329 réponses à ce sujet

[dreman9999]

humansrsuperior wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

2484Stryker wrote...

I wouldn't say that it sucked, but it was certainly disappointing. It's not the bugs that I'm referring to, it's the overall lack of refinement & passion that ME2 had.

But it has more passion then ME2.

Yep....

...notice how the crew talks to eachother far more in ME3, while in the first two games, they left each other alone.

That alone shows more passion in ME3.

Yeah, and in turn they hardly talk to YOU at all.  
.

Oh, someone doesn't know that you have to talk to your crew on the citadel, too.
Also, the growth of the character in the story doesn't mean they have to talk to you to grow as characters...Like the pdst asari commando in the hospital. What there is stil lbetter character growth then what's in ME2, EVEN IF THEY don't do face to face conversations with you.

[FemmeShep]

txgoldrush wrote...

FemmeShep wrote...

I actually do think ME3 is very flawed.

I'm not going to go into it too much, as I've said this way too many times. But after playing the game a 2nd time, I've realized that ME3 has a lot of issues besides the ending. When I first played the game I was like: 99% of the game was perfect, and only the ending was awful. In reality, there was a lot wrong with the game, and the ending was just a symptom of the bigger problems with this game.

In short, it's an on the rails action game that cuts complexity and depth from the world/choices of the game.

and the first two games didn't....

Hell, the FACT is that choice and consquence is STRONGER in ME3 than not only the first two games, but every game BW has made since Baldur's Gate II. Forget about the ending here...the journey is based on YOUR choices. Your choices throughout the series determine who lives and dies.

Nevermind the fact that ME3 is deeper and more complex than ME2 in gameplay.

All three games have big flaws....and so does almost every BW game and RPG.

ME3 is hardly deeper and more complex. I agree the gameplay is probably the most polished, but let's not get carried away here.

If anything, your choices and the complexity of the world is severely chipped away by ME3. Barely any sidemissions exist. Dialogue and scenes with squadmates are severely lacking. ME3 compared to 1 and 2 is 99% driven by the main plot missions. Go here, go there. It's more cinematic I agree. But world immersion takes a back seat, and the game suffers for it.

It feels like a hollow/empty world.

[humansrsuperior]

dreman9999 wrote...

2484Stryker wrote...

WarChicken78 wrote...

2484Stryker wrote...

I wouldn't say that it sucked, but it was certainly disappointing. It's not the bugs that I'm referring to, it's the overall lack of refinement & passion that ME2 had.

And that is not true. All the wonderful elements of ME1 and ME2 storywise are there.
It had everything of its predecessors and sometimes even more. Only the last minutes destroyed it all.
You make phantastic choices in grandious subplots and atmospheres, that don't matter ihe slightest bit in the end.

It really is only the ending, that makes ME2 not stand up to ME1 and ME2

Then you and I have a difference of opinion on this matter.  No biggie.

In my opinion, ME3 nailed its combat mechanics & weapon mod systems down pretty good.  But in terms of story and character development & mission exposition & .....

I stoped reading there...Yes it's better in term in character development. The fact you can see your crew on the normandy interact with one another show that it has better character development then ME2. The fact that the choices you have to make truely gets you to question your judgement clearly make ME3 story betterthen ME2's. ME3 has a much deeper impact then the last 2 games....ME2 just have more places to go and more character. ME3, based on character development, have more quality then what ME2 had...

I think we might be getting character development mixed up character interaction.  Development was there, yes, but there was very little interaction---with SHEPARD.  Yes, they moved around the ship and yes they talked to EACH OTHER more.  Which was brilliant.  I even liked the ambiant dialogue spoken to Shepard.  But there are very few actual open dialogue wheel CONVERSATIONS that YOU get to be a part of, that you get to pick what you want to say.  And even with all the ambiance, there was a significant LACK in any party members talking to you about major developments within the game.  A line about a squad mate you ran into doesn't count.  

At least, that's what I meant about lack of character interaction/dialogue.   What was THERE was great, but there needed to be a lot more.

[dreman9999]

BurnOutBrighter wrote...

You have to bear in mind how important the ending of a story is to the whole experience. It's literally the last thing we'll remember about our experience, and can retroactively taint the entire experience, no matter how good the journey was.

