451 réponses à ce sujet

[Ianamus]

I read a few that did, although they were on the less-heard of websites. He even said how shocked he was at how few other reviewers mentioned it, saying that he wondered if they had been playing the same ending sequence as him.

[HenchxNarf]

Or you know.. They actually loved the ending.

[Obrusnine]

Salvatore510 wrote...

CompositeGNR wrote...

Salvatore510 wrote...

An ending does not make a game, and despite most people not wanting to admit it, it's the best game in the series

If a horrible game had an amazing ending, should it be an amazing game? That's the logic you guys are using, because most of you seem to think because the ending sucks, doesn't matter if the game is great, the game has to suck.

Well it completly invalidates any reason to play the two previous games, because none of those choices matter, heck it even invalidates replaying 3

Irrelevant. That doesn't make it a bad game, and the reviewers are judging the quality of the game, and if you liked Mass Effect before (IE it's your type of game) you would be lying if you think it's anything less than a great game. Sure the ending is a massive letdown, but it doesn't detract from the game.

I got so deflated after the ending I didn't touch my Xbox for 3 days but it doesn't change the fact it's still an awesome game and deserving of all the high praise it's getting.

And people seem to forget, that some people actually do like the ending. But in the end, peoples opinions of the ending are irrelevant when discussing the quality of the game. It's just bitterness if you think it changes an amazing game into an awful game.

A lot of people also seem to be confusing peoples dissatisfaction with the endings as dissatisfaction with the entire game. I enjoyed my playthrough up until that last 10-15 minutes of game time. It is an excellent game, and a milestone in gaming to be sure, but the ending just seemed like a giant slap in the face and because of it I can't seem to go back to my keyboard and start playing it again.

[Salvatore510]

thunderhawk862002 wrote...

Salvatore510 wrote...

An ending does not make a game, and despite most people not wanting to admit it, it's the best game in the series

If a horrible game had an amazing ending, should it be an amazing game? That's the logic you guys are using, because most of you seem to think because the ending sucks, doesn't matter if the game is great, the game has to suck.

An ending absolutely makes a game.  If you're playing a Mario game and you start going up the castle to fight Bowser.  You beat him but just as you rescue Peach he wakes up, throws you into a reinforced steel cage and runs off with the princess.  Game over.    The ending absolutely makes a difference.  

Than you must believe a horrible game can become a great game with a great ending.

The ending is just that, an ending. People didn't like the ending of The Empire Strikes Back, but now its universally considered the best Star Wars movie. Mass Effect 3 is the best Mass Effect game, even if the ending sucks.

Obrusnine wrote...

Salvatore510 wrote...

CompositeGNR wrote...

Salvatore510 wrote...

An ending does not make a game, and despite most people not wanting to admit it, it's the best game in the series

If a horrible game had an amazing ending, should it be an amazing game? That's the logic you guys are using, because most of you seem to think because the ending sucks, doesn't matter if the game is great, the game has to suck.

Well it completly invalidates any reason to play the two previous games, because none of those choices matter, heck it even invalidates replaying 3

Irrelevant. That doesn't make it a bad game, and the reviewers are judging the quality of the game, and if you liked Mass Effect before (IE it's your type of game) you would be lying if you think it's anything less than a great game. Sure the ending is a massive letdown, but it doesn't detract from the game.

I got so deflated after the ending I didn't touch my Xbox for 3 days but it doesn't change the fact it's still an awesome game and deserving of all the high praise it's getting.

And people seem to forget, that some people actually do like the ending. But in the end, peoples opinions of the ending are irrelevant when discussing the quality of the game. It's just bitterness if you think it changes an amazing game into an awful game.

A lot of people also seem to be confusing peoples dissatisfaction with the endings as dissatisfaction with the entire game. I enjoyed my playthrough up until that last 10-15 minutes of game time. It is an excellent game, and a milestone in gaming to be sure, but the ending just seemed like a giant slap in the face and because of it I can't seem to go back to my keyboard and start playing it again.

Yes, but not everyones like you. Many people are saying because the ending sucks the game sucks. Many people are saying because the ending sucks you should boycott everything made by EA and Bioware in the future, that you should interuppt their personal liives to tell them. It's ridiculous. The ending doesn't make the game, the game is the best game in the series.

