289 réponses à ce sujet

[leapingmonkeys]

I should also point out that while ME3 had plenty of plot holes, those holes have been there since ME1. The Citadel is the conduit that allows the Reapers to return, and it was sabotaged by the Protheans, and the Reapers didn't think to check that the Citadel was functioning correctly for 50,000 years? Then, when we stop the Reaper at the Citadel in ME1, the Reapers come back anyway, so clearly the conduit was not necessary - so why would a Reaper who was isolated from the rest of the Reaper fleet expose itself to attack to go after a resource that they do not actually need?

In ME2, why didn't TIM put a kill switch in Shepard? The excuse for not putting in a controlling device was somewhat lame, but OK, sure. But clearly it is in TIM's nature to destroy what he cannot control, which means that putting a kill switch in Shepard would be the most natural thing in the world for him to do *and* it is inline with the whole premise that TIM does not want to alter "who" Shepard is.

The list goes on an on. But in ME1 and ME2 people did not get up in arms about those holes. Why? Because the holes facilitated creating an enjoyable gaming experience.

Then along comes ME3 which fails to be an enjoyable experience for a great many of the paying customers. Bioware then tries to hide behind "art" as a defense. This puts the plot squarely in the middle of the battle field, at which point all these problems start becoming a focus. But really, the problem is that ME3 is not enjoyable for many of the paying customers - the plot holes would have been tolerated or even completely ignored if people had enjoyed the ME3 experience.

[Vromrig]

Cannot rail about plot holes, then explain how holes are plugged.

Plot hole is unexplained or unexplainable why.

Not why you do not like.

[Kingthlayer]

Yeah side quests in this game were awful. I thought BioWare said they didn't like the amount of scanning we had to do in Mass Effect 2 but yet they still shove it down our throats.

Auto dialogue can die, out of everything that pissed people off about Dragon Age 2, I think auto dialogue was one that was complained on the most. But yet here they are, and they do it again in Mass Effect 3.

Even though I prefer the voiced main character, I think they should go back to the Origins system if they're going to force my character to say something without me selecting it,

And after everyone was pissed off about the VS in Mass Effect 2, they do the same exact thing again except with all the Mass Effect 2 squad, that was a big WTF moment for me. Couldn't they at least allow us to use them as temporary squad mates during their cameo quests? Would it have hurt them that much?

Seems like game needs another 6-8 months in development. Kind of funny how BioWare games tend to get worse as you go along in the series now. Dragon Age Origins>>>>>>>Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 1>>>>>Mass Effect 2>>>>Mass Effect 3.

[Virmire Vermin]

I don't think the Mass Effect games should've had any side-quests. Realistically, Shepard doesn't have the time to be a freaking galactic errand runner. They should've just increased the number of story missions instead, including the length of the missions and attention to detail of them. Would have given the developers more time and room to develop the main story and make the consequences of our choices more variable and meaningful AND provide much more satisfying endings.

[Poison_Berrie]

I don't think the actual side quest that are there are bad. Though the uninspiring copying of MP maps and how some Cerberus plots do seem to get abandoned do reflect poorly on them.
The problem is that compared to previous games there are very few. There's the N7 mission and Tuchanka and Rannoch have a few quest which you can abandon (2 and 1 respectivelly) which as such could be considered side quests.
But the bulk of what you do between side quests are scanning fetch quests, with interesting premises but little interaction and no variation. Would it be that hard to create a few extra maps and missions to spruce that up?

leapingmonkeys wrote...

I should also point out that while ME3 had plenty of plot holes, those holes have been there since ME1. The Citadel is the conduit that allows the Reapers to return, and it was sabotaged by the Protheans, and the Reapers didn't think to check that the Citadel was functioning correctly for 50,000 years? Then, when we stop the Reaper at the Citadel in ME1, the Reapers come back anyway, so clearly the conduit was not necessary - so why would a Reaper who was isolated from the rest of the Reaper fleet expose itself to attack to go after a resource that they do not actually need?

Actually that's explained. 
1) The Reaper didn't realize the sabotage until it was time for Sovreign to send the signal. (This does make the Catalyst either an passive observer or wholly incompetent)
2)  It never was about it being impossible, but being highly inconvienent and running counter to their Standard Operation Procedure. (This does raise the question/plothole why they completely abandon that during most of ME 3). By using the Citadel they cut of galactic society, get lot's of info on what's out there, expand little to no resources to get there.

[Agremont2]

To expand a bit over what I wrote earlier in the thread. I was reffering to the numerous scanning quests which to me felt pointless, because of the lack of gameplay involved and the, in my opinion lacking EMS system. I really liked the little planet exploring missions in ME2, despite the fact that they weren't tied to the main story. As for pacing well, it's not something that is particularly important to me. I do understand the argument though.