The fact that I don't want to play through the ME series ever again just goes to show how the ending ruined the entire experience for me.

The excuse that everyone uses to justify hating the game. You understand the fact that it's the journy to the end that makes a story great not the ending....Even it I'm not happy with the ending, nothing will take away the fact that I truelly enjoyed therest of the game and how emtionally tied I am to the reast of the story.  I still cryed when Thane die, laughed with Garrus, Morned Legion, and was moved by EDI'S humanity....Nothing will take that away.

Modifié par dreman9999, 05 avril 2012 - 06:20 .

[txgoldrush]

humansrsuperior wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

2484Stryker wrote...

I wouldn't say that it sucked, but it was certainly disappointing. It's not the bugs that I'm referring to, it's the overall lack of refinement & passion that ME2 had.

But it has more passion then ME2.

Yep....

...notice how the crew talks to eachother far more in ME3, while in the first two games, they left each other alone.

That alone shows more passion in ME3.

Yeah, and in turn they hardly talk to YOU at all.  

oh wait, they do...more than past games...

lets FACT CHECK....

There are MORE conversation oppurtunities in ME3 than their were in ME1 and ME2. Hell, Ashley has two hospital conversations, two ship conversations, two citadel conversations after joining, the docking bay conversation to join, never mind strong plot participation on Mars and during the coup. Nevermind the romance and goodbye conversation.

More so than three ME1 conversations plus two more if romanced.

Hell, Javik has more conversations than most non romanced crew in ME1.

Nevermind multiple non squad romances in ME3...wooops.

Oh and there are no more empty dialogue trees when they are out of things to say, and in fact in ME3, they tend to COMMENT on the situation, their friends, and teh missions more than they did in ME1 and ME2.

Hell come to think of it, Kasumi was the only crew mate to really have opinions of the crew in ME2, other than Joker and Kelly, and far more in depth than those two....dialogue trees aren't everything.

[Colonel_Klink_1]

As an individual game it's great. The last 10 minutes that end the game and the trilogy reduce the quality of the entire franchise.

It's like Mass Effect 1, 2 and the first 90% of 3 are the original Star Wars trilogy. The ending is Phantom Menace...with extra JarJAr.

[humansrsuperior]

dreman9999 wrote...

humansrsuperior wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

2484Stryker wrote...

I wouldn't say that it sucked, but it was certainly disappointing. It's not the bugs that I'm referring to, it's the overall lack of refinement & passion that ME2 had.

But it has more passion then ME2.

Yep....

...notice how the crew talks to eachother far more in ME3, while in the first two games, they left each other alone.

That alone shows more passion in ME3.

Yeah, and in turn they hardly talk to YOU at all.  
.

Oh, someone doesn't know that you have to talk to your crew on the citadel, too.
Also, the growth of the character in the story doesn't mean they have to talk to you to grow as characters...Like the pdst asari commando in the hospital. What there is stil lbetter character growth then what's in ME2, EVEN IF THEY don't do face to face conversations with you.

No, actually, I do, thanks for that.  I spoke to them frequently, as often as possible.  As I mentioned in another comment, I love that they talk to each other, I love that they move around, I love that they grow and and I even love the ambiant dialogue.  I'm not arguing there is no development, I'm arguing there is a LACK of, not absence of, open dialogue wheel conversations.  Having the power to guide Shepard's voice is largely taken away from you, and your squad has very little to say about your time grounded, or about major developments in the game.  A line about Jacob or Samara is nice, but they don't count. 

I'm not saying they didn't do well in certain areas with building on the characters and making them talk amongst themselves, but it was notable to me my lack of choice and lack of open conversation, and I missed it dearly.

[txgoldrush]

humansrsuperior wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

2484Stryker wrote...

WarChicken78 wrote...

2484Stryker wrote...

I wouldn't say that it sucked, but it was certainly disappointing. It's not the bugs that I'm referring to, it's the overall lack of refinement & passion that ME2 had.

And that is not true. All the wonderful elements of ME1 and ME2 storywise are there.
It had everything of its predecessors and sometimes even more. Only the last minutes destroyed it all.
You make phantastic choices in grandious subplots and atmospheres, that don't matter ihe slightest bit in the end.