Modifié par Salvatore510, 15 mars 2012 - 10:25 .

[Pacificarus]

Mass effect series were loved for their story not gameplay, those guys seem to be bias and reveiw only gameplay.

[TUHD]

@Obrusnine: Kidding, right? While the annoying loading bugs were screen, the rest was.... well, not improved or worse.
@Stanley Woo: My personal suspicion is that due to the amount of games reviewers test they grow less attached to characters. Sure, the main story of ME3 isn't bad at all. BUT.... like someone correctly states in an fan review, 'Bioware managed to self-destruct the reputation of a series spanning 100+ playing hours in a matter of a mere 10 minutes'. People have played each of their chars in general for over 100+ hours each (if they've got both ME1, ME2 and ME3). No way a reviewer can attach to it like that with a character within a game of 25 hours (ME3 is also way shorter then ME1, and also considerably shorter then ME2 in gameplay time. I finished ME3 in about 25-30 hours with everything done, ME2 in 50-60 hours and ME1.... over 80+ hours - this all with levelling my char in each game to the max and importing chars).

[SirCrimz]

Pretty sure they release their reviews before actually making it to the ending especially given the size of Mass Effect 3.

[Ianamus]

Salvatore510 wrote...

CompositeGNR wrote...

Salvatore510 wrote...

An ending does not make a game, and despite most people not wanting to admit it, it's the best game in the series

If a horrible game had an amazing ending, should it be an amazing game? That's the logic you guys are using, because most of you seem to think because the ending sucks, doesn't matter if the game is great, the game has to suck.

Well it completly invalidates any reason to play the two previous games, because none of those choices matter, heck it even invalidates replaying 3

Irrelevant. That doesn't make it a bad game, and the reviewers are judging the quality of the game, and if you liked Mass Effect before (IE it's your type of game) you would be lying if you think it's anything less than a great game. Sure the ending is a massive letdown, but it doesn't detract from the game.

I got so deflated after the ending I didn't touch my Xbox for 3 days but it doesn't change the fact it's still an awesome game and deserving of all the high praise it's getting.

And people seem to forget, that some people actually do like the ending. But in the end, peoples opinions of the ending are irrelevant when discussing the quality of the game. It's just bitterness if you think it changes an amazing game into an awful game.

But would you give a game with a terrible ending 100/100 and say it was a fantastic ending to the series? I'd deduct at least 10/100 from the score if the ending was as bad as mass effect 3's. 

[Obrusnine]

Salvatore510 wrote...

thunderhawk862002 wrote...

Salvatore510 wrote...

An ending does not make a game, and despite most people not wanting to admit it, it's the best game in the series

If a horrible game had an amazing ending, should it be an amazing game? That's the logic you guys are using, because most of you seem to think because the ending sucks, doesn't matter if the game is great, the game has to suck.

An ending absolutely makes a game.  If you're playing a Mario game and you start going up the castle to fight Bowser.  You beat him but just as you rescue Peach he wakes up, throws you into a reinforced steel cage and runs off with the princess.  Game over.    The ending absolutely makes a difference.  

Than you must believe a horrible game can become a great game with a great ending.

The ending is just that, an ending. People didn't like the ending of The Empire Strikes Back, but now its universally considered the best Star Wars movie. Mass Effect 3 is the best Mass Effect game, even if the ending sucks.

I thought the Empire Strikes Back was boring, my favorite Star Wars movie is Episode I, I will now accept being trashed upon for liking the prequels (except episode 2, even more boring).

[Stanley Woo]

Adeph wrote...

To be fair guys, these are the same critics that never, ever seem to experience any of the bugs that so many games release with and which you are I will find within a few days.

To be fair, a game reviewer's job isn't to be a bug hunter. It's to play the game and give people an idea of what it's like, to aid them in making their purchasing decision. If they feel that a bug or issue needs to be called out, I'm sure they would. I have read reviews which have called out things like install issues, connection problems, crashes, even hosts of minor bugs that, while noteworthy, ultimately did not hinder the game.

This is basically what it means to be objective, and most people can be objective to varying degrees.

[Taltherion]

Obrusnine wrote...

Taltherion wrote...

Given that many reviews were written before the game was released (day one reviews) ... maybe the reviewers didn't get to the endings?

