289 réponses à ce sujet

[txgoldrush]

redsox95MB wrote...

I've actually just started replaying ME1. I'm surprised by how much quality content is in that game. More, and better, sidequests than ME2+3, bigger Citadel, more dialogue, the list goes on. What a shame. Honestly the only game series I know that gets progressively more and better content throughout the sequels is the Elder Scrolls series.

Fact: ME3 has more dialogue than ME1...you're wrong right there.

More =/= better...ME1 proves it. Yes there is more "sidequests" but they are all the same....go to random barren planet, drive to the area of the quest, get out shoot everyone outside, than enter the cut and paste buildings, shoot everyone, resolve situation, and leave.

Same damn thing.

Nevermind the character work in ME3 is FAR better, the characters are FAR more MULTIDIMENSIONAL, and FAR more HUMAN. In ME1, they are just Bioware archtypes used as talking codex entries, later in the series, they evolve into more multifaceted characters that shep most of their archtype and are involved more in the plot. And really, all Tali is in ME1 was to give codex entries for a race you NEVER see, except for her.

The old way of Bioware handling characters SUCKS...BAD. It is an AWFUL way to develop characters, forcing development through conversations instead of events or plot progression, except for maybe a small sidequest. ME1 is guilty of this, DAO is really guilty of this, however ME3 breaks this trend. And really ME1 characters do lack development, unlike ME2 and ME3.

The more old Bioware fans scream about character interactivity, the more Bioware is doing the right thing. Really character interactivity only goes so far, character DEVELOPMENT is more important.

Hell, I have had 5 or 6 chats with my crewmates in ME3, unlike ME1's 3 or 4.

[jakal66]

I'm sorry but running around the galaxy finding something hidden in a monkey(pijacks) is not the kind of thing that would make sense when THE FRIGGIN REAPERS are here destrying the galaxy and its civilizations.I do believe that something better could have been done in regard the side missions,sure,but people what worked in ME 1 and 2 could not, and I am grateful they didn't include it, work in ME3 given the situation you and your crew are facing...
For that I believe I'd rather have this than a bunch of worthless sidemissions that yes add time of gameplay but add nothing to the story...They would have had to make something entirely new.

I do agree the game is short, there should have been more n7 missions regarding cerberus...that would have made sense.I also agree the game lacks the dialogue you had in the previous games and this did bother me but I was pleased to see my charachters interact with themselves...and bumping into them outside the ship was a great addition to the series.

The ending was a total disaster,yes I know but I am also sure that if the ending would have been acceptable people here would be ranting about everything else.Because let's face it...it happened with ME1, it happened with ME2 and sure ME3 would not have been the exception....

[txgoldrush]

Introducing THE TALKING CODEX.....



This is bad bad storytelling and bad characterization. Hell, Tali is my favorite ME franchise character however, she was my LEAST fave in ME1.

[txgoldrush]

Notice how this conversation, also revealing info on a character, is more natural. Instead of treating the character as a talking codex entry, the info comes more naturally, through character moments.

[cyric085]

game was rushed

so much content cut or dumped down its not even funny.

the bad ending just overshadow this medicore game.

it was only really anticipated because it should have been the epic ending of a trilogy, which failed horrible

Modifié par cyric085, 27 mars 2012 - 05:41 .

[Candoo]

Jesusland wrote...

I am KROGAN wrote...

It just feels like they gave up in the process of making this game.

It doesn't feel right, if you understand what I'm trying to say.

Yup.  It feels half-assed compared to ME2.  It just doesn't have the "heart" of its predecessors.

I'm not saying I hated the game, but it just didn't feel as in-depth, with player involvement, as the first two. The story line seemed "pushed along" by the cinematic cut scenes. A lot of games have gone this way. I'm a die-hard CoD fan, but for me MW3 and BO were very disappointing. 6 hrs of SP, each one. Both were filled with oo-aww cinematics that carried the story line. If I wanted to watch a movie, I would have paid $12 and went to the show, instead of $60 for a game.

One thing that really irked me, is that you couldn't prepare for a conversation. In the first two, I would generally make a save before talking to anyone on my terms. In ME3, you would just finish something major, or walk into an area, and you were *forced* into a dialogued cut-scene. The dialogue wheel was vague of choices, and often, what you chose, was very different than what was actually said, and conveyed two different ideas. Because of this, I felt like I was constantly being rushed through the story-line, instead of letting me take things at my pace. If you did choose something that you didn't mean to say, good luck, because the last save that you were *allowed* to make was 1/2 hour previous.

[liggy002]

I expect that they'll release a lot of DLC to make up for the lack of quests and that is probably one of the fundamental reasons why the game lacked side quest exploration. It had side quests, but not to the extent of ME1 and ME2.

[ManOfSteeL1618]

dreman9999 wrote...