It really is only the ending, that makes ME2 not stand up to ME1 and ME2

Then you and I have a difference of opinion on this matter.  No biggie.

In my opinion, ME3 nailed its combat mechanics & weapon mod systems down pretty good.  But in terms of story and character development & mission exposition & .....

I stoped reading there...Yes it's better in term in character development. The fact you can see your crew on the normandy interact with one another show that it has better character development then ME2. The fact that the choices you have to make truely gets you to question your judgement clearly make ME3 story betterthen ME2's. ME3 has a much deeper impact then the last 2 games....ME2 just have more places to go and more character. ME3, based on character development, have more quality then what ME2 had...

I think we might be getting character development mixed up character interaction.  Development was there, yes, but there was very little interaction---with SHEPARD.  Yes, they moved around the ship and yes they talked to EACH OTHER more.  Which was brilliant.  I even liked the ambiant dialogue spoken to Shepard.  But there are very few actual open dialogue wheel CONVERSATIONS that YOU get to be a part of, that you get to pick what you want to say.  And even with all the ambiance, there was a significant LACK in any party members talking to you about major developments within the game.  A line about a squad mate you ran into doesn't count.  

At least, that's what I meant about lack of character interaction/dialogue.   What was THERE was great, but there needed to be a lot more.

wrong, there are MORE dialogue tree conversations with crew mates than the first two games....try hanging out with them in the Citadel...

[Gemini1179]

I will say this: there is a lot to like in ME3. The BULK of it being the writing, music, animation and gameplay.

As a console user however, there is also a few things to dislike:
- Face Import bug
- Still get no weapon stats.
- The Journal- Seriously, BioWare?
- Eavesdropped Side Quests- not exclusive to consoles but still stupid.

[dreman9999]

humansrsuperior wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

2484Stryker wrote...

WarChicken78 wrote...

2484Stryker wrote...

I wouldn't say that it sucked, but it was certainly disappointing. It's not the bugs that I'm referring to, it's the overall lack of refinement & passion that ME2 had.

And that is not true. All the wonderful elements of ME1 and ME2 storywise are there.
It had everything of its predecessors and sometimes even more. Only the last minutes destroyed it all.
You make phantastic choices in grandious subplots and atmospheres, that don't matter ihe slightest bit in the end.

It really is only the ending, that makes ME2 not stand up to ME1 and ME2

Then you and I have a difference of opinion on this matter.  No biggie.

In my opinion, ME3 nailed its combat mechanics & weapon mod systems down pretty good.  But in terms of story and character development & mission exposition & .....

I stoped reading there...Yes it's better in term in character development. The fact you can see your crew on the normandy interact with one another show that it has better character development then ME2. The fact that the choices you have to make truely gets you to question your judgement clearly make ME3 story betterthen ME2's. ME3 has a much deeper impact then the last 2 games....ME2 just have more places to go and more character. ME3, based on character development, have more quality then what ME2 had...

I think we might be getting character development mixed up character interaction.  Development was there, yes, but there was very little interaction---with SHEPARD.  Yes, they moved around the ship and yes they talked to EACH OTHER more.  Which was brilliant.  I even liked the ambiant dialogue spoken to Shepard.  But there are very few actual open dialogue wheel CONVERSATIONS that YOU get to be a part of, that you get to pick what you want to say.  And even with all the ambiance, there was a significant LACK in any party members talking to you about major developments within the game.  A line about a squad mate you ran into doesn't count.  

At least, that's what I meant about lack of character interaction/dialogue.   What was THERE was great, but there needed to be a lot more.

WHo care if there was not much interaction with Sherpard...Which you do have anyway. The fact reamins the development was still well done. That's all that matter.
Also, the character do tell you how they feel about each mission and moment, you just done have the face to face conversation you obviouly want. Your not complaining about interactivity or character development....Just how it was applied.
And even then you still get the ability to develop your Shepards Character anyway.

[txgoldrush]

dreman9999 wrote...

humansrsuperior wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

2484Stryker wrote...

WarChicken78 wrote...

2484Stryker wrote...

