246 réponses à ce sujet

[SalsaDMA]

Cainne Chapel wrote...

I would agree Salsa.

its a shame the engine was only meant for groups of 3 though eh? I would of liked some epic battles going on.

What's funny is that I remember already with ME1 and ME2 people were voicing that this was unsatisfactory in some of the missions. Having your crew sip caffe latte on the normandy while you only took 2 of them along on some highly important task that was dangerous.

There's a saying that goes something along the lines of "you pick the tool fit for the job", and if the engine is the problem in restricting us from getting believeable scearios, then the engine isn't the right one for the job.

[Cainne Chapel]

I would agree. I would of at least liked missions in essence to the suicide mission where your crew is doing "behind the scenes" kinda stuff.

That would of been nice.

ButI can also see why they wouldnt totally re-do the engine on the 3rd game.

That said. I do hold out hope for a more versatile self made engine in the future from bioware if they DO future ME titles. I'd love to have a TPS/RPG that allowed for more AI controlled squadmates and and a lot more on screen action.

[Thoughts_My_Aim]

AlanC9 wrote...

It's not outlandish. But this would involve an awful lot of new dialogs, wouldn't it?

Perish the thought! RPG designers being asked to write *dialogue*!

In all seriousness, I get that it would be tricky to implement (particularly given how much of the gameplay relates directly to the entire cure-the-genophage plot) but surely the lesson here is not to have major plot elements in your final instalment assume the player made specific choices in the previous intalment.

This is a very old RPG design argument. How much length are you willing to trade off for breadth?

About 50%. I'm not a fan of long games.

Edit: Bio's house style has always been very light on alternative quest paths, and they've never liked locking out content because of earlier decisions. Some folks think that this makes Bio a bad RPG developer

True, fair point.

[string3r]

I agree with a lot of your points, but thankfully the game was so emotional and intense that most of the issues with the writing were easily overlooked.

Except the ending of course.

[J0E-]

KeilxKey wrote...

Spitfire_mcguire wrote...


Really? Sure it had its problems, but why did you REALLY dislike ME1? curious.

-The graphics are quite outdated
-The gameplay is horrible
-The cover system is horrible
-Lack of crew members 
-Normandy is so tiny 
-Not alot of dialogue for your crew on the Normandy when you interact with them (you get discuss a few topics overall, but it's not like every time you do a quest, like in me3, they'll discuss something new.)
-The tedious elevator rides
-I hated how big the citadel was. It felt big simply to feel big. You would see long, stretch out corridors, that would make the illusion of how big it was, but it just made it tedious to traverse around for me...
-I hated how empty the citadel was. I wanted to see npc's walking around, bartering with shop owners, I wanted to see in the citadel. It just felt empty, and lifeless for me. 
-I hate how lifeless the priority missions are-Noveria a icey bland planet-the main building was also lifeless and grey
-Feros was just as bland and lifeless. Bioware could've gone crazy with the levels. They could've made the beautiful and strange traverse in gaming. Instead they played it safe, and gave us quite boring and predictable looking levels (I loved vamir though). 
-Lack of squad banter. 
-The Mako is a clunky mess to traverse
-The side quests are the same copy and pasted terrains, with different sky boxes
-The priority missions felt very repetitive. It was basicaly this: Check out situation-find out where to go to X place-take Mako out and fight a wave of enemies-end up to X base-fight X waves-Fight X boss-Leave. This was the formula more or less for most of the missions and it drived me nuts. It was just repetitive. I know me3 is a bit of the same, while being even more repetitive, but at least it had epic and memorable moments thrown throughout each mission. Nothing really excited happen, it was just meh. 
-The game doesn't auto save (often) and I lost quite a bit of progress because of that. 
-Not to many enemy types
-frame rate issues here and there, as well as pop in of textures
-The ending can only end in 2 ways :/...not much choices in that regard. 
-the boss fights were just stupid and really uncessary in my opinion.

Not sure if nostaliga is why so many still love it, or what...Mind you, I played this just a month ago so I'm playing with 2012 goggles. 

