289 réponses à ce sujet

[Sidney]

ahandsomeshark wrote...
well you don't really talk to NPC's at all. Compared to ME1 and ME2 it feels like a major step back. Even characters you didn't interact with a whole bunch in ME1 & ME2 (Like Gianna, the consort, the cop from Samara's mission, Gavorn, Aria, Chabon, and others) you really got to know through their side quests or investigating dialogue. Here you barely even talk to any NPC's and when you do it's usually 1-2 lines.

What? There is a lot of conversation but it is more focused on your squaddies and former associates. there's not a ton of just chitty-chatting but then again there is a war to be fought.  You get a lot more interaction with Traynor and Steve than you did Kelly and well, no one else, in ME2.

[ahandsomeshark]

ticklefist wrote...

Agremont2 wrote...

Filler can be done more or less interesting though, In my opinion the filler in ME2 as well as ME1 is far more interesting than ME3s.

I've always felt filler (sidequests) is an integral part of the roleplaying game experience.

A big part of the appeal imo. Sidequests are the difference between a 30 hour agame and a 50 hour game. 

this, and I don't consider them filler. I consider them fun. If I didn't want sidequests I wouldn't play rpgs.

[Bishna]

Agremont2 wrote...

Filler can be done more or less interesting though, In my opinion the filler in ME2 as well as ME1 is far more interesting than ME3s.

I've always felt filler (sidequests) is an integral part of the roleplaying game experience.

I disagree with you on this. 

I thought that the side content of ME3 was a HUGE step forward for the series. In ME2 the N7 missions were boring and so were alot of the loyalty missions. The N7 missions rarely consisted of more that a paragraph or two of text-only context followed by (if you were lucky) 10-20 minutes of combat. 

In ME3 you visited places like Grissom Academy where you got to find an old friend and discover her new take on life. You got to dismantle a massive bomb and help deflate what could have caused another Krogan-Turian war. Even the N7 missions had a good amount of story context and actual dialogue.

[Chuvvy]

Vhalkyrie wrote...

Putting a storyline in the twitter feed is awful. I hope this is a concept that dies.

[edit] I was one of those that didn't know what happened to Emily Wong.  I did not find it cute or clever that she was killed off on Twitter.  >.<

They;ve eve done retcons on twitter. Like Mac saying "Oh yeah, some people made it off the citadel.".


Also OP, I agree with you. The lack of sidequest, and side characters is just another indicator that it was rushed. Though not to the extent of DA2.

Modifié par Slidell505, 27 mars 2012 - 02:17 .

[ahandsomeshark]

Bishna wrote...

Agremont2 wrote...

Filler can be done more or less interesting though, In my opinion the filler in ME2 as well as ME1 is far more interesting than ME3s.

I've always felt filler (sidequests) is an integral part of the roleplaying game experience.

I disagree with you on this. 

I thought that the side content of ME3 was a HUGE step forward for the series. In ME2 the N7 missions were boring and so were alot of the loyalty missions. The N7 missions rarely consisted of more that a paragraph or two of text-only context followed by (if you were lucky) 10-20 minutes of combat. 

In ME3 you visited places like Grissom Academy where you got to find an old friend and discover her new take on life. You got to dismantle a massive bomb and help deflate what could have caused another Krogan-Turian war. Even the N7 missions had a good amount of story context and actual dialogue.

I didn't really consider the planet side missions side quests, but even then they all became repetitive. Especially after Tuchanka. Grissoms Academy was awesome and actually involved story, the geth consensus was great, the asari monastery was good, but most of the cerebus missions? There was no story at all in them.

[AntonioA9011]

I agree with the OP. It wasn't just the endings that were terrible. Some characters were wildly inconsistent with their former selves, the romances were terribly limited (Almost unforgiving if you didn't romance who BIOWARE WANTED YOU TO ROMANCE i.e. Liara), and some of the side quests were just pointless filler/drivel that didn't require much of a mission, just planet scanning. Don't **** out peanuts and tell me it's gold.

[txgoldrush]

ahandsomeshark wrote...

ticklefist wrote...

Agremont2 wrote...

Filler can be done more or less interesting though, In my opinion the filler in ME2 as well as ME1 is far more interesting than ME3s.

I've always felt filler (sidequests) is an integral part of the roleplaying game experience.

A big part of the appeal imo. Sidequests are the difference between a 30 hour agame and a 50 hour game. 

this, and I don't consider them filler. I consider them fun. If I didn't want sidequests I wouldn't play rpgs.

 
a good meaningful 20 to 30 hours of content >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 50 hours boosted by tons of filler.

