239 réponses à ce sujet

[hopeisreal]

Not talking about fun....we are talking about technicalities.

Gears of War pretty much created a combat system that many games copy now. The system is VERY WELL done and far exceeds Mass Effect...without any glitches when going into cover...or glitchy enemies. Why? Because Gears is TOTALLY FOCUSED ON BEING A SHOOTER.

You can't just start off as a pure RPG...then veer off into being a shooter.

[Kreid]

hopeisreal wrote...

Creid-X wrote...

hopeisreal wrote...

Creid-X wrote...

It is definitely a solid game deserving a score of 9 IMO.

I understand many peoples' responses due the current ending debacle but you need to try and have a global vision, mostly everyone will agree the game is very good until the last mission and the journal and the eavesdropping aren't issues which can be said to objectively outweigh all the good.

forget the ending. The game as is? As good as Gears 1 or 2? Or Uncharted 2? or Halo 1? or MGS 4? There is a CONSIDERABLE gap in quality between ME3 and those games. 

Despite the ending....it's not good enough to be rated a 9

Maybe to you, I've played all the games you listed and I consider ME3 better than any game in the Gears trilogy, better than Halo and at par with Uncharted 2 and MGS4 (and this ones had a LOT of issues of it's own, many of them relation to the ending and plotholes too)

I don't think you guys really think through all the stuff that goes on in ME3 with all the permutations and variables, there are some characters like Padok Wiks that are simple what ifs and have awsome writting and voice acting, ME3 is not a perfect game but it is a very solid one.

???????????? On par with Uncharted 2? Have you played that game? Come on man...you must be having a joke.

I've played all the Uncharted games, they are flashy and have clever dialogue but in the end they're corridor shooters with cutsecenes thrown in and incredibly clicjhéd stories. I like Uncharted and admire Naughty Dog for what they've squeezed out of the PS3, but I'd take Mass Effect over Uncharted any day, the universe, characters, decisions are on a whole different level.

[txgoldrush]

savionen wrote...

Even without the ending I'm not sure the game deserves a 9. Everything after you get to Cerberus's base is a massive free fall in quality. Pretty much all the side-content are fetch quests, there's only 1 city, there's no mini-games, no Mako/Hammerhead, not much real depth or "flavor". Ontop of the journal system and it taking forever to actually get anywhere because of the load times on every single door in existence. The game is also significantly shorter than ME1 and ME2, by a good 5-10 hours. Half the romance scenes were basically copy-paste from ME2 and disappointing. ME3 doesn't really add any depth to any of the characters.

Pretty much every mainstream game with a high budget gets a good rating. You think reviewers are going to rip on a developer after they gave them tons of free stuff, help them fund their website, and help them keep their jobs?

"The game is also significantly shorter than ME1 and ME2, by a good 5-10 hours"

And those 5 hours of ME1 were filler.

" ME3 doesn't really add any depth to any of the characters"

Wrong.....nevermind that ME3 shows how Liara deals with the loss of control (notice how the entire series, especially ME2, she thinks she is in control, esepcially as the Broker) and learning what the Protheans really were like. or how these characters deal with loss, or Tali's maturity and why she no longer supports the war against the geth, nevermind the FACT that the characters, even the new ones, develop far better than the ones in ME1 do. Nevermind EDI who gains A LOT of depth.

"Pretty much all the side-content are fetch quests, there's only 1 city, there's no mini-games, no Mako/Hammerhead, not much real depth or "flavor""

1 city...woopdie doo...would I like more? Yes...bu the game didn't need more. The mini games sucked in th efirst two and slowed progression.

[hopeisreal]

Yes, I would take ME1 and maybe 2 over Uncharted.

But the decisions in ME3 don't amount to jack...so your argument there holds no water

[txgoldrush]

hopeisreal wrote...

Not talking about fun....we are talking about technicalities.

Gears of War pretty much created a combat system that many games copy now. The system is VERY WELL done and far exceeds Mass Effect...without any glitches when going into cover...or glitchy enemies. Why? Because Gears is TOTALLY FOCUSED ON BEING A SHOOTER.

You can't just start off as a pure RPG...then veer off into being a shooter.

Because the pure RPG elements hurt the first game...and really the RPG elements really do not fit a series about commandos.

[hopeisreal]

txgoldrush wrote...

savionen wrote...