ManOfSteeL1618 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Wow...You people are whinny *****es.

Ad homenim? You've already failed.

I'm sorry...
Complaining about great story development because did not end the way you wanted it to?(not talking about the ending)
Complaining about improvements to the gameplay that makes it better, because it's too gamey...And it's an action rpg?
Complaing about lack of hub worlds when every world is being invades by reapers?
Complaing about exploration when every were is being invades by reaper?
Complaing about lack of puzzles when it was the most minior part of a 3 games?
Complaining about dialoge...when it has scene like this?
 
....
Yes...you guys are whinny 
*****es .

And now you are being whinny about this...

Seriously if we say nothing than bioware won't see suggestions for improvement.

The only flawed things was the journal and the ending.
Dialoge was better in ME3 because it was more active and it had you squad interact with other squade mates.
Combat is much more fine tuned.
And I still don't see how multiple hub world would work? We go to illium to buy something and suddenly a reaper falls form the sky and start destory the port?

Those are the only things wrong with the game in YOUR opinion, sure.

And to clarify, you are assuming reapers are everywhere? Sure Thessia may not be the greatest hub location, but what about Sur'Kesh? Before Cerberus got there, they seemed to be fine. There is some exploration there before you start the mission, what would be wrong with adding a bit more to it?

You are not rushed in the game, all those pointless fetch quests on the citadel and all. I don't see why anyone would have a problem with a bit more exploration...that is what mass effect is all about.

[txgoldrush]

cyric085 wrote...

game was rushed

so much content cut or dumped down its not even funny.

the bad ending just overshadow this medicore game.

it was only really anticipated because it should have been the epic ending of a trilogy, which failed horrible

and so was ME1.....rushed as well, they didn't even bother to have the texture load correctly or have any balance whatsoever in the gameplay....

[ManOfSteeL1618]

Halo Quea wrote...

Dawson14 wrote...

Totally agree. I did the same thing after getting over the ending, started thinking about the whole game

-The side quests were lame and just a ploy for multiplayer maps
-The Journal sucked and so did scanning planets for "quests"
-Going to the Citadel to find the random people you overheard was annoying as well
-Getting rid of the dialouge boxes and just having Shepard speak
-No final Boss
-No use of your war assets at all. They didnt matter
-No Rachni, STG, Batarians, Elcor, Volus, Ex Cerebus etc anywhere in the final push
-The game was incredibly short
-No 3 choices for dialouge
-Opening cutscene was poorly done. Really bad voice acting and leadup to the reapers coming. I was pretty diappointed at it but let it go after stepping outside and being awed by the reapers size.
Reapers trying to kill you in the galaxies when scanning. POINTLESS

I could go on. Thank god the story kept me preoccupied until I got kicked in the nuts during the run for the beam

You see?  I KNEW this was eventually going to happen.  

The newness of ME3 is beginning to wear-off and gamers are starting to take a harder look at the game, not just the endings.   When I critcized the game early on I was immediately attacked, but now some people are starting to get it and see all of the things that made ME3 a cheaper experience than the first two games.

The game IS VERY SHORT, the auto-dialoging kills character interaction, the hub quests are utterly mundane, the game destroys the universe's established lore, and I could go on and on as well.   

As the new experience of ME3 wears-off a little more,  fans are going to see this game for what it really is.  Or rather what it isn't. 

You're right, when I got near the end of the game I started looking back and seeing it for what it was, a very flawed and rushed game. With so much to work with it is really a wonder how they left so much out...

[Hibernating]

While I disliked the ending, I thought the rest of the game was amazing. Best in the series.

[ManOfSteeL1618]

txgoldrush wrote...

cyric085 wrote...

game was rushed

so much content cut or dumped down its not even funny.

the bad ending just overshadow this medicore game.

it was only really anticipated because it should have been the epic ending of a trilogy, which failed horrible

and so was ME1.....rushed as well, they didn't even bother to have the texture load correctly or have any balance whatsoever in the gameplay....

But they sure as hell got the story right! Nothing in ME to this day, was better than VIGIL.

[txgoldrush]

Candoo wrote...

Jesusland wrote...

I am KROGAN wrote...

It just feels like they gave up in the process of making this game.

It doesn't feel right, if you understand what I'm trying to say.

Yup.  It feels half-assed compared to ME2.  It just doesn't have the "heart" of its predecessors.

I'm not saying I hated the game, but it just didn't feel as in-depth, with player involvement, as the first two. The story line seemed "pushed along" by the cinematic cut scenes. A lot of games have gone this way. I'm a die-hard CoD fan, but for me MW3 and BO were very disappointing. 6 hrs of SP, each one. Both were filled with oo-aww cinematics that carried the story line. If I wanted to watch a movie, I would have paid $12 and went to the show, instead of $60 for a game.