Then they wouldn't have been able to publish there review really huh? It's a review of the entire complete game, not just a portion.

Actually, there have been reviews (not necessarily of ME 3, I can't judge that as I have not played it) where you clearly noticed after playing the game, that the reviewer, despite writing about the story up to the end, had never played that particular game till the end - maybe relying on a script he got from the producers of the game.

[Caz Neerg]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Perhaps they had no problem with the ending, and/or felt the endings did not detract from their game experience.

So your theory is, that with 9/10 people who express an opinion disliking the ending, that every single professional reviewer just happens to fall in the 1/10? 

[Stakis]

Salvatore510 wrote...

thunderhawk862002 wrote...

Salvatore510 wrote...

An ending does not make a game, and despite most people not wanting to admit it, it's the best game in the series

If a horrible game had an amazing ending, should it be an amazing game? That's the logic you guys are using, because most of you seem to think because the ending sucks, doesn't matter if the game is great, the game has to suck.

An ending absolutely makes a game.  If you're playing a Mario game and you start going up the castle to fight Bowser.  You beat him but just as you rescue Peach he wakes up, throws you into a reinforced steel cage and runs off with the princess.  Game over.    The ending absolutely makes a difference.  

Than you must believe a horrible game can become a great game with a great ending.

The ending is just that, an ending. People didn't like the ending of The Empire Strikes Back, but now its universally considered the best Star Wars movie. Mass Effect 3 is the best Mass Effect game, even if the ending sucks.

say what ? you do realize ppl knew empire was the middle movie right ? this ending we get in ME3 is suppose to finish the series, not setting up the story.

[Sentr0]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Adeph wrote...

To be fair guys, these are the same critics that never, ever seem to experience any of the bugs that so many games release with and which you are I will find within a few days.

To be fair, a game reviewer's job isn't to be a bug hunter. It's to play the game and give people an idea of what it's like, to aid them in making their purchasing decision.

then they did a pretty shi*ty job, since all my friends and pople i know on the internet are raging for the ending (=disappointed)

Modifié par Sentr0, 15 mars 2012 - 10:27 .

[QueenMirage]

The ending is a major part of the game, but its not the whole game. As a whole the game was great, I loved it!

I dont read reviews, but the ratings are probably just based on overall experience. The ending should be factored into reviews, if its not alreay. even then, people have different opinions on the ending, so maybe its best to leave it out?

Modifié par QueenMirage, 15 mars 2012 - 10:32 .

[Obrusnine]

TUHD wrote...

@Obrusnine: Kidding, right? While the annoying loading bugs were screen, the rest was.... well, not improved or worse.

Nope, not kidding, loved the game.

Even more, I played through the entire thing on a netbook. You heard me, a 1GHz dual core integrated graphics chip 2 GB DDR3 RAM netbook.

[cotheer]

Taltherion wrote...

Given that many reviews were written before the game was released (day one reviews) ... maybe the reviewers didn't get to the endings?

IGN has been doing review in parts for a few weeks, so yeah.

The problem is, and sorry but ME3 is the clear case of it, that reviewer fails to mention negatives of "big" games, while on the other hand, "I'm alive" game got nothing but bashing with zero to none positive aspect. Not saying that the later is great game, but same standards should be applied to all games.

[Arokel]

It seems to me that critics of all kinds have a different view of their chosen field compared to the average consumer of whatever it is they review.

They have to go through thousands (not each person obviously) of games every year and assign them a rating. I imagine your perspective of things would change.

Modifié par Arokel, 15 mars 2012 - 10:27 .

[Ianamus]

Caz Neerg wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

Perhaps they had no problem with the ending, and/or felt the endings did not detract from their game experience.

So your theory is, that with 9/10 people who express an opinion disliking the ending, that every single professional reviewer just happens to fall in the 1/10? 

It is suspicious in my opinion, and I have never understood it personally. I don't believe in all of those conspiracy theories about reviewers being paid off, but I really can't believe that out of so many different reviews and reviewing sites only 3 have mentioned the ending in any negetive light at all, since in games with similar outcry's over story/endings reviewers have usually reflected the majority opinion. 

Modifié par EJ107, 15 mars 2012 - 10:27 .