Even without the ending I'm not sure the game deserves a 9. Everything after you get to Cerberus's base is a massive free fall in quality. Pretty much all the side-content are fetch quests, there's only 1 city, there's no mini-games, no Mako/Hammerhead, not much real depth or "flavor". Ontop of the journal system and it taking forever to actually get anywhere because of the load times on every single door in existence. The game is also significantly shorter than ME1 and ME2, by a good 5-10 hours. Half the romance scenes were basically copy-paste from ME2 and disappointing. ME3 doesn't really add any depth to any of the characters.

Pretty much every mainstream game with a high budget gets a good rating. You think reviewers are going to rip on a developer after they gave them tons of free stuff, help them fund their website, and help them keep their jobs?

"The game is also significantly shorter than ME1 and ME2, by a good 5-10 hours"

And those 5 hours of ME1 were filler.

" ME3 doesn't really add any depth to any of the characters"

Wrong.....nevermind that ME3 shows how Liara deals with the loss of control (notice how the entire series, especially ME2, she thinks she is in control, esepcially as the Broker) and learning what the Protheans really were like. or how these characters deal with loss, or Tali's maturity and why she no longer supports the war against the geth, nevermind the FACT that the characters, even the new ones, develop far better than the ones in ME1 do. Nevermind EDI who gains A LOT of depth.

"Pretty much all the side-content are fetch quests, there's only 1 city, there's no mini-games, no Mako/Hammerhead, not much real depth or "flavor""

1 city...woopdie doo...would I like more? Yes...bu the game didn't need more. The mini games sucked in th efirst two and slowed progression.

How much are Bioware paying you? Or rather..EA

[Mcfly616]

I'm sorry but a PERFECT score entails perfection all the way around.....beginning, middle and END.....

I was halfway through the game when I saw the GameInformer score, and at that point my friend and I both agreed that the game deserved every point of that perfect score....

And then we got to the end.....and we were like "how did anyone see this as Perfect?"

[txgoldrush]

hopeisreal wrote...

Yes, I would take ME1 and maybe 2 over Uncharted.

But the decisions in ME3 don't amount to jack...so your argument there holds no water

and the decisions in most Bioware games are meaningless a well....including ME1....

stop being a hypocrite.

And really in ME3, your choices matter more than any other Bioware game outside of maybe DAO sloppy ending cards system.

[txgoldrush]

hopeisreal wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

savionen wrote...

Even without the ending I'm not sure the game deserves a 9. Everything after you get to Cerberus's base is a massive free fall in quality. Pretty much all the side-content are fetch quests, there's only 1 city, there's no mini-games, no Mako/Hammerhead, not much real depth or "flavor". Ontop of the journal system and it taking forever to actually get anywhere because of the load times on every single door in existence. The game is also significantly shorter than ME1 and ME2, by a good 5-10 hours. Half the romance scenes were basically copy-paste from ME2 and disappointing. ME3 doesn't really add any depth to any of the characters.

Pretty much every mainstream game with a high budget gets a good rating. You think reviewers are going to rip on a developer after they gave them tons of free stuff, help them fund their website, and help them keep their jobs?

"The game is also significantly shorter than ME1 and ME2, by a good 5-10 hours"

And those 5 hours of ME1 were filler.

" ME3 doesn't really add any depth to any of the characters"

Wrong.....nevermind that ME3 shows how Liara deals with the loss of control (notice how the entire series, especially ME2, she thinks she is in control, esepcially as the Broker) and learning what the Protheans really were like. or how these characters deal with loss, or Tali's maturity and why she no longer supports the war against the geth, nevermind the FACT that the characters, even the new ones, develop far better than the ones in ME1 do. Nevermind EDI who gains A LOT of depth.

"Pretty much all the side-content are fetch quests, there's only 1 city, there's no mini-games, no Mako/Hammerhead, not much real depth or "flavor""

1 city...woopdie doo...would I like more? Yes...bu the game didn't need more. The mini games sucked in th efirst two and slowed progression.

How much are Bioware paying you? Or rather..EA

bla bla bla....he must like and defend the game, he must be paid by EA....

wow what a logical mindset.

[Dranks]

Sometimes I feel like it's because they're rating the brand and not the game. Companies may or may not pay off reviewers, but sometimes I feel like they rate big things so high because they're so big. I mean look at MW3. Amazing reviews but it's the exact same damn game as MW1. Sort of like "There was a gamebreaking bug where I couldn't finish the last boss battle but you know what this is Halo 8 so it's getting a 10 in everything from us because it's Halo and Halo rocks!!!".