1. The game is older so it's quite normal to have outdated graphics in comparison to ME2 and ME3.
2 - 5. Being the first game of the series it's normal that some of the gameplay stuff is not as good as that in the sequels.ME2 improved the combat and the cover system, expanded the number of crew members an so on.The fact that ME2 improved something(which you may expect from a sequel), doesn't mean that combat and gameplay in ME was bad.When people played it back in the days it was ok.It's like watching some old movie and compare it's visual effects to it's sequel released years later.And combat in ME was never as important as storytelling, the way the ME universe is created and it's impact to the player, good atmosphere and things like that.
3. There is more dialogue with the crew in ME1 than in ME3.In ME3 you have the first time you meet with the actual crew member on the normandy where you have dialogue cutscene with interaction, and after that every time you try to interact with someone you get automatic replies where you can't interact at all.
4. Yeah that was annoying.
5. If you get bored wandering the citadel you can always use instant travel to reach your destination.
6.The citadel empty and lifeless.ARE YOU SERIOUS?????This is one of the best levels in the entire ME triology.There are 20+ quests citadel only.There are more npc-s you can interact from the entire ME3, that are not only quest related ones.
8. There are a few.
9. True.That is a flaw fans complained about so it got removed from ME2.
10. This is the only major flaw in the entire game in my opinion.The missions were not bad it's just the fact that there are 4-5 of them that got copy pasted 10 times each.
11. Well at least the mission design was not the usual "Beginning of the mission - point A.You get to walk in straight line to point B.End of mission."You had some small place to explore and interact with nps-s before the actual mission starts(which was the case with Omega,Illium and Tuchanka in ME2).There was less action in the actual missions but like i said ME was never about action.It's not the element that made the franchise so loved by the fans.
12. True.
14. Not a major issue.It's something that any game has.
15. Yeah and ME3 has so much different ways to end and so much variety to offer.Srsly....
16. The boss fights were great, and one of the many flaws in ME3 is the lack of ones.

ME1 was better than ME3 in every aspect exept the combat(which i personally don't care about).The many things that doesn't look as polished as 2 and 3 is just the fact that it is an older game.The one major problem with ME3 is not that it's bad, it's just that it's unfinished.If only there were at least one more year of development it had the potential to be the best in the series.

Modifié par J0E-, 15 avril 2012 - 08:21 .

[Fireblader70]

Thoughts_My_Aim wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...

OP, this is a dramatic space opera, not a detailed historical account of the galaxy. It was either find a superweapon device, defeat the Reapers conventionally, or die. The first option gives a higher chance of survival. Yes, it could be seen as a cheap way out, but there you go.
What would you have preferred instead?

I'm a bit confused by your argument here, in that you seem to be conflating in-character logistical problems with criticisms of the game as a fictional text.

Obviously *in character* finding a magic superweapon that destroys the reapers is a better solution but to many people (and I am one of them) it is flat out crappy storytelling.

Similarly *in character* the fact that defeating the reapers conventionally is a very risky proposition is a point against it, but as a player this is a positive advantage.

If I was given the choice between (a) rely on a superweapon which will destroy the Reapers and save the galaxy no matter what I do or ( try to fight the reapers by conventional military methods, with the ultimate survival of the galaxy depending on my actions and my ability to unite the various races into an effective fighting force then as a *player* I'd far rather choose option ( because, well, I'm playing a video game, and I sort of want the stuff I do to matter.

I saw the OP as criticising the game for conveniently introducing a massive superweapon, and I replied by saying that it was one of the only ways they could have given the galaxy a true advantage over the Reapers. Fighting conventionally would have likely caused another galaxy-wide extinction, as shown by the countless cycles that ended with Reaper victories.
Of course, if humanity had succeeded conventionally where countless species from the past had not, that would not be radically different from the idea of an all-powerful Crucible.

That was my argument, and nothing more. Not too complex

[SalsaDMA]

Fireblader70 wrote...

Thoughts_My_Aim wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...

OP, this is a dramatic space opera, not a detailed historical account of the galaxy. It was either find a superweapon device, defeat the Reapers conventionally, or die. The first option gives a higher chance of survival. Yes, it could be seen as a cheap way out, but there you go.
What would you have preferred instead?