Look at JRPGs, much of their playtime is filler.

[Sidney]

CRISIS1717 wrote...

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.

Fetechquests/ filler quest: REally you want to claim ME1's find a flippin' rock wasn't filler? The Turian Insignia and Matrirach writing were nothing but fetch quests. Attacking pirates/mercs/biotic rebels in the SAME structure over and over wasn't filler? What they did in ME3 was trim out a lot more filler.

The narrative was a lot tighter in ME3 for good reason, you are in a hurry. The gravest sin of ME1's story telling was how they ripped the tension of time out of that game to sacrifice it on the altar of non-linearity. You want the wander around and do nothing then go find Skyrim where the main plot doesn't even exist. The mass effect games are built around a central mission and focusing on that mission and giving it some feeling of urgency is good.

[Bishna]

ahandsomeshark wrote...

Bishna wrote...

Agremont2 wrote...

Filler can be done more or less interesting though, In my opinion the filler in ME2 as well as ME1 is far more interesting than ME3s.

I've always felt filler (sidequests) is an integral part of the roleplaying game experience.

I disagree with you on this. 

I thought that the side content of ME3 was a HUGE step forward for the series. In ME2 the N7 missions were boring and so were alot of the loyalty missions. The N7 missions rarely consisted of more that a paragraph or two of text-only context followed by (if you were lucky) 10-20 minutes of combat. 

In ME3 you visited places like Grissom Academy where you got to find an old friend and discover her new take on life. You got to dismantle a massive bomb and help deflate what could have caused another Krogan-Turian war. Even the N7 missions had a good amount of story context and actual dialogue.

I didn't really consider the planet side missions side quests, but even then they all became repetitive. Especially after Tuchanka. Grissoms Academy was awesome and actually involved story, the geth consensus was great, the asari monastery was good, but most of the cerebus missions? There was no story at all in them.

While I don't enjoy the N7 missions in ME3 nearly as much as missions like the Grissom Academy or the Monastary one, I do think they are vast improvements over the ones in ME2 and I think it is unfair to say that they had no story. I helped tuchanka regain control over massive planetary defense cannons that help turn the tide of battle in that system! In ME2 I found the body of some cerberus and read his diary or something.

[Chuvvy]

Sidney wrote...

CRISIS1717 wrote...

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.

Fetechquests/ filler quest: REally you want to claim ME1's find a flippin' rock wasn't filler? The Turian Insignia and Matrirach writing were nothing but fetch quests. Attacking pirates/mercs/biotic rebels in the SAME structure over and over wasn't filler? What they did in ME3 was trim out a lot more filler.

Those side quest had story to them, and were actually interesting, as for the fetch quest in ME1, they didn't make up the bulk of the sidequests.

The sidequests in ME3 were "Hey, go to this multiplayer map for some random reason, don't talk to anyone, kill some guys, then hop in the shuttle." The only sidequest that had any story to them were the few citadel hub quests. As for "nattative flow" who the **** cares? It's an RPG, not a movie, there are cool sidequests and interesting side characters in RPGs.

[txgoldrush]

AntonioA9011 wrote...

I agree with the OP. It wasn't just the endings that were terrible. Some characters were wildly inconsistent with their former selves, the romances were terribly limited (Almost unforgiving if you didn't romance who BIOWARE WANTED YOU TO ROMANCE i.e. Liara), and some of the side quests were just pointless filler/drivel that didn't require much of a mission, just planet scanning. Don't **** out peanuts and tell me it's gold.

Who is WILDLY inconsistant?....nevermind the fact that many of these characters did develop, and Tali explains why she changed her views.

Romances limited....ummm no.....nevermind that Liara, Ash, Kaiden, Garrus, Tali, and ME2 squaddies Miranda and Jack being romancable, but for the first time, no party members can as well. And Jacob finds someone lese, which is realistic and Thane has a romance arc end with his death.

Pointless filler, all ME games had them.

The PROBLEM is that people are OVER EXAGGERATING flaws in their new games, while GLOSSING OVER flaws in the old games. So, basically how is a simple 5 minute mission that is filler worse than going into a copy and paste planet with copy and past building for quests that break the pacing of the game (ME1)?

ME1 was horribly flawed, but its just convienant to ignore the flaws.

[LadyWench]

CRISIS1717 wrote...

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.

Yeah without twitter peeps will never know Emily Wong was killed off and pretty much everyone on the Citadel is dead.