[hopeisreal]

txgoldrush wrote...

hopeisreal wrote...

Yes, I would take ME1 and maybe 2 over Uncharted.

But the decisions in ME3 don't amount to jack...so your argument there holds no water

and the decisions in most Bioware games are meaningless a well....including ME1....

stop being a hypocrite.

And really in ME3, your choices matter more than any other Bioware game outside of maybe DAO sloppy ending cards system.

How do your choices in ME3 matter...please explain that to me. 

[savionen]

txgoldrush wrote...

savionen wrote...

Even without the ending I'm not sure the game deserves a 9. Everything after you get to Cerberus's base is a massive free fall in quality. Pretty much all the side-content are fetch quests, there's only 1 city, there's no mini-games, no Mako/Hammerhead, not much real depth or "flavor". Ontop of the journal system and it taking forever to actually get anywhere because of the load times on every single door in existence. The game is also significantly shorter than ME1 and ME2, by a good 5-10 hours. Half the romance scenes were basically copy-paste from ME2 and disappointing. ME3 doesn't really add any depth to any of the characters.

Pretty much every mainstream game with a high budget gets a good rating. You think reviewers are going to rip on a developer after they gave them tons of free stuff, help them fund their website, and help them keep their jobs?

"The game is also significantly shorter than ME1 and ME2, by a good 5-10 hours"

And those 5 hours of ME1 were filler.

ME1 definitely had a ton of junk quests, but the game is also 5 years old now and was the first of the trilogy.

Like 60% of ME3 is filler, and has no bearing on the ending. You could probably finish the main story in a good 8-10 hours if you did no side content.

ME1 was a good 25-35 hours including side-content, ME2 was a good 30-35 as well. I finished ME3 in 21 hours and ended up with a 8500 EMS score.

[Calibrations Expert]

What is with you people? ME3 deserves 75% perfect reviews. It deserves way more than that. It is a 97% perfect game, the piece of sh*t ending is only a very small part of the game.

[The Protheans]

Calibrations Expert wrote...

What is with you people? ME3 deserves 75% perfect reviews. It deserves way more than that. It is a 97% perfect game, the piece of sh*t ending is only a very small part of the game.

The ending is bad but we're distracted from the other crap because of it, I fear this already happened you.

[Kreid]

hopeisreal wrote...

Not talking about fun....we are talking about technicalities.

Gears of War pretty much created a combat system that many games copy now. The system is VERY WELL done and far exceeds Mass Effect...without any glitches when going into cover...or glitchy enemies. Why? Because Gears is TOTALLY FOCUSED ON BEING A SHOOTER.

You can't just start off as a pure RPG...then veer off into being a shooter.

Look, no one is arguing that Gears is a good game based purely on it's combat system (what else?) but Mass effect was never a pure RPG, it was conceived as a RPG-shooter hybrid and it has advanced leagues in gameplay since ME1, name me another shooter with some many options, six clases, ammo powers, biotic combos etc....I mean, Uncharted is fun, but sometimes it pales in comparion with what ME can accomplish in terms of gameplay now.

hopeisreal wrote...

Yes, I would take ME1 and maybe 2 over Uncharted.

But the decisions in ME3 don't amount to jack...so your argument there holds no water

There are big decision in ME3, the fact that the ending renders them useless is another story, still i'd take Priority: Tuchanka before any section of any of those games.

[Jackal7713]

xxskyshadowxx wrote...

Cuz EA buys advertising from all of those reviewers, and even included one in the game.

Yep, money can get you perfect scores.

[hopeisreal]

Yep....21 hours and you are done with ME3.

And not very memorable 21 hours.....

Hate being so negative but can't stand when journalism we are supposed to trust is so subjective and biased

[ShepnTali]

Calibrations Expert wrote...

What is with you people? ME3 deserves 75% perfect reviews. It deserves way more than that. It is a 97% perfect game, the piece of sh*t ending is only a very small part of the game.

97% of the game is not perfect. Well done, great if you choose. Not perfect. The flaws can even be ignored and give you a fantastic game. The game isn't 'perfect'.

[viperabyss]

txgoldrush wrote...