I wouldn't say that it sucked, but it was certainly disappointing. It's not the bugs that I'm referring to, it's the overall lack of refinement & passion that ME2 had.

And that is not true. All the wonderful elements of ME1 and ME2 storywise are there.
It had everything of its predecessors and sometimes even more. Only the last minutes destroyed it all.
You make phantastic choices in grandious subplots and atmospheres, that don't matter ihe slightest bit in the end.

It really is only the ending, that makes ME2 not stand up to ME1 and ME2

Then you and I have a difference of opinion on this matter.  No biggie.

In my opinion, ME3 nailed its combat mechanics & weapon mod systems down pretty good.  But in terms of story and character development & mission exposition & .....

I stoped reading there...Yes it's better in term in character development. The fact you can see your crew on the normandy interact with one another show that it has better character development then ME2. The fact that the choices you have to make truely gets you to question your judgement clearly make ME3 story betterthen ME2's. ME3 has a much deeper impact then the last 2 games....ME2 just have more places to go and more character. ME3, based on character development, have more quality then what ME2 had...

I think we might be getting character development mixed up character interaction.  Development was there, yes, but there was very little interaction---with SHEPARD.  Yes, they moved around the ship and yes they talked to EACH OTHER more.  Which was brilliant.  I even liked the ambiant dialogue spoken to Shepard.  But there are very few actual open dialogue wheel CONVERSATIONS that YOU get to be a part of, that you get to pick what you want to say.  And even with all the ambiance, there was a significant LACK in any party members talking to you about major developments within the game.  A line about a squad mate you ran into doesn't count.  

At least, that's what I meant about lack of character interaction/dialogue.   What was THERE was great, but there needed to be a lot more.

WHo care if there was not much interaction with Sherpard...Which you do have anyway. The fact reamins the development was still well done. That's all that matter.
Also, the character do tell you how they feel about each mission and moment, you just done have the face to face conversation you obviouly want. Your not complaining about interactivity or character development....Just how it was applied.
And even then you still get the ability to develop your Shepards Character anyway.

nevermind they have more interaction with Shepard....this fact makes his argument without merit.

[dreman9999]

Gemini1179 wrote...



- Still get no weapon stats.

We have weapon stats.

[FrozenDreamfall]

We never said it sucked,it's one of the most amazing games ever made,aside from many bugs,plot holes,immensely cut exploration and dialogue aaaand the ending.We could ignore all those if the endings made sense.

[humansrsuperior]

txgoldrush wrote...

humansrsuperior wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

2484Stryker wrote...

WarChicken78 wrote...

2484Stryker wrote...

I wouldn't say that it sucked, but it was certainly disappointing. It's not the bugs that I'm referring to, it's the overall lack of refinement & passion that ME2 had.

And that is not true. All the wonderful elements of ME1 and ME2 storywise are there.
It had everything of its predecessors and sometimes even more. Only the last minutes destroyed it all.
You make phantastic choices in grandious subplots and atmospheres, that don't matter ihe slightest bit in the end.

It really is only the ending, that makes ME2 not stand up to ME1 and ME2

Then you and I have a difference of opinion on this matter.  No biggie.

In my opinion, ME3 nailed its combat mechanics & weapon mod systems down pretty good.  But in terms of story and character development & mission exposition & .....

I stoped reading there...Yes it's better in term in character development. The fact you can see your crew on the normandy interact with one another show that it has better character development then ME2. The fact that the choices you have to make truely gets you to question your judgement clearly make ME3 story betterthen ME2's. ME3 has a much deeper impact then the last 2 games....ME2 just have more places to go and more character. ME3, based on character development, have more quality then what ME2 had...

I think we might be getting character development mixed up character interaction.  Development was there, yes, but there was very little interaction---with SHEPARD.  Yes, they moved around the ship and yes they talked to EACH OTHER more.  Which was brilliant.  I even liked the ambiant dialogue spoken to Shepard.  But there are very few actual open dialogue wheel CONVERSATIONS that YOU get to be a part of, that you get to pick what you want to say.  And even with all the ambiance, there was a significant LACK in any party members talking to you about major developments within the game.  A line about a squad mate you ran into doesn't count.  

