216 réponses à ce sujet

[xsdob]

Ugh, another I hate mass effect 3 thread. I'm outta here.

[mauro2222]

Finally! Someone who actually sees the problems with the whole game!

[InvincibleHero]

mauro2222 wrote...

Finally! Someone who actually sees the problems with the whole game!

And if you believe the whole game is a mess yet would be happy if you got your ending then you'd be somewhat hypocritical. I am amazed that people can say the game is garbage yet not return it and move on. What purpose does it serve to constantly harp on what one perceives as short-comings? (YES It is your time to waste, I beat you to that.  ) IMO I'd rather play games I enjoy than grouse about those I don't. I'd rather enjoy my time than wallow in negative emotions.

[mauro2222]

InvincibleHero wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

Finally! Someone who actually sees the problems with the whole game!

And if you believe the whole game is a mess yet would be happy if you got your ending then you'd be somewhat hypocritical. I am amazed that people can say the game is garbage yet not return it and move on. What purpose does it serve to constantly harp on what one perceives as short-comings? (YES It is your time to waste, I beat you to that.  ) IMO I'd rather play games I enjoy than grouse about those I don't. I'd rather enjoy my time than wallow in negative emotions.

Nice assumptions there, never said I hate the game or that it's a mess nor garbage... so keep your opinion for you, don't try to look badass by puting words in my mouth

Thanks for providing an useless response
Keep playing games, you don't look silly in that way.

Modifié par mauro2222, 24 avril 2012 - 06:20 .

[InvincibleHero]

@mauro2222
 

If you want to claim you have never posted anything highly negative towards ME3 then go ahead. I have read many of  them. You may not have used those exact words, but you do make negative comments every chance you get about the game. Your comment was just a see they even think it sucks in the entirety which you agree with. That is real helpful feedback BTW.

Did you read the review and the conclusions it draws? You are agreeing with it with your answer. They said it is a game not worth playing for new players and ME3 ruins the whole series so that fans should not want to play it either. That does not equate to throw ME3 in the trashbin?  That is also some of the nicer comments about the game.

FYI saying there are problems with the whole game means it is garbage because who would want to play a game riddled through with poor quality? You agreed with a highly negative pan of ME3 and the whole series actually.

[Phaedon]

Deuxhero wrote...
Eh, the post he linked to with it is in reference to a pre-release pic that was indeed VERY anime style in the eyes and facical strcture.

I specifically referred to multiple posts and linked to a page saying 'read on' instead of linking to a specific post when I had that choice.

Nice try though

[HBC Dresden]

Don't forget, they were very nitpicky and negative over Mass Effect 1 & 2, so....

Sero303 wrote...

The article was a bit nitpicky, for every
point they made about something wrong with the game/trilogy/universe,
the article itself was wrong about something else, or making a big deal
out of something little that could be easily explained.
I will agree, hands down no argument,... we don't need "clarity" on the ending, we need a better ending!

Totally agree with the first part. It's like they wanted to slam the trilogy so hard they attacked everything in sight, both valid complaints and not so valid complaints (just one example--the Reapers didn't blockade all the relays because they were overconfident and they wanted to harvest species, can't do that from space).

Modifié par HBC Dresden, 24 avril 2012 - 07:13 .

[sea-]

And here I thought posting the words "RPG Codex" led to an instant ban on these boards.  I'm genuinely surprised.

[Phaedon]

 

Baconandliver wrote...
Also, maybe it's because I'm tired and not reading things right, but are you saying that you think people there agree with Walters that ME is hard sci-fi? Because most all mentions of ME as hard sci-fi I've noticed on the Codex look like well-deserved mockery, not approval.

...it's sarcasm.

There are also genre conventions: ME3 (despite the developers' absurd claims as to its 'hard sci-fi' nature)

 
Apparently that guy is set on believing that that is claimed by the developers[when in fact it was only Walters who talked about the partial (and subjective (!), I kid you not)] hard sci-fi nature of the series.

To put things in perspective: 
Mass Effect is as much hard sci-fi as the bastard child of Buck Rogers and Duck Dodgers is.

Baconandliver wrote...
8 Seconds. Knights of the Chalice is from 2009, and it's in the third row. You'd best get baking those cookies.

Unless we are reading a different list, Knights of Chalice is the 14th game, with just the previous one being the first 21st century release.

In fact, the average release date of the first list (the one which is not sh*tty according to him) is that of 1994. Yup.

I mean, holy duck, people still play Wasteland? Wasteland? And still consider it a top tier title?

Modifié par Phaedon, 24 avril 2012 - 07:43 .

[ywfn]

TNO's review brings up a lot of good points I hadn't even thought too much about. Obviously most all of us already knew the ending was complete horse****, but the author points out a lot of other things in the "Beginning" and "Structure" sections that are worth thinking on. Quite a well-written piece.

