340 réponses à ce sujet

[Lavits75]

txgoldrush wrote...

Lavits75 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Lavits75 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Lavits75 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

The Stoned Volus wrote...

ME1 had the best story I don't really give a **** about textures, I play ME for the story and character interactions, ME3 really let me down on this part

So you like talking codexes and stilted dialogue?

ME3 had FAR better character interaction.....Garrus bottle shooter moment and liara wirting you name in the stars says hi.

Congrats! You found two examples. What of Tali? She was my love interest, how come I couldn't have a real conversation with her.What of Thane, you literally have a two second conversation on his disease then it stops? You couldn't talk to Garrus on the ship, the bottle shooting scene was it. You couldn't talk to Liara on the ship, the scene where she comes to your cabin is it. The conversations and character interaction were ******-poor. You can't possibly believe otherwise. Most of the conversation in the game was linear, with no choices. Hell, half of it was like the conversation with downloaded characters.

I counted 6 dialogue sequences for most of the characters in ME3 either on teh ship or the citadel, Tali gets 4. And really, you get to talk to them MORE than in the first game where each character had only three talks on the ship, with an extra for LI. Nevermind they were more human moments with the characters unlike tlaking codex in ME1.

Hey at least they got more to say when they run out of regular dialogue unlike ME1 and ME2.

Oh wait did you miss the part where Garrus was talking about the "ruthless calculus of war"...that was on the ship.

The part with Garrus on the ship wasn't deep-seated at all. He tells you the choice he was faced with and you can reassure or put him down. So, so, so deep.

And what exactly did you expect from the very FIRST installment of the series with the very FIRST introduction of the characters. In ME1 you hadn't built those relationships yet. You hadn't become as close. The conversations would have been slightly dull and awkward. In ME3 after three years of fighting impossible odds, I would imagine that characters like Tali, Garrus, and Liara would have more than, "It's nice to see you," "Come back later," and "Sorry, I've got some calibrations to run."

You really do not get what I am saying do you....

When TW2 first introduced Roche, a new character, he was not talking codex entry where you could question about his past....hell, you do not interact with him much in the game anyway outside of plot...but the STORY fleshes him out, NOT the conversations with him.

Bioware used to do characters, MEW1 included, in a crude unnatural manner wihere the lesser party members were not important to the plot, instead of having character development through the plot, iis forced into talking codex roles, where the writers were too lazy to let the plot flesh out, left it to the characters. Look at Jade Empire for example...

ME1 was the same way, carried the same faults as older Bioware games.

Nevermind that ME3's shorter conversations show MORE character development than ME1's talking codex. Really does Tali even develop AT ALL in ME1? Nope.

You're not getting what I'M saying. ME3 doesn't develop Tali. ME2 did that job. ME3 doesn't have better character development because all characters from the past two games are fully developed. Their philosophy for the third installment? New characters be damned. Any new character in ME3 had zero development. Old characters were developed previously.

Why did that scene with Garrus and the bottles even work? Because of the vents of ME1 and ME2. Why did the part about ruthless calculations or his new leadership position make sense? Because of what happened in the past two games. How was he able to make those hard choices? Because of your influence and advice in the past two games. I distinctly remember talking to Garrus in ME1 and giving him advice on how to make choices and how not to let your hatred get in the way. ME3 didn't make Garrus into who he was. The other two games did.

Scenes like these DEVELOP an character FAR more than talking codex moments....



Face it, Bioware SUCKED at character development in the past because their need to use talking codex over natural development from the plot. Its okay for a character to talk about what he or she feels after a plot event, thats not talking codex, what is talking codex is revealing ones past in a forced manner, having the character describe storye elements when showing them through the plot would be far better, and actual character development through conversations instead of plot.

Look at KOTOR, Bastila and Carth were the only characters that really developed through the plot, same with Dawn Star and Zu in Jade Empire. And really only Alistair developed through the plot in DAO, Leliana for DLC. Because why? Bioware instead of using these characters naturally in how they related to the plot, makes them just talk buddies. Newer Bioware isn't doing this as much. Yes, there are less dialogue options, but more quality dialogue instead.

So what of ME2? ME3 isn't where talking codex stopped. That was ME2. For example, if Mordin is leading the second team in the suicide mission, he dies and says "Tell them... I held the line."

This is a distinct step in his character development. It refers to his time at STG under Captain Kirrahe. See, ME2 managed to do that through plot. But how do you find out he was STG in ME3? Talking codex. It gets brought up in dialogue, just kind of thrown in there with no real purpose. ME3 didn't develop characters. ME1 and two did. ME1 and ME2 built relationships for ME3. ME1 and ME2 got you empotionally attached.