At least, that's what I meant about lack of character interaction/dialogue.   What was THERE was great, but there needed to be a lot more.

wrong, there are MORE dialogue tree conversations with crew mates than the first two games....try hanging out with them in the Citadel...

Uh, I did.  There's about one open wheel conversation for each of them, the rest is ambiant, and it's usually about what they're up to on the Citedal, not about events in the game (I'm NOT saying there is NO open wheels or NO conversations about current events, just very little.   And what there is is very quick and shallow, not in depth. The fact that it's more scattered and spread out doesn't equal MORE OF.)

[txgoldrush]

FrozenDreamfall wrote...

We never said it sucked,it's one of the most amazing games ever made,aside from many bugs,plot holes,immensely cut exploration and dialogue aaaand the ending.We could ignore all those if the endings made sense.

many bugs, just like most BW games...next

cut exploration....maybe because, the Reapers are attacking , you know, and they do not wait around like Saren does...

dialogue...less dialogue options BUT....BETTER quality dialogue, especially from Shepard.

[DarkRPG]

My ending was a dream sequence that told me to buy DLC when I woke up...

Yep, best game ever...

[Calbeb]

I can't get behind the dialogue complaint. The writing is actualy a lot more effective than in previous games during a lot of the run time. I think I had more great character moments than in any of Bioware's previous RPGS.

There was just a lot more auto-dialogue. That seemed like it was a conscious decision on their part, and hopefully they will respond to that and do less in the future. It rarely bothered me though.

Exploration? What exploration are we comparing this to? Makoing on dead empty world, or scanning every planet in search of shot side quests. I liked those in two well enough, but the exploration in One was really tiresome.

Modifié par Calbeb, 05 avril 2012 - 06:38 .

[txgoldrush]

humansrsuperior wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

humansrsuperior wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

2484Stryker wrote...

WarChicken78 wrote...

2484Stryker wrote...

I wouldn't say that it sucked, but it was certainly disappointing. It's not the bugs that I'm referring to, it's the overall lack of refinement & passion that ME2 had.

And that is not true. All the wonderful elements of ME1 and ME2 storywise are there.
It had everything of its predecessors and sometimes even more. Only the last minutes destroyed it all.
You make phantastic choices in grandious subplots and atmospheres, that don't matter ihe slightest bit in the end.

It really is only the ending, that makes ME2 not stand up to ME1 and ME2

Then you and I have a difference of opinion on this matter.  No biggie.

In my opinion, ME3 nailed its combat mechanics & weapon mod systems down pretty good.  But in terms of story and character development & mission exposition & .....

I stoped reading there...Yes it's better in term in character development. The fact you can see your crew on the normandy interact with one another show that it has better character development then ME2. The fact that the choices you have to make truely gets you to question your judgement clearly make ME3 story betterthen ME2's. ME3 has a much deeper impact then the last 2 games....ME2 just have more places to go and more character. ME3, based on character development, have more quality then what ME2 had...

I think we might be getting character development mixed up character interaction.  Development was there, yes, but there was very little interaction---with SHEPARD.  Yes, they moved around the ship and yes they talked to EACH OTHER more.  Which was brilliant.  I even liked the ambiant dialogue spoken to Shepard.  But there are very few actual open dialogue wheel CONVERSATIONS that YOU get to be a part of, that you get to pick what you want to say.  And even with all the ambiance, there was a significant LACK in any party members talking to you about major developments within the game.  A line about a squad mate you ran into doesn't count.  

At least, that's what I meant about lack of character interaction/dialogue.   What was THERE was great, but there needed to be a lot more.

wrong, there are MORE dialogue tree conversations with crew mates than the first two games....try hanging out with them in the Citadel...

Uh, I did.  There's about one open wheel conversation for each of them, the rest is ambiant, and it's usually about what they're up to on the Citedal, not about events in the game (I'm NOT saying there is NO open wheels or NO conversations about current events, just very little.   And what there is is very quick and shallow, not in depth. The fact that it's more scattered and spread out doesn't equal MORE OF.)

Wrong..lets recount Ashley again

Huge plot particpation in Mars...lots of open wheel...

...two hospital conversations (three if you want to count her unconscious)...big open wheel for both, plays a big impact later.

.Plot particpation during the coup.

Her rejoining conversation.