Phaedon - I don't really get your point.  Obviously on any "mature" gamer's list of the "best RPGs of all time" there's going to be a ton of old games, because, well, frankly most of the best RPGs are from 10+ years ago.  RPGs are few and far between these days, and the few good ones, even moreso.

Modifié par ywfn, 24 avril 2012 - 07:54 .

[Amioran]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

Amioran wrote...

It is the same for painters. No painter works without a background laid upon. Naturally the background can change itself, but without it you will mistake all prospective and make a lot of other mistakes. You always have a background on where to work upon that you then finalize. You don't work in pieces, finalizing everyone of them in turn and then come out with the next as a puzzle. If you don't have a full picture (even if only in your mind) nothing will ever come out of it if not something to throw out of the window.

You also don't complete 1/3 of the painting, then hand the other 2/3 over to another painter. 

Actually it has been done many times, in fact. Almost all famous painters in the past started the painting (to give it a structure) and gave the students the work to complete.

Modifié par Amioran, 24 avril 2012 - 07:55 .

[Phaedon]

Amioran wrote...
Actually it has been done many times, in fact. Almost all famous painters in the past started the painting (to give it a structure) and gave the students the work to complete.

That's not true at all.

They had to sign them before giving them away. 

[Amioran]

Baconandliver wrote...

Attempts to paint ME3's story as philosophically compelling are... odd. I'm not the type to demand anyone stop enjoying ME3, just because I don't like it. However, one should accept what it is, and the reasons they enjoy it, not create elaborate yet flimsy philosophical justifications for their enjoyment, as if they are ashamed of it.

Again, I didn't paint anything in it.
You would be astounded on how many "easy reads" have very complex themes behind. Even fables. If you don't know the theme you can think it's just a simple story without no attempt at being taken seriously, but if you know the theme everything acquires a different pow.

No author write anything without a reference to a theme. This is just your attempt at denying that something as this happens, but I already provided much enough proof that's not as you say. Morover the theme I'm talking about it's a well known one, it's not a theme that is difficult to know (as it can be some themes in the Ulysses of Joyce). It's even referenced directly in ME (i.e. they talk about "order vs. chaos" directly in many sentences).

You can naturally believe what you want, however.

Baconandliver wrote...
Using one's education in a grasping attempt to place B-movie grade space schlock on the same level as truly great philosophical, religious, and academic texts is a betrayal;

Have I ever placed ME at the level of academic texts? Of what the hell are you talking about?

I just said that there's a theme behind that the majority of you don't know at all and so your judgment is flawed from beginning. To judge a narrative you NEED the full context or your judgement counts nothing. You can form your opinion, but that's a lot different than judging.

Modifié par Amioran, 24 avril 2012 - 08:14 .

[Amioran]

Phaedon wrote...

Amioran wrote...
Actually it has been done many times, in fact. Almost all famous painters in the past started the painting (to give it a structure) and gave the students the work to complete.

That's not true at all.

They had to sign them before giving them away. 

Many students signed the painting themselves without notice. Many paintings nowadays cannot be easily attributed to an author just for the change of hands.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

I always felt that the theme of Mass Effect was self determination. A person or group is looking to exercise free will at the expense of others or are fighting against circumstance (or both). The specifics of the conflicts and events becoming the series' plot points.

When you think about it, it's not exactly a thought provoking theme, but game narratives rarely elevate themselves beyond the most basic of themes.

But does it really matter either way? I mean, you touch constantly on the issue of Chaos v Order as well as the plausibility of the Starchild, but the article doesn't address (or dispute) either.

Continuity: there are all these little drips of water torture throughout the entire ending sequence. If the reapers knew where the Crucible was (implied by Hackett before storming the Cerberus base), why didn't they attack it while I was gathering military strength? Why don't they just turn off the teleport beam between Earth and the Citadel, forestalling any hope of me getting to it? Why is the Illusive Man alone inside the Citadel, waiting for you to deploy your paragon/renegade conversation options on him, instead of, say, a battalion of troops to make sure I couldn't frob the console of power?

What the article focuses on is the details and tries to illustrate why the writing in Mass Effect 3 is bad (and good, depending on the section - it's not all negative) from a narrative perspective and a game perspective (C&C) using specific examples.

i.e pointing out illogical or out-of-character outcomes or events that are there not because of foreshadowing or a result of a rational character's actions, but simply because the plot demands it.

In a work that kept it's thematics in the background to focus on a) the immediate plot and the interactions between various characters; as well as c) not being thoroughly planned out by the writers, would the existence of a theme in and of itself excuse the inconsistencies and deficiencies presented in the plot and characters, as pointed out in the article?

Or are the points made and examples given incorrect or irrelevant (something only IsaacShep has done)?