And yet those are still MINOR bugs....far less than Skyrims...visual bugs are far less annying than game stoppers. Nevermind that Turinas could have flank cannons. Oh nevermind ME1 and ME2's visual bugs.....like Tali's father not showing up.

Yes, except the fact that Skyrim is a sandbox game. Sandbox game is more prone to bugs due to the fact that they have to tolerate users doing stupid stuff.

Mass Effect 3 is not a sandbox game. Heck, it shouldn't even be called a RPG given the amount of railroading we've been put through. The fact is, there are enormous amount of bugs in ME3, which are practically non-existent in ME and ME2. Have you seen a cruiser firing backwards in ME2? No you haven't. Have you seen missing panels on Normandy in ME2 / ME? No you haven't. Have you seen people getting stuck on Normandy in ME2 / ME? No you haven't.

And Tali's father bug is also present in ME3. If you didn't talk to Barla Von before the Cerberus attack, he will not be there after the attack. However, the map will still show him as an interactive character.

And yet the sidequests aren't the major part of the game and can be completed in just over a half an hour....far less substantial than mE1's poor sidequest system of identical buildings on the same old barren planets with different colors.

Same old barren planets with different colors...have you even played ME? Have you even dropped Mako onto a planet? Each planet is actually remarkedly different from each other. Some will have very tall moutains with very little flat areas, and some others will have large flat areas with little mountains. The fact that you think all of them are the same tells me you really haven't been paying attention.

And sure, the sidequest isn't a major part of the game...except that it dictates the outcome of the game. If you don't do sidequests, you don't unlock all the endings. The fact that you have to eavesdrop all over the Citadel to get sidequests is a markedly worse than ME2's sidequests. In ME2, you're given a location, the objective to be completed, and some background story. In ME3, you get an objective, and that's it. Furthermore, how does "I can complete the sidequests in 30 minutes" translate to good sidequests? If anything, don't you just admit yourself that there's a lack of sidequests in the game?

Did you miss the part where Adam's told you that you can get one on th ecitadel? Many of the eavesdrop conversations TELL you where to find the object.....you are making up flaws here that aren't there.

Adams did tell me to find on the Citadel, but didn't tell me which store. Should I look on the Presidium Common? Should I look in the Holding Area? Or should I look in the Spectre Acquisition Office?

And no, most eavesdrop conversation doens't tell you where to find the object. When did the asari on the Embassy Suite tell me where to find her Reaper codes? When did the Salarian on Presidium Common tells me where to find the heating stabilizers? When did the woman outside of Purgatory Bar tells me where to find the power schematics? When did the Preacher in the Holding Area tell me where to find the lost Batarian artifacts? When did the Turian in the Purgatory Bar tell me where to find the Flag of the First Regiment?

In fact, I think you're covering up flaws because things just worked out so well for you, or that you're wearing colored lenses.

Because the characters are not treated as TALKING CODEX ENTRIES, like Tali in ME1. Nevermind the FACT that their is more talking points with characters than ME1 and ME2, including some that aren't even on your team like Miranda. Nevermind the fact that they talk to EACHOTHER more and actuially have relationships with eachother, unlike ME1 and ME2. Oh and the FACT that they voice their views on the missions and plot, only which Kasumi does in ME2. More empty incorrect criticism.

LOL, you're really clueless, you know that?

People are definitely not treated as talking codex entries, but they do serve as the primary source for that character's background. In ME2, you can talk to Jacob about his service history, which is something missing in ME3. You can also talk to Mordin about his view on the genophage, and see how it actually changes as the game progresses, which is again, something missing in ME3. You can talk to Jack about her childhood, and why she hated Cerberus, which is missing in ME3. If you are romancing a non-human character, Mordin will have a long conversation about the precautions you must do, which is again, missing from ME3.

And there aren't more talking points in ME3 than ME2. In ME2, all characters will have 4~5 different long conversations about their background, including 1~2 more conversation about their loyalty mission, and 1 more after the destruction of Collector Base. Furthermore, Joker has one comment about all the teammembers, additional comments about the status of the Normandy, as well as occasional quib about the mission progress. Also, Donelly and Daniels will make a comment about the characters you just acquired, which is something they don't do in ME3. Sure, team members don't interact with each other, but they have significantly more dialogue options, as well as content, isn't it?

And aside from Kasumi, Zaeed also comment on the mission progress as well, as do some other selected team members (like Miranda). 

