanding what it did was moot. They were like idiot savants, but without the savant part..
Then, if the MacGuffin gets fully built, the hand waving "God did it" child will know that his cyclical logical fallacy will no longer function, and so he presents our mentally disabled "I'll trust you for no reason whatsoever" commander with a group of decisions that feel as if they were written by a hammered philosophy student during final's week.
None of it makes sense, but, it doesn't have to... because... well.. umm.. God did it, err, a hoodie equipped white kid with a major case of thread bare makes it all ok.. or something.. whatever, just watch this 45 second low res video of a colored explosion and buy moar DLC!!
Is that close?
Now my question. if you were a supporting writer for Mass Effect 3. Say you helped write the Krogan missions and a couple conversations with squad mates or something. Would you, if you'd known about this ending, argued about it with the head writer or the other's involved with it's design? Or would you have simply stayed quiet, thinking "They know what they're doing, I hope"?
Personally I don't think I would've been able to keep my trap shut and I would have railed against it. Not saying nobody did during development, but I feel that I would have tried to persuade them that that end made zero sense in context of the game's universe and that something a bit less philosophically colored (literally) should perhaps be used. Something a bit simpler perhaps. Something that, ya know, made sense..
Your thoughts?
Modifié par Revan312, 13 mars 2012 - 01:39 .
Retour en haut