[Fixers0]

The original Mass Effect despite it's problems and limitations worked, both on a gameplay and story level, the same can't always be said about the second and third installment.

[Acidrain92]

Mass Effect 3 improves on everything in the series, but takes three steps back when it comes to the ending. Dont let it get to your head people, its ok to dislike the endings and wish for them to change, but it doesnt change that the rest of the mechanics in the game were fantastic.

ME3 > ME2=ME1

I say ME2 = ME1 because where as ME2 had better gameplay in every way, its lack of weapons and lack of an interesting major plot makes it on par with ME1. The loyalty missions are easily the best parts of ME2.

but yeah. Mass Effect 1 is definitely not the best in the series. If a game improves on itself to the point where I cant even go back and play the original because of how gawd awful the inventory system and gameplay are...I think its a safe bet to say the original is not the best.

[Narayan23]

txgoldrush wrote...

Scenes like these DEVELOP an character FAR more than talking codex moments....



Face it, Bioware SUCKED at character development in the past because their need to use talking codex over natural development from the plot. Its okay for a character to talk about what he or she feels after a plot event, thats not talking codex, what is talking codex is revealing ones past in a forced manner, having the character describe storye elements when showing them through the plot would be far better, and actual character development through conversations instead of plot.

Look at KOTOR, Bastila and Carth were the only characters that really developed through the plot, same with Dawn Star and Zu in Jade Empire. And really only Alistair developed through the plot in DAO, Leliana for DLC. Because why? Bioware instead of using these characters naturally in how they related to the plot, makes them just talk buddies. Newer Bioware isn't doing this as much. Yes, there are less dialogue options, but more quality dialogue instead.

If this is what you believe it's all well and good unfortunately they also decided to turn the actual game in mostly stupid corridor shooters and left behind the actual plot development.

I find it interesting so many people hated Feros and Noveria because i actually thought those were the best missions in ME 1.

I like walking around stuff having a bit of foreshadowing into what's going to happen getting a feel for the place. Makes it seem more real and makes you care about what's going on. That's more fun to me then just being dropped into the next corridor with random bad guys shooting you without any motivation whatsoever. This is what happened for most of ME 2 and 3.

[Acidrain92]

Lavits75 wrote...

So what of ME2? ME3 isn't where talking codex stopped. That was ME2. For example, if Mordin is leading the second team in the suicide mission, he dies and says "Tell them... I held the line."

This is a distinct step in his character development. It refers to his time at STG under Captain Kirrahe. See, ME2 managed to do that through plot. But how do you find out he was STG in ME3? Talking codex. It gets brought up in dialogue, just kind of thrown in there with no real purpose. ME3 didn't develop characters. ME1 and two did. ME1 and ME2 built relationships for ME3. ME1 and ME2 got you empotionally attached.

so I guess we arent considering it character development when Mordin decides to cure the Genophage because he realized "I MADE A MISTAKE"? Or how Tali has finally accepted Legion as a friend? Or how Tali and Garrus decided that they wanted to be together? Or how Wrex has become a leader of his people, really stepping it up from ME2, trying to KILL YOU if you stop the genophage cure?

also relationships and character development walk hand in hand

but whatever, I see how it is. Whatever it takes to satisfy your skewed point of view.

[FrozenDreamfall]

They were all rushed,but to compare how rushed the 3rd was to the 1st,never.They quite took their time with the 1st and to me it seemed even longer (if you did the whole Mako thing).To me personally the 1st was done quite slow and nicely,it might seem so cause you barely get acquainted to the universe of the game but lets face it.Even if emotionally the 3rd is superior and gameplay wise,the 1st felt complete to me,hell I didn't even feel the need for a 2nd.I came out a hero and imagined how the galaxy would unite and destroy the Reapers already taking done one of the most important Reapers.But with the 3rd,I constantly feel like there are so many things left unsaid and undone,it was rushed beyond expectation.I miss exploring worlds like in the 2nd and doing loyalty missions.They cut the conversations,choices and exploration to 50% in the 3rd.

[txgoldrush]

Acidrain92 wrote...

Lavits75 wrote...

So what of ME2? ME3 isn't where talking codex stopped. That was ME2. For example, if Mordin is leading the second team in the suicide mission, he dies and says "Tell them... I held the line."