I mean, Michael Bay's Transformers films have themes to engage the audience beyond the narrative presented to them (the value of loyalty for one). Are the Transformers films deep, engaging and more than just a mindless popcorn blockbuster?

Does the existence of a theme inherently translate to good narrative?

Personally, I'd say no. But I haven't played Mass Effect 3, so I am not an expert on the subject matter.

Modifié par CrustyBot, 24 avril 2012 - 11:14 .

[December Man]

RPG Codex. LoL.

[Prosarian]

December Man wrote...

RPG Codex. LoL.

Yea some of the guys that post there are not very nice.

Anyway the review was excellent, many points were spot on.The reviewer made a few mistakes regarding the lore and i had a higher opinion of the Tuchanka/Rannoch arc than he did. But otherwise, largely spot on, unfortunately.

[Getorex]

Phaedon wrote...

 

Baconandliver wrote...
Also, maybe it's because I'm tired and not reading things right, but are you saying that you think people there agree with Walters that ME is hard sci-fi? Because most all mentions of ME as hard sci-fi I've noticed on the Codex look like well-deserved mockery, not approval.

...it's sarcasm.

There are also genre conventions: ME3 (despite the developers' absurd claims as to its 'hard sci-fi' nature)

 
Apparently that guy is set on believing that that is claimed by the developers[when in fact it was only Walters who talked about the partial (and subjective (!), I kid you not)] hard sci-fi nature of the series.

To put things in perspective: 
Mass Effect is as much hard sci-fi as the bastard child of Buck Rogers and Duck Dodgers is.

Baconandliver wrote...
8 Seconds. Knights of the Chalice is from 2009, and it's in the third row. You'd best get baking those cookies.

Unless we are reading a different list, Knights of Chalice is the 14th game, with just the previous one being the first 21st century release.

In fact, the average release date of the first list (the one which is not sh*tty according to him) is that of 1994. Yup.

I mean, holy duck, people still play Wasteland? Wasteland? And still consider it a top tier title?

Yes, people who have held tightly to their 8088 PC museum pieces do play Wasteland and other sprite-based/ascii graphics games.  That and people who have DOS installed in a virtual machine or in the form of an emulator.  You KNOW there are such creatures out there.

[Seboist]

Eterna5 wrote...

Imperial Sentinel Arian wrote...

The amount of backhurt is high indeed!

Seeing the most intelligent and experienced players including my top friends find ME3 full of flaws, I wonder how naive the posters here are - persuaded by few cool moments of the game.

Everything has flaws. It was your choice to overplay them until you could no longer enjoy the game. 

Most flaws don't involve a defense commitee acting like clueless morons in the intro in order to metaphorically jack the player off, "lol indoctrination" as a cheap excuse to railroad and cut corners or a horrid Deus Ex Machina plot that makes the stories from the SNES era look brilliant in comparison.

[Prosarian]

Fair codexia is a weird and wonderful place. Some posters betray a
remarkable insight and there are many hilarious threads in GRPG, the
workshop, the playground and the retardoland stickies. You just need to
stop being so butthurt all the time and you might actually find them
enjoyable.

Hi Ulminati,

I suppose that without qualifying my statement, it does come off as a simple case of butthurtery, don't get me wrong, I think that a lot of the stuff on the site is interesting and I am in the process of checking it out, especially the recommended RPGS.

When i stated that

Yea, some of the guys that post there are not very nice

I was referring to these statements from a linked thread

Gay sex with a ****

And the "Gay****s from outer space" photo that proceeded that post.

Not only Gay****s from Outer Space is far more hard sci-fi than any
Mass **** Popamole

Also the fact that everyone simply ignored it as though these statement are par for the course. "Not very nice" is an understatement of how i really feel.

Edit : The asterisks are covering that racist n-word.

Modifié par Prosarian, 24 avril 2012 - 01:05 .

[blurbrbrb]

 Delightfully enough, Wasteland 1 is now available via your browser.

I enjoyed the review; I'm not entirely sure the fact that it was published on a site whose members prefer an older style of game to the preoccupations of newer efforts, the idea that reviewers are apparently required to deal in detail with the (in my opinion very poorly-realised) themes of a game that also happen to be themes in works of classic literature before they are to be considered an authority on the subject (?), or the citing of Rimbaud, Milton, the Qu'ran, Nietzsche, Ezra Pound, Edward Casaubon, etc, etc, do anything to effectively discredit it.

The fact that it's mainly devoted to finding holes in the logic of the plot and setting doesn't necessarily make it unfair or 'nitpicking', either. There seems to be a popular and quite silly position amongst gamers which goes 'Well, I was able to ignore those flaws and loved the game as a result; what a pity you forced yourself to notice them!' - it's relativism stretched to breaking point, where an individual that acknowledges but deliberately ignores a work's failings can dismiss an individual that actually bothers to examine them. Some of those flaws are whopping, quite apart from the game's endings, and actually, I hadn't seen a few of them, like the Reapers' battle plan, being properly discussed in other articles on the subject.