I guess I'm a filler kind of guy.

Also the whole Tali face thing seemed a bit cheap to me as well as the stargazer at the end.

The game on the whole though (excluding the, how should I say, vague ending) was good and very enjoyable.

Modifié par Agremont2, 27 mars 2012 - 06:03 .

[alberta]

Unfortunately the only reason I'm replaying ME3 is to get a good save as BW has said - keep your ME3 saves. I find little enjoyment in this game unlike ME1 and 2 - I'm playing strictly for the saves and getting a live Sheppard. To tell the truth I'm even struggling with that - it's more like a long stop then force myself back to playing this thing.

[leapingmonkeys]

Poison_Berrie wrote...

I don't think the actual side quest that are there are bad. Though the uninspiring copying of MP maps and how some Cerberus plots do seem to get abandoned do reflect poorly on them.
The problem is that compared to previous games there are very few. There's the N7 mission and Tuchanka and Rannoch have a few quest which you can abandon (2 and 1 respectivelly) which as such could be considered side quests.
But the bulk of what you do between side quests are scanning fetch quests, with interesting premises but little interaction and no variation. Would it be that hard to create a few extra maps and missions to spruce that up?

leapingmonkeys wrote...

I should also point out that while ME3 had plenty of plot holes, those holes have been there since ME1. The Citadel is the conduit that allows the Reapers to return, and it was sabotaged by the Protheans, and the Reapers didn't think to check that the Citadel was functioning correctly for 50,000 years? Then, when we stop the Reaper at the Citadel in ME1, the Reapers come back anyway, so clearly the conduit was not necessary - so why would a Reaper who was isolated from the rest of the Reaper fleet expose itself to attack to go after a resource that they do not actually need?

Actually that's explained. 
1) The Reaper didn't realize the sabotage until it was time for Sovreign to send the signal. (This does make the Catalyst either an passive observer or wholly incompetent)
2)  It never was about it being impossible, but being highly inconvienent and running counter to their Standard Operation Procedure. (This does raise the question/plothole why they completely abandon that during most of ME 3). By using the Citadel they cut of galactic society, get lot's of info on what's out there, expand little to no resources to get there.

First, lets understand what a plot hole is (per Wikipedia):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plot_hole
"A plot hole, or plothole, is a gap or inconsistency in a storyline that goes against the flow of logic established by the story's plot, or constitutes a blatant omission of relevant information regarding the plot. These include such things as unlikely behaviour or actions of characters, illogical or impossible events, events happening for no apparent reason, or statements/events that contradict earlier events in the storyline."

As you said, why didn't the "Catalyst", who is using the Reapers to fufill his plans, do anything about the sabotage (which would interfere with the Reaper's execution of his plan) for *50,000 YEARS*?  Heck, forget the Catalyst, why didn't the Reapers check the functioning of the Citadel for 50,000 YEARS?  What race of super intelligent robots would not run periodic checks on critical systems, such as the conduit, for 50,000 YEARS?  Both omissions run conter to the logical construction of the ME story and the logical behavior of the characters in the story.  That is the text book definition of a plot hole.

Same thing for exposing itself to attack.  So it took three years to get back - so what?  They've been waiting for 50,000 years.  3 years is nothing.  It does not represent anything at all in the face of a plan which has been waiting 50,000 years.  So again, we have behavior that is illogical given the situation setup in the story and the motivations poised for the characters.  That is the text book definition of a plot hole.

And the hits just keep on coming.  In ME3 the Reapers learn that the Citadel is the key to their defeat.  So they capture it and fly it to Earth?  The one place in the universe that is most likely to have a huge Alliance fleet show up?  Why not simply use the Citadel to shutdown the mass relays (remember, they did that in ME1).  At best it would take 100 years for a ship to reach Citadel without the mass relays, if they could do it at all.  And it would completely divide the organics into easily defeatable, isolated groups (can anyone say "divide and conquer").  Super intelligent robots could certainly determine that once they had Citadel they could turn off the mass relays on the organics.  So once again, we have characters behaving in a way that is completely illogical given the premise of the story and the motivations espoused for the characters.  The text book definition of a plot hole.

Heck, for that matter, how did the Reapers simply walk in and take Citadel with no resistance at all?  And what happened to all those war assets from the Citadel?  They would certainly have had to be destroyed in the process, and yet there they sit in my GWA inventory at the end of the game.

It goes on and on and on.

As per my original post, no one would care much, or possibly even notice, these (and all the other) plot holes *if* ME3 had been an enjoyable experience.  The problems were pretty much ignored by the paying customers in ME1 and ME2 because the holes facilitated providing an enjoyable gaming experience.  Since ME3 was not, for many, an enjoyable experience, ME3 no longer enjoys such immunity.