Less busted than the plot hole ME1 creates by while chasing Saren in a RACE AGAINST TIME, lets you go on side missions UNRELATED to the main story. Nevermind Bioware got lazy with planet design as well....oh wait, you can't criticize ME1....LOL.

ME, being the first one in the series, aims to establishes the universe, which is something apparently you did not catch. Are sidequests unrelated to the main story arc itself? Sure, but it does have long term ramification in the trilogy, isn't it? You don't have to do the sidequest for Admiral Kahoku, but you'd miss out the origin of Cerberus, as well as the reason people hate them, which is very useful in ME2. Sure, you don't have to talk to Jenna, but it would have a ramification in ME3 when he is shot dead by Cerberus. 

Planet design? LOL. ME is the only game in the trilogy that features fully explorable planets (each system has at least one), and like I said, each planet is unique to each own. Just because you have to climb the mountain in all of them, doesn't make them the same.

But again, I guess "dropping a probe to assist with the evacuation of the population" is more inline with your expectation from a RPG?

People did not like the Hammerhead as well.

No. People liked the Hammerhead. They didn't like the Firewalker pack missions, but Hammerhead itself got almost universally acclaim.

[Mcfly616]

Calibrations Expert wrote...

What is with you people? ME3 deserves 75% perfect reviews. It deserves way more than that. It is a 97% perfect game, the piece of sh*t ending is only a very small part of the game.

Haha umm....it doesn't deserve any "perfect" scores....a perfect score means the game was PERFECT in every important aspect....Beginning, Middle and END....

In that aspect, the Ending was a monumental failure.....I'm sorry but a game with a crap ending does not deserve a perfect score.....and the Ending is a HUGE part of the game contrary to what you say....especially when you take into account that it was supposed to show the outcome of our decisions over the course of the trilogy, but instead it renders them all meaningless

Just because a game was great for the first 95%, does not give it a free pass to blow the ending.....and no, it doesn't warrant a perfect score

[viperabyss]

txgoldrush wrote...

And yet yuou and many other fans IGNORE the problems of past games in the series. All three games have flaws...why so critical on ME3 more than ME1 and mE2? Nevermind many of these changes are from criticisms of the first two, like the dialogue with characters.

And the fact is, that you can easily get around the jorunal flaw. Was it criticized in many reviews...oh yes. Was it enough to drop the score tremedously? No.

And the twist DOES fit in with the rest of the universe...fans just suddenly want to ignore ME3's themes.

I never said there were no problem in the past games, but the bugs presented in the last two games were markedly lower than the one presented in ME3. Aside from that, the bugs in ME3 were supposed to be caught by the dev team (especially the cruiser firing backwards one), which they didn't do.

And why should Bioware get a pass for the journal issue? Mass Effect 3, at it's core, is a RPG. It is a very deformed RPG, but still a RPG nonetheless. What core component should a RPG have? Oh yes, the journal system. All Elders Scroll series have good journal system. All Fallout series have good journal system. DA:O had a good journal system. Both ME and ME2 have a good journal system. The fact that ME3, supposedly the best in the series, have the worst journal system, is not acceptable. I know you're easily drawn away by the pretty explosions and the great combat system, but all ME should have a decent journal system, and ME3 has none. Should Bioware be punished for this? Of course, because it is the core of the game. In fact, couple that with the sidequest system, and you have one of the worst sidequest experiences of all time. 

And no, the twist does not fit in with the rest of the game. The main story of the game is defeating the Reapers, not organics vs. synthetics. A strong theme throughout the series is sacrifice, which the ending gives us, but with pointless reasons and faulty logic. The abstract theme of the game is to fight against genocide, extremism, and lack of free will, which the ending forced upon us. In fact, I'd argue that those people who liked the ending seemed to have forgotten about the theme of the game.

[PhotonMaze]

Because their opinion is different to yours. Get over it.

[Aggie Punbot]

Katherine wrote...

Reviewers rarely play through the entire game, unfortunately.

Maybe this is why they thought they could get away with such a lousy ending.

[David7204]

You're an idiot.

[PhotonMaze]

10/10 Doesn't mean perfect (No flaws), it usually means masterpeice and arguably ME3 is a masterpiece. Why are you angry that some people have different opinions to you? What a pointless thread.

Modifié par PhotonMaze, 22 avril 2012 - 12:54 .