I'm a bit confused by your argument here, in that you seem to be conflating in-character logistical problems with criticisms of the game as a fictional text.

Obviously *in character* finding a magic superweapon that destroys the reapers is a better solution but to many people (and I am one of them) it is flat out crappy storytelling.

Similarly *in character* the fact that defeating the reapers conventionally is a very risky proposition is a point against it, but as a player this is a positive advantage.

If I was given the choice between (a) rely on a superweapon which will destroy the Reapers and save the galaxy no matter what I do or ( try to fight the reapers by conventional military methods, with the ultimate survival of the galaxy depending on my actions and my ability to unite the various races into an effective fighting force then as a *player* I'd far rather choose option ( because, well, I'm playing a video game, and I sort of want the stuff I do to matter.

I saw the OP as criticising the game for conveniently introducing a massive superweapon, and I replied by saying that it was one of the only ways they could have given the galaxy a true advantage over the Reapers. Fighting conventionally would have likely caused another galaxy-wide extinction, as shown by the countless cycles that ended with Reaper victories.
Of course, if humanity had succeeded conventionally where countless species from the past had not, that would not be radically different from the idea of an all-powerful Crucible.

That was my argument, and nothing more. Not too complex

The protheans already gave this cycle a very powerfull "weapon" when they tamepered with the keepers. This was already highlighted in ME1, and they should have elaborated on the impact this had, rather than invent a new thing in the last chapter.

[DaJe]

Meh.
Many of these things don't bother me that much, or I don't see a problem where the OP sees one.
There are valid points, but overall in my opinion some overreaction.

There is a lot this game does very well. I think everything around Tuchanka and Rannoch was very well done. To me these two planets and everything that has to do with them are highlights in the series in terms of writing, pacing, game play and emotions.

What bothers me most is
-the beginning,
-the ending,
-the overdone auto-dialog,
-the horrible journal and generally not well fleshed out GUI that lacks needed information and user comfort,
-the tedious exploration and scanning which also suffers under interface limitations
-some gameplay animations, like every single walking or running animation for femshep (ME1 had it perfect really, why not use it?)
-faces, the facegen is just messed up and a clear step back except for hair and frequently femshep looks suddenly extremely ugly due to some weird face animations
-Tali/Quarian reveal, it could have hardly be done any cheaper and careless plus it doesn't even make sense. Long flowing hair? On a race that has spend 3 centuries underneath skintight environmental suits? There was a big opportunity missed here for a much anticipated scene that never happened. At least showing her face without stupid hair, in 3d, when she takes off her mask on rannoch would have been much better and the right moment.

[AlanC9]

SalsaDMA wrote...
What's funny is that I remember already with ME1 and ME2 people were voicing that this was unsatisfactory in some of the missions. Having your crew sip caffe latte on the normandy while you only took 2 of them along on some highly important task that was dangerous.

There's a saying that goes something along the lines of "you pick the tool fit for the job", and if the engine is the problem in restricting us from getting believeable scearios, then the engine isn't the right one for the job.

Hell, people have complained about party size restrictions in just about every party-based RPG ever. The only exception I can think of offhand was the NWN2 OC, and that only in the endgame.

[CerberusCheerleader]

Sheoro wrote...


- The "war"
This is really something that kept pressing on my mind the whole game:
Since ME1 we know that one single reaper needs a whole fleet to get destroyed, so a whole fleet of reapers needs an ungodly amount of firepower. Even in ME3, they manage to destroy the entire Earth defense force in seconds! It isn't war, it's slaughter, it’s pure survival, and everyone acknowledges that...
...and, seconds after, talks about it like a regular war: "The Reapers are pressing on our borders", "Their forces are in entrenched positions", and, my favorite, "we totally need the Krogan to fight these giant invincible
starships!"

That's the most important point you make IMHO and the one you have to ignore in order to enjoy the game.

If you think about it this whole war doesn't make much sense. The reaper fleat is invincible. They could just fly around and kill everything (spaceships, military infrastructure, etc.) and using the Mass Relays they could probably do so in days. After a week of slaughter it would be over. There wouldn't even be a war.