This is a distinct step in his character development. It refers to his time at STG under Captain Kirrahe. See, ME2 managed to do that through plot. But how do you find out he was STG in ME3? Talking codex. It gets brought up in dialogue, just kind of thrown in there with no real purpose. ME3 didn't develop characters. ME1 and two did. ME1 and ME2 built relationships for ME3. ME1 and ME2 got you empotionally attached.

so I guess we arent considering it character development when Mordin decides to cure the Genophage because he realized "I MADE A MISTAKE"? Or how Tali has finally accepted Legion as a friend? Or how Tali and Garrus decided that they wanted to be together? Or how Wrex has become a leader of his people, really stepping it up from ME2, trying to KILL YOU if you stop the genophage cure?

also relationships and character development walk hand in hand

but whatever, I see how it is. Whatever it takes to satisfy your skewed point of view.

Bingo....

Really, ME3 did charcater development the best out of any Bioware game....next in line, the hated DA2, also did character development very well. Instead of talking codexes, they had three character quests each to develop their character.

[bryceax]

Acidrain92 wrote...

Mass Effect 3 improves on everything in the series, but takes three steps back when it comes to the ending. Dont let it get to your head people, its ok to dislike the endings and wish for them to change, but it doesnt change that the rest of the mechanics in the game were fantastic.

ME3 > ME2=ME1

I say ME2 = ME1 because where as ME2 had better gameplay in every way, its lack of weapons and lack of an interesting major plot makes it on par with ME1. The loyalty missions are easily the best parts of ME2.

but yeah. Mass Effect 1 is definitely not the best in the series. If a game improves on itself to the point where I cant even go back and play the original because of how gawd awful the inventory system and gameplay are...I think its a safe bet to say the original is not the best.

I agree with EVERYTHING in this. Some people seem swayed by the nostalgia of discovering a new universe

[Cosmar]

I actually never experienced the problems people talk about with ME1. I never experienced poor textures or pop-in textures or framerate issues or getting stuck in geometry. I also have a super computer, so that probably helped.

[Spectre_Shepard]

i loved ME1....

[Seifer006]

Militarized wrote...

Wrong, they spent a long time working on ME1.

The largest amount of work was they spent an entire year.. A YEAR or maybe even more sitting in an office every day conceptualizing Mass Effect... writing out what the galaxy was going to be like.

That is the opposite of rushed. Now obviously they had to meet deadlines but ME1 fit it's genre perfectly. No company will ever have unlimited time but Microsoft sure as hell did give them a lot of time and it was ana amazing game for the time it came out in. It's still a great game. 

agreed. well said

[iamthedave3]

Acidrain92 wrote...

Lavits75 wrote...

So what of ME2? ME3 isn't where talking codex stopped. That was ME2. For example, if Mordin is leading the second team in the suicide mission, he dies and says "Tell them... I held the line."

This is a distinct step in his character development. It refers to his time at STG under Captain Kirrahe. See, ME2 managed to do that through plot. But how do you find out he was STG in ME3? Talking codex. It gets brought up in dialogue, just kind of thrown in there with no real purpose. ME3 didn't develop characters. ME1 and two did. ME1 and ME2 built relationships for ME3. ME1 and ME2 got you empotionally attached.

so I guess we arent considering it character development when Mordin decides to cure the Genophage because he realized "I MADE A MISTAKE"? Or how Tali has finally accepted Legion as a friend? Or how Tali and Garrus decided that they wanted to be together? Or how Wrex has become a leader of his people, really stepping it up from ME2, trying to KILL YOU if you stop the genophage cure?

also relationships and character development walk hand in hand

but whatever, I see how it is. Whatever it takes to satisfy your skewed point of view.

Both of those things are set up in ME 2. Very clearly. They're meaningless statements without ME 2 and the character development that occurs for Mordin and in the clash between Tali and Legion that occurs in that game.

But you know, go on and pretend the second game didn't do most of ME 3's work for it.

There is very little character development in ME 3. There are character moments, but they are all based on prior characterization.

Modifié par iamthedave3, 31 mars 2012 - 11:32 .

[Indylavi]

ME2 was my first Mass Effect game. I liked it and went to buy the first one.

Still ME1 is my favourite of the series. I suppose it depends on how you play RPGs or games. I like to immerse myself into the world. I feel ME1 did that better. I liked the Mako missions. It made the universe feel bigger and mysterious. That's not to say it didn't have problems. Yes, some of the planets were frustrating to collect things on due to the topography. Yes the inventory system wasn't the best. But then I usually sold everything I didn't need after each mission and you don't need to loot every locker you see. After all from a role playing point of view it wouldn't make sense for my soldier to be walking around pockets full of stuff from mission to mission. Load out light for what we need and move out.

I also liked ME1's levelling system. It gave me much better control over how I played the game. I could make several different builds in the same class. Even the solider class was fun. I could choose to be a heavy armour wearing shotgun CQC specialist or a light armour wearing sniper while still being a soldier class. I could be an infiltrator but only focus on hacking. This made each play through with the same class feel and play wildly different.