Her with her sis at the memorial wall.

Her at Apollo Cafe

Drunk Ashley

Romance

Goodbye

all open wheel

[txgoldrush]

Calbeb wrote...

I can't get behind the dialogue complaint. The writing is actualy a lot more effective than in previous games during a lot of the run time. I think I had more great character moments than in any of Bioware's previous RPGS.

There was just a lot more auto-dialogue. That seemed like it was a conscious decision on their part, and hopefully they will respond to that and do less in the future. It rarely bothered me though.

Exploration? What exploration are we comparing this to? Makoing on dead empty world, or scanning every planet in search of shot side quests. I liked those in two well enough, but the exploration in One was really tiresome.

"There was just a lot more auto-dialogue. That seemed like it was a conscious decision on their part, and hopefully they will respond to that and do less in the future. It rarely bothered me though."

They should actually try a set protagonist, like a Geralt or Adam Jansen...for their next game. Do something different.

[humansrsuperior]

Calbeb wrote...

I can't get behind the dialogue complaint. The writing is actualy a lot more effective than in previous games during a lot of the run time. I think I had more great character moments than in any of Bioware's previous RPGS.

There was just a lot more auto-dialogue. That seemed like it was a conscious decision on their part, and hopefully they will respond to that and do less in the future. It rarely bothered me though.

Exploration? What exploration are we comparing this to? Makoing on dead empty world, or scanning every planet in search of shot side quests. I liked those in two well enough, but the exploration in One was really tiresome.

This is all I was trying to say.   There was some REALLY STRONG dialogue and often left me beaming or heartwarmed.  But yes, auto dialogue, too much, it overrode the open conversation wheel, and it bothered me.  

[nikki191]

i was having a great time although i was having some issues.. how they managed to break the journal system in the 3rd game is beyond me but i digress the only good part after getting hit with the space magic beam is andersons talk the rest just felt so off.

the human mind remembers negative experience more than positive and it remember the end more than the journey

[zippythecellist]

No, the entire game as a whole doesn't suck...but it sure as hell isn't the "OMG 10/10 SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY" game that the last 2 were. I would go so far as to give it a 5 or 6/10, mainly for these reasons: (yes, in that order!)

1. The ending. I'm sorry, but after 2 games of KICK ASS storytelling you can't just end the series on a literary cluster**** of an ending. We were promised multiple endings based on our choices; we did not get that! This (http://jmstevenson.w...-mass-effect-3/) is a good read if anyone is looking for a real literary analysis on why the ending is crap, and it is a neutral standpoint as well.

2. HUGE lack of "real" (30mins-1hr+ long) side missions. In the previous 2 games, there were like 10-15+ "real" side missions. Yeah, ME1's side missions were basically the same prefab units in different layouts on each explorable planet, but at least they were REAL side missions with a wide variety of enemies. In ME3, we get a bunch of bull**** fetch quests and THREE "real" side missions: grissom academy, the ardat-yakshi temple and the fuel reactor mission; all the other N7 missions were WAAAY too short to be "real" side missions as they can easily be done in 10-15 mins. VERY dissapointing, not to mention a cheap tactic by the rEApers to make us pony up for DLC. (which I will not be doing; you don't manhandle consumers into spending money like this!)

3. The useless journal! I mean, what the ****? The previous 2 games had a journal that explained every step of a mission and where to find key people in case if you got lost; all we have in ME3 is a vague description of the ENTIRE mission. This was especially annoying with all the fetch quests when they don't give you a specific location of where the person is.

4. Not as much interaction with your crew. A LOT of the conversations were similar to the one-liners Zaeed and Kasumi had in ME2. I also found the dates with LI's to be a bit lacking; they really should have been more than some 3 minute cutscene. Not exactly asking for a 30 minute one either, but after finding out shepard's mom was still alive, I felt that really was a missed opportunity for shepard's & his/her LI's family to meet each other!

5. Not really sure if this belongs under #4, but some loyalty missions for crewmates like Kaidan/Ashley that weren't playable in ME2 would have been nice. Or maybe "doing a huge favor for a friend" missions since they probably make more sense in ME3 due to everyone already knowing shepard well...haha. But you get the point.