And if you like "we need Krogans to fight invincible Reapers" how about this:
Even if the enemy would have been a normal enemy (say, like the Turians) you still wouldn't need Krogan infantry. Because in a future scenario like Mass Effect wars wouldn't be won by infantry and courage. They would be won by technology and machines. Whoever has better and more spaceships, better mechs, more tactical nukes etc. wins the war. Infantry would probably be your least important asset.

I think one has to be somewhat tolerant when it comes to these kind of games. That doesn't mean you have to accept everything, however. For instance, the Crucible by itself is probably acceptable (although not brilliant). What isn't acceptable is that they are telling you that you need a Prothean VI to tell you that it can dock onto the Citadel. I think our engineers would have figuered that out by themselves, thank you very much:huh:

[wetnasty]

xsdob wrote...

Sorry you feel that way, I liked the rest of the game though.

/endthread

Because that's basically what it comes down to.

[GodWood]

KeilxKey wrote...

I thought the narrative was fine. This is my opinion and my opinion only.  Please don't question why I think so. 

OP, no offense but your starting to come off as one of these people;

Not at all. He's pointing out significant narrative flaws present in ME3's script.

Why is widescale hate allowed to be directed at the ****ty endings but not the rest of the ****ty plot?

[chevyguy87]

I still feel I received my moneys worth from this game. I have not lost interest in it yet.

[Kalas82]

While i do agree with all of the points made in the opening post, i just think you (or we as gamers) got to accept that as soon as a franchise gets big attention and big-money behind it it most of the times takes the same path most big movies walk -> shiny, shiny, bling, bling, don`t think to hard just look it sparkels.

This in mind i could live with most flawes besides the ending (which is just too bad to ignore it).


"- Last
but not least

3/4 of ME1's staff wasn't involved in ME3:"

Didn`t know this, but that explains much. Thanks for sharing that information.

One point that bugged me with ME2 and 3 the most was the atmosphere. ME1 just had a diffrent flair/feeling.
ME1 felt kinda lika a sci-fi-mystery-thriller..don`t know how to describe it, this feeling of beeing tiny in the scale of the universe was just there. Dialogue and the way the plot moved felt more grown up.
ME2 and 3 just seem to a bit more adepted for masses.
ME2 and 3 feel to me more like a action-flic...which isn`t bad, just diffrent.
I still like 2+3 (minus the ending) but ME1 wrote gaming-history in my eyes.

[DirgeSinger]

thunderhawk862002 wrote...

Yeah every day that passes those flaws and others grow more apparent. Especially things like the journal system and multiplayer being required to see all the endings (as crappy as they were).

I had a high enough readiness rating without MP. This actually does depend on your choices.

That being said, I still hate the endings like everyone else...

[mauro2222]

Sheoro wrote...

- Your choices don’t matter
This doesn't just apply to the ending, it applies to the whole game. Did [companion from ME1/ME2] die? No problem, he's replaced by some NPC. Kept the Collector base? Have some Military Strength Points. Kept that NPC in ME1 alive? Military Points. Your companions from ME2? Military points. That assignment in ME1/2? Military. Points. The biggest thing I’ve heard of was about the Salarian Councilor, and even that is just a penny.

Agree.

Sheoro wrote...

- The Crucible
This is what you call a classic plot device, and "device" is even literal in this case. It also shows how completely pointless ME2 was: It should have been all about finding a way to stop the reapers. Instead we got that Cerberus and Collector stuff, and by the time ME3 was made, a writer or some cool guy found out: "Whoops, the reapers are attacking, but we haven't established a SINGLE CLUE about stopping them. Ah,  I'll just let Liara find a superweapon on, uh, Mars." You want to tell me that is remotely good writing?

Agree.

Sheoro wrote...

- Geth
As if ME2 wasn't pointless enough, another part about it became completely
null: The Geth indoctrination.
Here's a short illustration:
Mass Effect 1:
"The Geth are controlled by Reapers."
Mass Effect 2:
"Only a part of the Geth is controlled by Reapers."
Mass Effect 3:
"The Geth are controlled by Reapers."
There was absolutely no point in Legion's appearance in ME2 - especially since the history of the Geth uprising is explained once again (though unfitting and amateurish). Kind of reminds me of DX:HR, where the canon ending is “everyone dies, nothing that happened matters”.