In ME2 and ME3, that level of customization is gone. With it's simple level up system each play through with the same class felt very much the same as the last one. With the lack of inventory and mods. I can no longer customize my armour as much as I did in ME1. ME3 did bring back some of this but not as much as the first one.

I still like all the games. Even ME3. But my fav is ME1

[Indylavi]

iamthedave3 wrote...

Both of those things are set up in ME 2. Very clearly. They're meaningless statements without ME 2 and the character development that occurs for Mordin and in the clash between Tali and Legion that occurs in that game.

But you know, go on and pretend the second game didn't do most of ME 3's work for it.

There is very little character development in ME 3. There are character moments, but they are all based on prior characterization.

I agree, most of the best moments in ME3 are due to things done before in ME2 and even ME1. If you don't beleive me. Try playing the game where you killed Wrex on Virmire. Tali, Legion, Mordin, Thane, and Garrus die in the suicide mission.

[Bleachrude]

You know...I never understood why people consider ME1 to have an awesome story...

To me, it always had the BIGGESt plothole of the series...

Why did Saren need the beacon?

Before he went all renegade, what exactly prevented Saren from simply walking into the citadel and figuring out what was wrong with the keepers?

[Phaedros]

Once again kiddie boxes strike at the heart of gaming...

ME1 was a game not semi-movie

With the *wonderful" Mako that kiddie-boxers couldn't drive.. so NO Mako!

ME1 was made with <3

ME3 at the death for $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$s 

[Dark_Caduceus]

Narayan23 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Scenes like these DEVELOP an character FAR more than talking codex moments....



Face it, Bioware SUCKED at character development in the past because their need to use talking codex over natural development from the plot. Its okay for a character to talk about what he or she feels after a plot event, thats not talking codex, what is talking codex is revealing ones past in a forced manner, having the character describe storye elements when showing them through the plot would be far better, and actual character development through conversations instead of plot.

Look at KOTOR, Bastila and Carth were the only characters that really developed through the plot, same with Dawn Star and Zu in Jade Empire. And really only Alistair developed through the plot in DAO, Leliana for DLC. Because why? Bioware instead of using these characters naturally in how they related to the plot, makes them just talk buddies. Newer Bioware isn't doing this as much. Yes, there are less dialogue options, but more quality dialogue instead.

If this is what you believe it's all well and good unfortunately they also decided to turn the actual game in mostly stupid corridor shooters and left behind the actual plot development.

I find it interesting so many people hated Feros and Noveria because i actually thought those were the best missions in ME 1.

I like walking around stuff having a bit of foreshadowing into what's going to happen getting a feel for the place. Makes it seem more real and makes you care about what's going on. That's more fun to me then just being dropped into the next corridor with random bad guys shooting you without any motivation whatsoever. This is what happened for most of ME 2 and 3.

People hated Noveria and Feros, seriously? They were the most atmospheric and creative missions in the entire series.

[Billabong2011]

Militarized wrote...

Wrong, they spent a long time working on ME1.

The largest amount of work was they spent an entire year.. A YEAR or maybe even more sitting in an office every day conceptualizing Mass Effect... writing out what the galaxy was going to be like.

That is the opposite of rushed. Now obviously they had to meet deadlines but ME1 fit it's genre perfectly. No company will ever have unlimited time but Microsoft sure as hell did give them a lot of time and it was ana amazing game for the time it came out in. It's still a great game. 

This.

[moteh]

Playing through ME1 now for my let's play (info in the sig) and gameplay is the biggest problem. I liked the feeling to the universe, especially the citadel in ME1 more. Though I still say ME3 is better overall, endings aside, there are some things I miss from ME1 like the sense of exploration.

[Aurvant]

Bleachrude wrote...

You know...I never understood why people consider ME1 to have an awesome story...

To me, it always had the BIGGESt plothole of the series...

Why did Saren need the beacon?

Before he went all renegade, what exactly prevented Saren from simply walking into the citadel and figuring out what was wrong with the keepers?

The conduit wasn't for Saren, it was for The Geth. Sovereign and Saren had to amass an army to retake the Citadel, and it was clear that they couldn't just waltz in and start tampering with the keepers.

[XJ347]

I am in the ME1 camp.

ME2 had better combat but the game felt smaller.

ME1 the world felt huge, while ME3 felt like the world is a series of tunnels. Two seemed to be a good balance of the two but the game play was pretty linear once you were in a mission.

Only thing that ME3 had that was better than the rest was the types of enemies and tactics to kill them. The missions though more linear than ME2 and ME2 was linear enough... The world in 3 only had 1 location you could roam, a carnal sin for me.