Ditto. I don't twitter, either. I understand wanting to take advantage of different online forums to get more people interested in the game virally, but to exclude story-important info from the game is bogus.

[AMmayhem]

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.

Apparently I'm still clueless on what happened on Twitter.  What did I miss?

[txgoldrush]

Slidell505 wrote...

Sidney wrote...

CRISIS1717 wrote...

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.

Fetechquests/ filler quest: REally you want to claim ME1's find a flippin' rock wasn't filler? The Turian Insignia and Matrirach writing were nothing but fetch quests. Attacking pirates/mercs/biotic rebels in the SAME structure over and over wasn't filler? What they did in ME3 was trim out a lot more filler.

Those side quest had story to them, and were actually interesting, as for the fetch quest in ME1, they didn't make up the bulk of the sidequests.

The sidequests in ME3 were "Hey, go to this multiplayer map for some random reason, don't talk to anyone, kill some guys, then hop in the shuttle." The only sidequest that had any story to them were the few citadel hub quests. As for "nattative flow" who the **** cares? It's an RPG, not a movie, there are cool sidequests and interesting side characters in RPGs.

I guess someone forgot to do the Fuel Reactor and Communications Hub N7 missions......

[N-Seven]

Glad to see you guys have convinced yourselves that you never liked any of the games in the first place now.  This is like when people break up with someone they loved.  They convince themselves that person never gave them any happiness and had few redeeming qualities.

That's a shame, guess there's no reason for you to be on the forums now, is there?

Modifié par N-Seven, 27 mars 2012 - 02:24 .

[Udalango]

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.

What twitter stuff?

[Sidney]

Slidell505 wrote...
Those side quest had story to them, and were actually interesting, as for the fetch quest in ME1, they didn't make up the bulk of the sidequests.

The sidequests in ME3 were "Hey, go to this multiplayer map for some random reason, don't talk to anyone, kill some guys, then hop in the shuttle." The only sidequest that had any story to them were the few citadel hub quests. As for "nattative flow" who the **** cares? It's an RPG, not a movie, there are cool sidequests and interesting side characters in RPGs.

The rocks had a story? The story for all the generic building inhabitants was "they are there, kill them" by and large.  All that thrilling one buuilding combat was wrapped in a boring all-look-same UCW with rocks, downed probes and the buggy from Moon Patrol. Yeah for RPG's!

[Lonsecia]

I can't believe that they revealed the fate of those residing on the Citadel over bleeding Twitter. I have no interest in following tweets, and if I did, it'd not be those for a game.

I agree with much of what the OP said. As has been said a few time, the planet scanning quests are pretty rubbish. I also thought the Reapers chasing you through space if you scanned too often was poorly implemented.

Modifié par Lonsecia, 27 mars 2012 - 02:29 .

[GreenDragon37]

I agree. The endings were terrible, but the game had other bad points. 

The god-awful journal (how do you mess this up!?!)
Getting rid of Emily Wong over Twitter so we can have Allers! (lazy)
Harbinger being side-lined 
The Rachni were wasted
A lot of side quests were done by scanning. ME2 had much better side-quests
The lazyness of detail: Aethyta, Joker's face, Tali's face reveal
Too much auto-dialogue
Less character interaction

I just felt the game wasn't ready. It was rushed. You can't release a game like Mass Effect in two years, games like this need time. 

Modifié par GreenDragon37, 27 mars 2012 - 02:34 .

[txgoldrush]

GreenDragon37 wrote...

I agree. The endings were terrible, but the game had other bad points. 

Getting rid of Emily Wong over Twitter so we can have Allers! (lazy)
Harbinger being side-lined 
The Rachni were wasted
A lot of side quests were done by scanning. ME2 had much better side-quests
The lazyness of detail: Aethyta, Joker's face
Too much auto-dialogue
Less character interaction

I just felt the game wasn't ready. It was rushed. You can't release a game like Mass Effect in two years, games like this need time. 

LESS CHARACTER INTERACTION......FALSE.

In fact, I had more conversations with Liara, James, Garrus, and Javik than most Bioware characters in the past games. Nevermind they interacted with eachother better. Nevermind that while they have their ship interactions, there is also interactions on the Citadel...and as well, they have things to say outside the dialogue tree AND they are more vocal on missions. AND they get quests where they star in...Garrus on Palaven and Turian Patrol, Liara on Thessia and Eden Prime, Tali on the Rannoch quests, EDI in the HQ, which leads to superior character development.