I was like... "Again?"

Sheoro wrote...

- Quarians
Oh yeah, another plot device. Right as the reapers attack, the Quarians invent some device that makes the Geth vulnerable.
Just a short reminder: Not long ago we were told that Quarian ships are made of scrap metal and duct tape. That if there's no noise, the engine died. Their whole pilgrimage bases on the fact their ships are flying junk that seriously needs some fixing.
Geth, on the other hand, had 300 years of access to unlimited resources and high-end technology. Not to mention all their other benefits from being synthetic. There is no way they didn’t build superior defenses and fleets.
And now I have to believe the Quarians just said "Hey, we COINCIDENTALLY found this plot device, let's take the risk of dooming our whole race and dive right into the shark's pool"?

True, hull breach, everyone dies.
No noise aboard the ship, air filter fails, everyone dies.
The Geth should have the biggest, most powerful fleet of the galaxy, followed by the Rachni.

Sheoro wrote...

- Companions
Am I the only one who noticed the massive changes in behavior for most Companions?
A short list:
Garrus
Went from untalkative ("Shepard", the only reaction upon seeing him again in ME2) to Roman Bellic ("Shepard, bars! Drinks, Shepard! Let's go bowling!")
Wrex
DIDN'T EVEN SAY HELLO. Tells unfunny knee-slappers jokes.
Ashley
Bimbofized.
Legion
Suddenly acts like an individual, nothing about its involvement makes any sense. Uses the word "beautiful".

Fan influence, I utterly hate "Bro" characters, their friendship seems fake. Alcohol, stupid random jokes about killing and sex seem to be friendship now, oh and cigarettes... having lung cancer its very social. It didn't bothered me with Garrus, why? Shepard's dialogue about "real" friends, but ends there.

Wrex... is Wrex.
Ashley, new Miranda.
Legion... I liked it.

Sheoro wrote...

- EDI
Okay, they totally messed up here. EDI’s writer from ME2 left, and if you didn’t notice that, I just won’t believe you.  She constantly contradicts herself and former AI lore, stating for example that she has no emotions – meanwhile  dating Jeff, making Jokes and actually following Shepard out of loyalty.
And do I even have to mention the horrible, horrible[/i] design choice that is her body? It also leaves the question:
Why aren’t Geth remote-controlling bodies and ships from a safe spot?

I liked her character development. But her camel-toe was bad, really bad.

Sheoro wrote...

- Dialogue
Can you even call it dialogue anymore? There were maybe two sentences Shepard said in ME1 that didn't require my input - and now he now talks all day by himself. Out of a 10 minutes dialogue cutscene I had two occasions to actually choose something. And these weren’t even meaningful choices.
Best example is that kid at the beginning: A renegade, or even just a mildly intelligent Shepard wouldn't waste his time on a single kid since there are millions dying already! But you can't influence that because someone really wanted him to have cliched nightmares.
Oh, not to mention the voice acting quality suffered greatly from the loss of Ginny McSwain.

Try to play again the game... everyone talks and talks about the same thing, and you just skip dialogue.
Liara's forced friendship... enough said.
DoucheShep doesn't exist anymore. Your crew are your family now.

Sheoro wrote...

- Illusive Man
This guy had potential to be a god-tier villain. He is cruel, he is immoral, but his reasoning is flawless.
Whooosh, nope, indoctrinated! Since 20 years. From the first moment on I wanted to know "TIM, HOW do you want to control them?", but Shepard doesn't ask (quality writing strikes again) and TIM doesn't explain. He just wants to do it. And he merely tried to convince Shepard, his most expensive project[/i], to believe him.

I never liked the guy, never liked the organization, but his character suffered a lot.

Sheoro wrote...