I think ME1 and ME2 tie for things relating to conversation. ME3 sadly is the worst since the auto dialogue, and the crew one liner dialogue, like from ME2 DLC....

I guess for me the openness of the universe trumps what ME2 did better. I can see people going with ME2 though. Anyways saying ME3 is best... that I do not understand.

[Larryboy_Dragon]

I think ME1 is the best game in the series.

It's the one with the most and best RPG features. It's has the least linear plot. The hook of making you a Spectre is the most fun. It has the best exploration.

Technically, (bugs, textures and so forth) it's not as good - but people are forgetting it came out when the 360 was new and people were still figuring out how to make it work for them. Compare any game four years old to something today and you'll see the same technical gap.

[Heather Cline]

txgoldrush wrote...

Seriously, all three games in the series were rushed to meet deadlines...but ME1 for the 360 was the worst.

Yes, the ending and some elements in ME3 might have been rushed out the door, however almost every element was rushed out the door for ME1. Only DA2 is more rushed and unpolished than ME1...

Horrendous texture pop in, cut and paste environments, bugs galore, horrendous combat mechanics, horrendous gameplay balance, backwards difficulty curve, poorly thoughout inventory....

Plain and simple, MICROSOFT, not EA, rushed the game out the door to meet the holiday season for their 360 exclusive. But since its not EA that did it, its not convienant to criticize. Fact is Microsoft is worse than EA at rushing games....name a Fable game thats not unfinished and unpolished.

Really, ME3 is one of Bioware's MOST polished games. Its also better than ME1 in almost every single way...ME3 doesn't treat the characters like talking codex entries like ME1, ME3 has more organic writing than ME1 unlike the first games robotic like script at many points, ME3 has better combat than both ME1 and ME2, ME3 has a better paced plotline than ME1 and definitely ME2...the only thing ME1 has an advantage is the ending...thats it.

Take of the nostalgia glasses people.....

I have to refute this post on several things.

First of all ME1's texture popping was programmed in for the first game. They were working with new technology of the 360 so the texture popping issue was apart of the game. The PC version of the game did not have that but the PC version came out nearly a year later after the 360 launch and had a different system.

The combat system was programmed to be that way. It wasn't horrible and it wasn't meant to be the combat system that ME2 or ME3 had. In fact the only reason why ME2 and ME3 has the combat system the way it is now is because a bunch of third person shooter and first person shooter fanboys whined that the combat sucked in ME1 and this is why we got the stripped down version of the RPG mechanics in ME2 and ME3 due to people wanting it to be less rpg and more third person shooter.

The cut and paste environments? Where? Each planet was different and had different sky's different terrain. In fact the only things that had the similar environments were side missions and that was explained as prefabricated shelters so they were all the same.

The inventory system was not poorly thought out. Mass Effect was supposed to be an RPG first a shooter second. However due to the fact that whiny fanboys of other genre's got their way the ME team took a more shooter route and less rpg route for the second game and 3rd game. They only added back in more RPG elements because we the rpg crowd got pissed off that the third person shooter part of the fan base got their way almost entirely.

There are not that many bugs in ME1. In fact there was only one patch in the entire history of ME1 ever made. That says something about the quality of ME1. ME2 and ME3 have more bugs than ME1 ever had.

Fact is you are trying to destroy the first game because you think the other two games are better. When many of us don't like how ME2 or 3 was put together.

Furthermore Microsoft made Bioware sign an exclusivity right to the 360 and PC version of ME1. They had no hand in putting the game out before it was finished. They didn't even tell Bioware what to do, they just made sure that Bioware didn't make the game for the Playstation. Once that contract ran out Bioware was under no obligation to make future Mass Effect games for just the 360 or the PC. Thus they were able to put the 2nd and 3rd games on the Playstation and 360. However due to the original exclusivity right, Bioware cannot put out ME1 in any shape or form on any other platform other than the PC or 360 or future Microsoft gaming consoles due to that exclusivity contract for ME1.

This is not nostalgia blinders, this is a fact which is why ME1 never was put out on the Playstation because of said exclusivity contract. Microsoft did not nor did they ever own Bioware. EA owns Bioware now and EA tells Bioware when to put out a game. Before that Bioware was autonomous and put out games when they wanted too. Thus your argument really doesn't stand on anything.

Have a nice day.

Modifié par Heather Cline, 01 avril 2012 - 02:20 .

[merikano]

BW had over a hundred hours of gameplay and story that they tried to wrap up in a thirty hour campaign. Could they have used some more time to do the stories justice?

HELL YES