One thing that really irked me, is that you couldn't prepare for a conversation. In the first two, I would generally make a save before talking to anyone on my terms. In ME3, you would just finish something major, or walk into an area, and you were *forced* into a dialogued cut-scene. The dialogue wheel was vague of choices, and often, what you chose, was very different than what was actually said, and conveyed two different ideas. Because of this, I felt like I was constantly being rushed through the story-line, instead of letting me take things at my pace. If you did choose something that you didn't mean to say, good luck, because the last save that you were *allowed* to make was 1/2 hour previous.

No, they constantly have done this in ME2 where you walk into a cutscene and are forced to pick dialogue options. And really, why "prepare for a conversation" in the first place? Its kills the momentum.  Not being able to save scum as much is a GOOD thing and makes your decisions matter more.

The cinematic direction also prevents the TALKING CODEX problem I mentioned before, where characters have to explain everything in a very unnatural manner instead of let the storyline organically explain it.

[txgoldrush]

ManOfSteeL1618 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

cyric085 wrote...

game was rushed

so much content cut or dumped down its not even funny.

the bad ending just overshadow this medicore game.

it was only really anticipated because it should have been the epic ending of a trilogy, which failed horrible

and so was ME1.....rushed as well, they didn't even bother to have the texture load correctly or have any balance whatsoever in the gameplay....

But they sure as hell got the story right! Nothing in ME to this day, was better than VIGIL.

Story wasn't all right...it was good, yes...but the characters lacked development to degree that the sequels gave them, the pacing was uneven, and the dialogue wasn't grand, especially from Shepard.

Yes, the Vigil part was awesome, but the game was a slow burn. ME3 had far more excitiment, better character development, and a better sense of pace.

[Kyrick]

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.

Indeed.  The game felt rushed, though the initial rush I felt when completing it was somewhat soothing.  "Oh look, it's Grunt kicking ass!"  Of course, once you sit down and think about the various points of the game, it really doesn't hold a candle to Mass Effect Two.  Not in the slightest.

The game was ridiculously rushed.  It's perfectly obvious that it was.  Now, the real question to ask is whether or not Bioware were the ones to rush the game, or if it was EA that insisted that it come out in a certain timeframe, ready or not.

It's easy to overlook the stuff that is wrong with the game (Hiya Tali.  Oh wait, you're just a photoshopped stock photo!) were the ending more satisfactory.  However, the ending being what it is, it simply shines a spotlight on the flaws found in the rest of the game. 

There is NO way that this game deserves perfect scores from ANYbody reviewing it.  It has some notable moments, yes.  It ties together some plotlines and all of that, sure.  But it falls far short of perfection and the fawning praise it has been given by many people and critics is galling to watch.  These are the type of people who celebrate the triumph of mediocrity as a laudible goal in art, literature, etc.  It makes me cry to see 'perfection' awarded to things that, while entertaining, are certainly not perfect.

I wonder what the people who created Mass Effect 3 feel about their efforts?  Do they privately sit around and commiserate about how good the game 'could have been' were they just given the time they needed to finish it properly?  Of course they'd never say such, especially on the forums, but it's an interesting thing to sit and puzzle over.

[DukeOfNukes]

Honestly, I HATED the game demo. I was pissed off by the lack of choice, the lack of investigation options, and the overall guided dialog. I was furious about the plotholes presented in a 60 minute demo, and the purely combat based focus. I posted as much on these forums, to which I recieved an overwhelming "Stop whining, you'll love it when the game comes out"

I, like MY Shepard, now have this to say: "Suck on it now, jerkoffs. I warned you this was coming, and now we're all suffering for it!"

[txgoldrush]

Kyrick wrote...

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.

Indeed.  The game felt rushed, though the initial rush I felt when completing it was somewhat soothing.  "Oh look, it's Grunt kicking ass!"  Of course, once you sit down and think about the various points of the game, it really doesn't hold a candle to Mass Effect Two.  Not in the slightest.

The game was ridiculously rushed.  It's perfectly obvious that it was.  Now, the real question to ask is whether or not Bioware were the ones to rush the game, or if it was EA that insisted that it come out in a certain timeframe, ready or not.

It's easy to overlook the stuff that is wrong with the game (Hiya Tali.  Oh wait, you're just a photoshopped stock photo!) were the ending more satisfactory.  However, the ending being what it is, it simply shines a spotlight on the flaws found in the rest of the game. 

There is NO way that this game deserves perfect scores from ANYbody reviewing it.  It has some notable moments, yes.  It ties together some plotlines and all of that, sure.  But it falls far short of perfection and the fawning praise it has been given by many people and critics is galling to watch.  These are the type of people who celebrate the triumph of mediocrity as a laudible goal in art, literature, etc.  It makes me cry to see 'perfection' awarded to things that, while entertaining, are certainly not perfect.