- The "war"
This is really something that kept pressing on my mind the whole game:
Since ME1 we know that one single reaper needs a whole fleet to get destroyed, so a whole fleet of reapers needs an ungodly amount of firepower. Even in ME3, they manage to destroy the entire Earth defense force in seconds! It isn't war, it's slaughter, it’s pure survival, and everyone acknowledges that...
...and, seconds after, talks about it like a regular war: "The Reapers are pressing on our borders", "Their forces are in entrenched positions", and, my favorite, "we totally need the Krogan to fight these giant invincible
starships!"

This is debatable, they made huge technological advances from Sovereign, including the Thanix... oh right, the mythical Thanix Cannon, installed in every ship, but nobody seems to use it.
And yes, it felt like if the Reapers were a random alien species trying to become an Empire.

Sheoro wrote...

*just straight from my mind: Space Ninjas, asking a Turian to help Earth while standing right in front of his burning homeworld, Javik being another plot device par excellence

And this... WTF!?

Why Earth must be saved first? Palaven is a burning sphere, in fact the codex says that every city suffered orbital bombardement in huge scales. In fact why everyone agrees that Earth needs to be rescued when every planet is under attack. What about Thessia? they need all that Eezo. This appears to be a conflict between the Dark Energy plot (in which humanity has some kind of potential, and in fact could explain all this "Save Earth, forget your family" thing) and the Child/God.

Modifié par mauro2222, 15 avril 2012 - 11:59 .

[mauro2222]

Very good points OP.

[daytona123]

The only thing I'm going to talk about is legion/geth/quarians and I dont remember everything cause its been a bit since I played, but I'm pretty sure Legion still had its reaper upgrades the whole time you get to hang out with it. And at the very end when it sacrifices itself, a companion point out that in the end Legion did become an individual.

As for the Geth we only assume that All Geth are controlled by reapers we learn in 2 that that isn't the case. As for them being controlled in 3 it was basically just a plot device to give the players an enemy they like and to give the players a reason to choose either Geth or Quarians(who started the fight)

[The Wizard]

I think what ticked me off the most was the fact that whether you kill or release the Rachni Queen in ME2, it makes NO DIFFERENCE! You're still fighting Rachni in ME3. So much for my "choices affecting the game's outcome".........

[mauro2222]

The Wizard wrote...

I think what ticked me off the most was the fact that whether you kill or release the Rachni Queen in ME2, it makes NO DIFFERENCE! You're still fighting Rachni in ME3. So much for my "choices affecting the game's outcome".........

There is a difference, one was born from another queen, and the other was created with Space Magic and screams more

[Sgt Stryker]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Cainne Chapel wrote...

I would agree Salsa.

its a shame the engine was only meant for groups of 3 though eh? I would of liked some epic battles going on.

What's funny is that I remember already with ME1 and ME2 people were voicing that this was unsatisfactory in some of the missions. Having your crew sip caffe latte on the normandy while you only took 2 of them along on some highly important task that was dangerous.

There's a saying that goes something along the lines of "you pick the tool fit for the job", and if the engine is the problem in restricting us from getting believeable scearios, then the engine isn't the right one for the job.

Better yet, if the problem really is just an engine limitation, then why not just show (via cutscene or radio comms) the other squad members doing background stuff in another sector? IMO Virmire could have been significantly improved if it somehow involved all members of the crew.

Modifié par Sgt Stryker, 16 avril 2012 - 01:00 .

[Cainne Chapel]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Any game as large as ME3 is bound to have some problems; basically anything can be picked apart like this. I'm certainly not denying that there are some issues with the game; trivialization of some supposedly major choices (ie Collector Base and rachni), sidelining or altering of characters (although most of my favourites got treated pretty well, so didn't bother me too much), and that horrible journal system. However, the parts that were done well were so good that I was willing to forgive all that. It's not like you couldn't really make similar criticisms towards the earlier games anyway.

Not only is that rue Cthulhu... ME2 and ME1 were picked apart on a regular basis back in the day.  Heck ME1's opening arc revolves around a few plot holes as well and tremendous leaps of logic.

But it worked for ME1, still loved it despite obvious flaws in the story telling, same with 2 and now same with 3.

Really if you want they ALL can be picked apart quite adeptly by one with enough time.  Even ME1's "perfect" storyline can fall when the microscope is turned on.