Autodialogue = A BETTER WRITTEN SHEPARD...gone are the one liners and cheesy dialogue from him, he is far better intergrated into the conversations than the first two games. Its more natural.

And Diana Allers is kinda underrated, she is supposed to be annoying, but really her moment was at the very end when she realizes her home was hit. Chobot who overplayed the part for the most part, nailed perfectly her last part.

[Udalango]

txgoldrush wrote...



LESS CHARACTER INTERACTION......FALSE.

In fact, I had more conversations with Liara, James, Garrus, and Javik than most Bioware characters in the past games. Nevermind they interacted with eachother better. Nevermind that while they have their ship interactions, there is also interactions on the Citadel...and as well, they have things to say outside the dialogue tree AND they are more vocal on missions. AND they get quests where they star in...Garrus on Palaven and Turian Patrol, Liara on Thessia and Eden Prime, Tali on the Rannoch quests, EDI in the HQ, which leads to superior character development.

Autodialogue = A BETTER WRITTEN SHEPARD...gone are the one liners and cheesy dialogue from him, he is far better intergrated into the conversations than the first two games. Its more natural.

And Diana Allers is kinda underrated, she is supposed to be annoying, but really her moment was at the very end when she realizes her home was hit. Chobot who overplayed the part for the most part, nailed perfectly her last part.

You know who I felt least connected to in Me2.  Kasumi.  Cause every convo with her was her using "Cheesy oneliners"  Just like a ridiculous amount of the Squad convos in the third one.  I felt like I RARELY had real convos with my squadies 

[Clone 071]

GreenDragon37 wrote...

I just felt the game wasn't ready. It was rushed. You can't release a game like Mass Effect in two years, games like this need time. 

Yeah, seriously. Mass Effect 2 took 2 years and 2 months to release after Mass Effect hit stores, but that was just the second game. Mass Effect 3 was to implement all your choices in the first two games and roll out something amazing (or completely devastating if you renegaded your way through the series) so it should taken a hell of a lot longer than just 2 years and 2 months to roll this game out. I would have said 3-4 years, and it would've been damn worth the wait, but this? No, it was rushed and definitely incomplete. Romances were shafted (minus Liara) and besides Liara and Garrus, there was no real dialogue conversations or interactions between crewmates and squaddies, which was more BS. I would've loved to have a friendly chat with other squadmates to catch up with them, especially the VS.
Bah, no matter what happens, the damage has already been done. Just like what the Reapers did to Earth. You can fix the problem, but the damage is still there.

[The_Crazy_Hand]

Yeah, the lack of a final boss fight also sucked badly.  The final area just wasn't "video-gamey" enough if you ask me.

[KotorEffect3]

N-Seven wrote...

Glad to see you guys have convinced yourselves that you never liked any of the games in the first place now.  This is like when people break up with someone they loved.  They convince themselves that person never gave them any happiness and had few redeeming qualities.

That's a shame, guess there's no reason for you to be on the forums now, is there?

These people would complain about their water being too wet.

[ahandsomeshark]

Bishna wrote...

ahandsomeshark wrote...

Bishna wrote...

Agremont2 wrote...

Filler can be done more or less interesting though, In my opinion the filler in ME2 as well as ME1 is far more interesting than ME3s.

I've always felt filler (sidequests) is an integral part of the roleplaying game experience.

I disagree with you on this. 

I thought that the side content of ME3 was a HUGE step forward for the series. In ME2 the N7 missions were boring and so were alot of the loyalty missions. The N7 missions rarely consisted of more that a paragraph or two of text-only context followed by (if you were lucky) 10-20 minutes of combat. 

In ME3 you visited places like Grissom Academy where you got to find an old friend and discover her new take on life. You got to dismantle a massive bomb and help deflate what could have caused another Krogan-Turian war. Even the N7 missions had a good amount of story context and actual dialogue.

I didn't really consider the planet side missions side quests, but even then they all became repetitive. Especially after Tuchanka. Grissoms Academy was awesome and actually involved story, the geth consensus was great, the asari monastery was good, but most of the cerebus missions? There was no story at all in them.

While I don't enjoy the N7 missions in ME3 nearly as much as missions like the Grissom Academy or the Monastary one, I do think they are vast improvements over the ones in ME2 and I think it is unfair to say that they had no story. I helped tuchanka regain control over massive planetary defense cannons that help turn the tide of battle in that system! In ME2 I found the body of some cerberus and read his diary or something.

I meant the Ceberus side missions had no story.