I wonder what the people who created Mass Effect 3 feel about their efforts?  Do they privately sit around and commiserate about how good the game 'could have been' were they just given the time they needed to finish it properly?  Of course they'd never say such, especially on the forums, but it's an interesting thing to sit and puzzle over.

Bioware rushes most of its games...what else is new. Jade Empire was rushed, DA2 was rushed, and ALL three Mass Effect games were rushed.

Once again, you are assuming the rest of the series wasn't rushed....well...it was. And really, ME1 was under Microsoft and IT was rushed.

[txgoldrush]

simfamSP wrote...

These posts and threads are why the BSN has such a bad rep. Why do we always look for the 'bad' in games? I might as well say PS:T is awful because of the horrible combat system and how hard it was to control my characters during it. Oh! Wait, theres more. The UI for the combat was just a rip of from Fallout and there were to many copy/paste pixel men walking about. Sigil was to small compared to BG2's Akakhla (mispelt I know) and I hate that TNO is male only...

See how much of a dick I sound? xD

oh and did you hear that the ending was always bittersweet despite your choices?

What a horrible game PS;T is....(sarcasm)

Oh and Ultima VII is crap too, the inventory sucks so much that I can lose quest items....oh wait it doesn't suck, its one of the most important WRPGs ever made and a landmark in th eseries.

I love how selective in their criticism Bioware fans are....ignore the obvious glaring flaws of their past ones and blow minor ones from newer games way out of proportion.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 27 mars 2012 - 06:16 .

[DukeOfNukes]

Sorry, how do you figure ME1 was rushed? There's definitely parts that aren't amazing, but rushed? Not really.

[agathokakological]

I am KROGAN wrote...

It just feels like they gave up in the process of making this game.

It doesn't feel right, if you understand what I'm trying to say.

I know that feel, bro.

[txgoldrush]

simfamSP wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Kyrick wrote...

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.

Indeed.  The game felt rushed, though the initial rush I felt when completing it was somewhat soothing.  "Oh look, it's Grunt kicking ass!"  Of course, once you sit down and think about the various points of the game, it really doesn't hold a candle to Mass Effect Two.  Not in the slightest.

The game was ridiculously rushed.  It's perfectly obvious that it was.  Now, the real question to ask is whether or not Bioware were the ones to rush the game, or if it was EA that insisted that it come out in a certain timeframe, ready or not.

It's easy to overlook the stuff that is wrong with the game (Hiya Tali.  Oh wait, you're just a photoshopped stock photo!) were the ending more satisfactory.  However, the ending being what it is, it simply shines a spotlight on the flaws found in the rest of the game. 

There is NO way that this game deserves perfect scores from ANYbody reviewing it.  It has some notable moments, yes.  It ties together some plotlines and all of that, sure.  But it falls far short of perfection and the fawning praise it has been given by many people and critics is galling to watch.  These are the type of people who celebrate the triumph of mediocrity as a laudible goal in art, literature, etc.  It makes me cry to see 'perfection' awarded to things that, while entertaining, are certainly not perfect.

I wonder what the people who created Mass Effect 3 feel about their efforts?  Do they privately sit around and commiserate about how good the game 'could have been' were they just given the time they needed to finish it properly?  Of course they'd never say such, especially on the forums, but it's an interesting thing to sit and puzzle over.

Bioware rushes most of its games...what else is new. Jade Empire was rushed, DA2 was rushed, and ALL three Mass Effect games were rushed.

Once again, you are assuming the rest of the series wasn't rushed....well...it was. And really, ME1 was under Microsoft and IT was rushed.

Thinking about it...

Did anybody acuse of DA:O being rushed? Or even BG!?

For a game that was in production for 5 years, DAO still feels rushed....that how clunky and unploshed that game was....far worse than ME3.

[txgoldrush]

simfamSP wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

simfamSP wrote...

These posts and threads are why the BSN has such a bad rep. Why do we always look for the 'bad' in games? I might as well say PS:T is awful because of the horrible combat system and how hard it was to control my characters during it. Oh! Wait, theres more. The UI for the combat was just a rip of from Fallout and there were to many copy/paste pixel men walking about. Sigil was to small compared to BG2's Akakhla (mispelt I know) and I hate that TNO is male only...

See how much of a dick I sound? xD

oh and did you hear that the ending was always bittersweet despite your choices?

What a horrible game PS;T is....(sarcasm)

I love how selective in their criticism Bioware fans are....ignore the obvious glaring flaws of their past ones and blow minor ones from newer games way out of proportion.

JACOB GOT MARRIED! THIS GAME SUCKS!

Ok now we're just being mean.

KOTOR sucks, how can they make the deaths of billions of people so irrelevant.......

This game is fun.