[Rulycar]

1) Story
... too many endings lowered impact/quality
... starts slow, picks up, depresses me, falls flat, no multiple endings as promised (ie ending sucks)
2) Acting
... I liked the performances of main cast
... some supporting roles sounded rushed / nonprofessional
... in a "choose your own path" game I expect flatter performances (so ... no big deal)
... still, I was hoping BioWare had learned some new tricks after their work on SW:TOR
3) Production
... where do I begin?
... bad editing
... bad story pacing
... bad audio pacing
... jump edits ... say what? why does any modern production have jump edits?
... schizophrenic eyelines
... poor lipsync
... fake difficulty (Kai Leng, etc)
... ... KL destroyed story immersion
... lack of continuity
... etc etc etc
4) Multimedia (graphics/sound)
... sound/score was beautiful
... visuals on the other hand
... ... dreadful
... ... I think they actually took several steps backwards from ME2
5) Gameplay
... uh, I miss the old minigames
... one button does all in combat made some levels a nightmare
... ... GOAL: escape level
... ... ACTUAL: mistakingly duck into cover over and over and over
... ... RESULT: needless reloads due to death
... endless sections with no save option
... ... followed by even more nightmarish sections where you could save unrestricted ???
... ... I don't understand this, but it left me just wanting those sections to end already!
... waves of enemies - really? ... waves are all you could come up with?
... constant collision detection errors
... ... may be system specific: I got stuck every time I spoke to EDI on the bridge unless I stood in one specific spot
... ... spent more than one level stuck to a squadmate as they ran to a new location (controls reported "BLOCKED")
... squadmate proximity mine
... ... still drops where player is standing instead of where squadmate is standing
... multiplayer addition (pointless - this was a singleplayer game series)
... character import flawed (graphics/data)
... the mission journal ... need I say more?
... replayability destroyed by ending
... etc etc etc

My conclusion?
... ME3 sucks ... sorta ... okay, compromise, it's mediocre at best.

With a repaired/clarified ending at least it should become replayable.

[txgoldrush]

Rulycar wrote...

1) Story
... too many endings lowered impact/quality
... starts slow, picks up, depresses me, falls flat, no multiple endings as promised (ie ending sucks)
2) Acting
... I liked the performances of main cast
... some supporting roles sounded rushed / nonprofessional
... in a "choose your own path" game I expect flatter performances (so ... no big deal)
... still, I was hoping BioWare had learned some new tricks after their work on SW:TOR
3) Production
... where do I begin?
... bad editing
... bad story pacing
... bad audio pacing
... jump edits ... say what? why does any modern production have jump edits?
... schizophrenic eyelines
... poor lipsync
... fake difficulty (Kai Leng, etc)
... ... KL destroyed story immersion
... lack of continuity
... etc etc etc
4) Multimedia (graphics/sound)
... sound/score was beautiful
... visuals on the other hand
... ... dreadful
... ... I think they actually took several steps backwards from ME2
5) Gameplay
... uh, I miss the old minigames
... one button does all in combat made some levels a nightmare
... ... GOAL: escape level
... ... ACTUAL: mistakingly duck into cover over and over and over
... ... RESULT: needless reloads due to death
... endless sections with no save option
... ... followed by even more nightmarish sections where you could save unrestricted ???
... ... I don't understand this, but it left me just wanting those sections to end already!
... waves of enemies - really? ... waves are all you could come up with?
... constant collision detection errors
... ... may be system specific: I got stuck every time I spoke to EDI on the bridge unless I stood in one specific spot
... ... spent more than one level stuck to a squadmate as they ran to a new location (controls reported "BLOCKED")
... squadmate proximity mine
... ... still drops where player is standing instead of where squadmate is standing
... multiplayer addition (pointless - this was a singleplayer game series)
... character import flawed (graphics/data)
... the mission journal ... need I say more?
... replayability destroyed by ending
... etc etc etc

My conclusion?
... ME3 sucks ... sorta ... okay, compromise, it's mediocre at best.

With a repaired/clarified ending at least it should become replayable.

lets whine......are you ignoring all the flaws of the first two while your at it?

[dreman9999]

Rulycar wrote...

*A giant post filledwithnothing but nickpicks...