Modifié par leapingmonkeys, 27 mars 2012 - 11:39 .

[DreamTension]

CRISIS1717 wrote...

 I don't know about the rest of you but as this ending thing has dragged on I have come to realise not just the end of the game was the bad part. 

Things like wrapping up plot points over twitter, fetch quests, filler quests with a reward of an email, limited personal quests, blatant plotholes, poor characterisation, wasted potential like the Rachni quest, forced decisions again like the Rachni appearing even if you kill them.

The only consistent thing which was good imo was the combat which by the end got old because they threw the same enemies at you in the same way...

Make no mistake though I realise best chance everyone has is getting an ending change but the rest of the game is far from perfect.

I agree, but these things (as you mentioned) all are minor to the atrocity that is this ending.

If this ending was 'better', these things would be discussed instead.

[Typhoniel]

Wait what? They explained the Citadelle-Thingy on Twitter? Why are they doing that? At first they force me to use Origin, which I hate. Then they also force me to be connected to the internet so they can scan my ME3-Keys thats why I CAN'T START MY SAVE when I am offline. "We found no authorization for 'From the Ashes'-DLC." That made me angry. And they want me to follow them on Twitter too to get the full story?

This is Madness!

I never used Twitter or Facebook and all that strange things. I am even not very amused to be forced having an account here on BSN but I would have made one nevertheless as soon as I figured the absolutly bad ending out.

The rest of the story felt very rushed. I don't get it why they made this game so bad. They could have taken their time and learn from ME2 what was good and what was bad and how they can improve it. N7-Missions were boring, the autodialogues destroyed the feeling of having control, my team was poor. I was close to click "No I don't want you" to Kaidan and all I needed Javik for was his Weapon after that I tried to seal the door of his room.

I wanted to see a Volus planet and recruiting their Bombingships could have been so awesome and Normandy was doing nothing all day long. Why do I even have that Thanix-Cannon? And Why can't I be a friend of Cerberus. I really liked those guys in ME2. Now they have the better equipment than the Alliance and more money and a larger army it seems. They could easily send 100 men to hunt Jacob. I don't get it.

The romances were too short. My Femshep hasn't even touched the lips of Samantha then there was already the cut into Nightmare-scene.

Paragon or Renegade. I had these two options. I want more variety and not being punished in the end for not going straight one route. I had luck that most of the time I agreed with the paragon decision but sometimes I felt forced picking it to get my Paragon-Points and the one Renegade choice I did ruined me the last conversation option in the ending. ONE SINGLE CHOICE did that.

I would love to see ME3 been completly reworked but that is utopian. So I just hope for a better ending and if they do that I will give BioWare a chance to show me with the next game that they still can do good work.

If they don't fix the ending to satisfy the majority of their customers.... (Indoctrination Theory is not the thing I want to see as my new ending, I still want to win this fight.)

Then I have to say: There is no ME3 I am still waiting for it.

[txgoldrush]

Autodialogue is good.....hell, the entire mood after Thessia DOES NOT WORK without some sort of autodialogue.

The Witcher 2 did fine with autodialogue, and in fact DAII h ad NOT ENOUGH autodialogue.

Face it, storytelling is far more important than dialogue options. You can have a great tsory without much dialogue options, but lots of dialogue with a sucky story is useless.

[TheDasterdly]

It wasn't just the endings that were terrible.
It was the lack of Jack. :)

[Agremont2]

txgoldrush wrote...

Autodialogue is good.....hell, the entire mood after Thessia DOES NOT WORK without some sort of autodialogue.

The Witcher 2 did fine with autodialogue, and in fact DAII h ad NOT ENOUGH autodialogue.

Face it, storytelling is far more important than dialogue options. You can have a great tsory without much dialogue options, but lots of dialogue with a sucky story is useless.

Some autodialogue can be good, I agree. It didn't bother me that much in ME3, But it shouldn't go overboard. Choice is important for defining your character.

Modifié par Agremont2, 29 mars 2012 - 02:14 .

[Ahdia]

TheBishop_82 wrote...

The twitter stuff was just plain awful. There are many, many people that don't use twitter (like me!) and had no idea about any of that stuff until I got to this forum... After I finished the game.

Yup. I don't use twitter, I read about it on the forum. Why is there game info on twitter and oh I don't know..not in the game? :|

[MinatheBrat]

TheBishop_82 wrote...

The twitter stuff was just plain awful. There are many, many people that don't use twitter (like me!) and had no idea about any of that stuff until I got to this forum... After I finished the game.

I agree. I hate twitter.