[meisjoe]

That's what I was thinking... it's possible they just really aren't gamers (they are paid reviewers) --- or that they had incomplete versions that didn't include the ending.

[Salvatore510]

EJ107 wrote...

Salvatore510 wrote...

CompositeGNR wrote...

Salvatore510 wrote...

An ending does not make a game, and despite most people not wanting to admit it, it's the best game in the series

If a horrible game had an amazing ending, should it be an amazing game? That's the logic you guys are using, because most of you seem to think because the ending sucks, doesn't matter if the game is great, the game has to suck.

Well it completly invalidates any reason to play the two previous games, because none of those choices matter, heck it even invalidates replaying 3

Irrelevant. That doesn't make it a bad game, and the reviewers are judging the quality of the game, and if you liked Mass Effect before (IE it's your type of game) you would be lying if you think it's anything less than a great game. Sure the ending is a massive letdown, but it doesn't detract from the game.

I got so deflated after the ending I didn't touch my Xbox for 3 days but it doesn't change the fact it's still an awesome game and deserving of all the high praise it's getting.

And people seem to forget, that some people actually do like the ending. But in the end, peoples opinions of the ending are irrelevant when discussing the quality of the game. It's just bitterness if you think it changes an amazing game into an awful game.

But would you give a game with a terrible ending 100/100 and say it was a fantastic ending to the series? I'd deduct at least 10/100 from the score if the ending was as bad as mass effect 3's. 

If the game was amazing yes I would give it 100/1000 even if I didn't like the ending. And yeah Mass Effect 3 is a great ending to the series, gameplay wise.  Look how many 3rd game in a series really drop the ball and don't improve or even move backwards (Uncharted 3 for example), while Mass Effect 3 significantly improved on everything.

Peoples opinions on the ending are just that opinions. How good a game is isn't opinion, it's fact. People that don't like great games will often say the game sucks, but what they really should be saying is the game isn't for them.

[Nefario]

To be fair, whatever might be said about the ending of ME3 itself, the game as a whole was fantastic and was a pretty great way to cap off the trilogy.

It's not as if the game itself is anything even approaching poor - quite the contrary. I think it deserves the praise it's been getting.
I do find it a bit odd that none of the reviews I've read really had anything negative to say about the ending. Not that I'd expect unanimous or widespread criticism, necessarily - I can see why some people might be satisfied with how it all wraps up. It's just a bit surprising that, given the reaction of fans and my own feelings, there didn't seem to be anything corresponding with those sentiments coming out of the journalism sphere.

[kbct]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Adeph wrote...

To be fair guys, these are the same critics that never, ever seem to experience any of the bugs that so many games release with and which you are I will find within a few days.

To be fair, a game reviewer's job isn't to be a bug hunter. It's to play the game and give people an idea of what it's like, to aid them in making their purchasing decision. If they feel that a bug or issue needs to be called out, I'm sure they would. I have read reviews which have called out things like install issues, connection problems, crashes, even hosts of minor bugs that, while noteworthy, ultimately did not hinder the game.

This is basically what it means to be objective, and most people can be objective to varying degrees.

I wish you would finish the game, Mr. Woo. It's strange that you haven't experienced it yet.

[Ianamus]

Salvatore510 wrote...

If the game was amazing yes I would give it 100/1000 even if I didn't like the ending. And yeah Mass Effect 3 is a great ending to the series, gameplay wise.  Look how many 3rd game in a series really drop the ball and don't improve or even move backwards (Uncharted 3 for example), while Mass Effect 3 significantly improved on everything.

Peoples opinions on the ending are just that opinions. How good a game is isn't opinion, it's fact. People that don't like great games will often say the game sucks, but what they really should be saying is the game isn't for them.

Of course it's an opinion. What are you on about?

Modifié par EJ107, 15 mars 2012 - 10:30 .

[Obrusnine]

Salvatore510 wrote...
 And yeah Mass Effect 3 is a great ending to the series, gameplay wise.  Look how many 3rd game in a series really drop the ball and don't improve or even move backwards (Uncharted 3 for example), while Mass Effect 3 significantly improved on everything.

I didn't think Uncharted 3 did any of those things, it didn't improve much on the single player side, but they majorly reworked the multiplayer which is now a far more complete experience. Also, the single-player was excellent. Besides, why fix what's not broken?