Most importantly, the reviewer never came across to me as if he was ranting for the mere sake of ranting, nor cheaply recycling popular complaints - he'd clearly put a good bit of personal thought into his conclusions, negative as they were. (One or two language slips, if I'm pedantic, but that'd just be nitpicking, right?). I was also overjoyed to learn the word  'Heinleining' :happy:.

Modifié par blurbrbrb, 24 avril 2012 - 02:36 .

[Tirigon]

Agree with a lot of it.

But bashing Kirrahe's "HOLD THE LINE" as "bullsh!t" is unforgiveable. It only became so when some forumites disgraced Kirrahe by adapting it as their slogan.

[Amioran]

CrustyBot wrote...
But does it really matter either way? I mean, you touch constantly on the issue of Chaos v Order as well as the plausibility of the Starchild, but the article doesn't address (or dispute) either.

And that's the point. You cannot focus on the narrative and judge the same without addressing the theme behind. It would be like trying to judge, for example, American Psycho of Ellis without considering at all the existential theme (in synthesis)in the background or judging Alastor the Spirit of the Solitude of Swinburne without considering the nihilist theme (and/or the esoteric one) in the same.

What the article focuses on is the details and tries to illustrate why the writing in Mass Effect 3 is bad (and good, depending on the section - it's not all negative) from a narrative perspective and a game perspective (C&C) using specific examples.

But you cannot do that until you don't consider all the context. That's faulty judgement because you pretend to give an objective analisys on a thing you don't know in full (with all the context). You cannot consider objectively the why and the "good/bad" in it until you don't have the complete picture. It would be like pretending to judge a book based only on a chapter of the same.

I'm sure that if you would read a review of a book that gives a judgment on the same based only on the first chapter (for example) you would instantly recognize the idiocy of the thing. Judging the narrative of a medium without knowing/considering the theme it's the exact same thing (even worse in reality, because from a chapter you can anyway extrapolate some technical aspects that will probably be the same in all the book, but without the context you cannot do this).

Modifié par Amioran, 24 avril 2012 - 02:45 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

I just want to ask this question: in regards to theme, do you believe that this was intentional by BioWare? Or merely an accident since a) they didn't plan out the trilogy to the extent of covering most major details and had a vastly different ending part way through development according to the leaks.

In either case, I think you're reading into something that BioWare had never intended.

Also, have you given consideration to the self determination theme I threw out earlier? Surely it's just as valid as the Order v Chaos theme, and by doing so, would create a different context for an examination of the narrative, no?

Modifié par CrustyBot, 24 avril 2012 - 03:10 .

[Getorex]

Amioran wrote...

CrustyBot wrote...
But does it really matter either way? I mean, you touch constantly on the issue of Chaos v Order as well as the plausibility of the Starchild, but the article doesn't address (or dispute) either.

And that's the point. You cannot focus on the narrative and judge the same without addressing the theme behind. It would be like trying to judge, for example, American Psycho of Ellis without considering at all the existential theme (in synthesis)in the background or judging Alastor the Spirit of the Solitude of Swinburne without considering the nihilist theme (and/or the esoteric one) in the same.

What the article focuses on is the details and tries to illustrate why the writing in Mass Effect 3 is bad (and good, depending on the section - it's not all negative) from a narrative perspective and a game perspective (C&C) using specific examples.

But you cannot do that until you don't consider all the context. That's faulty judgement because you pretend to give an objective analisys on a thing you don't know in full (with all the context). You cannot consider objectively the why and the "good/bad" in it until you don't have the complete picture. It would be like pretending to judge a book based only on a chapter of the same.

I'm sure that if you would read a review of a book that gives a judgment on the same based only on the first chapter (for example) you would instantly recognize the idiocy of the thing. Judging the narrative of a medium without knowing/considering the theme it's the exact same thing (even worse in reality, because from a chapter you can anyway extrapolate some technical aspects that will probably be the same in all the book, but without the context you cannot do this).

There is no "narrrative".  Accept this and the blinders come off and you see it for what it is: a B-movie in a game skin.  Plain and simple.  QUIT READING TOO MUCH INTO THE DAMN GAME!  Sheesh.  Get a life.  There is no "there" there.  No narrative, no over-arching story, no coherence, no logic beyond toothpick logic (it will break down with the slightest intellectual pressure).  By Cthulhu there is NO great philosphy in this game, nothing but the barest sprinkling of the "human condition" in the game.  It is multiple plot holes covered by heavy syrup and a prestidigitator's distraction technique to avert your gaze from what is REALLY there...nothing.  My Cthulhu you are full of...something...something brownish, extremely smelly, and chock full of bacteria.