235 réponses à ce sujet

[Armass81]

Let me remind you. A bad game is something like Mindjack, Superman 64 or Daikatana. ME3 cant be called a bad game by any stretch of an imagination, it is actually pretty decent. Sure it has its problems and isnt polished and there is alot of a wasted potential, but dont you dare call it a bad game. It doesnt deserve it. Neither does DA2. Dont get too zealous people in throwing labels like this around.

Devs did a decent job with the game, they could have done better yes, but still they deserve our thanks for their efforts. So thank you Bioware for ME3, on behalf of myself at least.

[Leonardo the Magnificent]

While it's not necessarily a bad game, it is by all means mediocre and when you consider the role it was supposed to play and the potential leading up to it, it can be called indeed a bad game in comparison to what it should've been. And in some parts it really was poorly done.

[Theta Thetis]

The game itself was magnificent, the ending... not so much...

[DJBare]

It is what it is for a triple A title.

[grey_wind]

Objectively speaking, it's not a bad game at all. Compared to what it was supposed to be though, it really comes across as underwhelming.

Modifié par grey_wind, 26 avril 2012 - 11:18 .

[Creepter]

Are people really screaming that it's bad?
Personally I mostly see people calling it a mediocre game with some great small parts and a **** ending. And I can't argue against that.

To me the bigger sin is the mediocre part.
Because it's ****ing Mass Effect. And that should never be mediocre.

But straight out bad? Ehh... not really.

[DevilBeast]

Wauv, Armass, pretty ballsy of you to post a thread like this considering how quick people usually shoot down those who don´t think ME3 was a bad game.

Anyway, as for your statement: I agree with you completely.

[arial]

most of the people who are calling it a bad game are to young to remember games like Superman 64

[Deathstroke123]

Leonardo the Magnificent wrote...

While it's not necessarily a bad game, it is by all means mediocre and when you consider the role it was supposed to play and the potential leading up to it, it can be called indeed a bad game in comparison to what it should've been. And in some parts it really was poorly done.

Mediocre? I wanna know what kind of games you play on a regular basis to comparitively call this one mediocre. I must be missing out big time.

[Velocithon]

grey_wind wrote...

Objectively speaking, it's not a bad game at all. Compared to what it was supposed to be though, it really comes across as underwhelming.

This ^^^

[King of the Evil Crabs]

It is a brilliant game mostly.

Just an underwhelming conclusion to a brilliant series.

[RevenantWolf]

Main storyline minus ending- 10/10
Side missions- 5/10
scanning fetch quests- 2/10
War asset system- 1/10
Ending- 0/10

conclusion- bad game

[Star fury]

ME3 is average.

1) Graphics is bad. We were promised HD textures by the way.
2) Combat is still average.
3) Interface became worse, especially journal.
4) Story. Nuff said. Story and NPC made first two games great.

[s17tabris]

It's not bad. It's an ok game.

[FFHAuthor]

It comes down to the fact that on it's own, ME3 is a decent game. The mechanics are acceptable, the story is acceptable, everything rates as acceptable. But the thing is that the botched ending makes you examine the aspects of the game in a less courteous light. How many times have we looked at a game and overlooked bad mechanics, bad story or mediocre issues because the rest of the game was great? The ending was so botched that you look back on all the mediocre things and start picking them apart.

That, and you can't just say ME3 should be judged on it's own. It's a third part of a trilogy, and it's a part of the trilogy. Judge ME3 on it's own, but that's a cop out. You need to judge a story based upon the entire story, not just one segment on it's own.

[SilencedScream]

It was mediocre.
When I first played through it, I thought it was excellent aside from the ending.
As I slowly trudge through a second playthrough (which I started weeks ago and still haven't managed to complete), I'm finding more and more flaws.

Ending or no ending, it's mediocre.
For an ending to Shepard's story, it's outright pathetic.

[Deathstroke123]

People's reaction to the game all comes down to one thing, and that's how much they allowed themselves to get hyped for it. Too many people picked it up expecting it to be the messiah of video game storytelling, to usher us to a promised land of milk and honey. Inevitably, these people will be disappointed, and this pattern will continue for the next big title game. (See: SWTOR and Guild Wars 2 <- calling this one.)

I'm just as big a fan as anybody else of the series, but my expectations were more realistic. As such, the game delivers.

Moral of the story: Stop getting caught up in the hype machine.

[daecath]

It's all about expectations. You don't expect much from a superhero game. Up until Batman Arkham Asylum, they were all crap (Batman Begins was ok, but not great). So Superman 64 being bad wasn't a shock. It's like jumping off the bottom step, or tripping over a rock.

ME3 is a good game that could have been great. The drastic loss in quality between 2 and 3 is sharp. Two had its flaws, but 3 single-handedly ruined the franchise in 10 minutes. That's a major accomplishment. And we expected better from BioWare, especially based on the promises and the fact that it was the last in the series. So sure, it might be quality, but the fall is much farther than a game that we didn't have any expectations for.

[Kajan451]

Armass81 wrote...

Let me remind you. A bad game is something like Mindjack, Superman 64 or Daikatana. ME3 cant be called a bad game by any stretch of an imagination

Played all of them and ME3 is a bad game, it has the worst ending i have seen in 2 decades of video gaming and i've seen alot of bad endings.

ME3's whole purpose, in my opinion, is to deliever the story.. and they screwed that up royally. ME isn't a game i play for the gameplay. There are better games for that. I play it for the atmosphere and the story it told.

I understand how people can like the game, if they don't care as much about the story, but just like Movies i don't watch/play them for their explosions or SFX.. i consume them for their stories they tell.

And if i leave the story aside, all thats left is some pretty boring Tactical Shooter. There is no real need for tactics in this game. ME2 at least had that down. ME2 made me change my approach, try to flank the enemy and such, even in normal. ME3 basically is straight forward, no need to play tactics.

It was a good solid experiance until the end. But thats like saying "The plane flew just fine, until it crashed into the towers".

There are games with bad mechanic, alot of them. But thats also the reason they ain't as bad as ME3. With a bad game from the start i don't care. I don't get invested in the game at all. I might play it, but thats about it. ME3 on the other hand was a good game, i got invested, i cared for the story.. and then they trainwrecked it. And that makes it stand out as the worst game in my personal videogame history. It made me care about the game before they wrecked it.

[ShepnTali]

There are many better games with less flaws, but it's not a bad game.

[Velocithon]

Deathstroke123 wrote...

People's reaction to the game all comes down to one thing, and that's how much they allowed themselves to get hyped for it. Too many people picked it up expecting it to be the messiah of video game storytelling, to usher us to a promised land of milk and honey. Inevitably, these people will be disappointed, and this pattern will continue for the next big title game. (See: SWTOR and Guild Wars 2 <- calling this one.)

I'm just as big a fan as anybody else of the series, but my expectations were more realistic. As such, the game delivers.

Moral of the story: Stop getting caught up in the hype machine.

What? You make no sense. Hype has nothing to do with this.

The entire trilogy was buildig up and led us down the path where we expected numerous things to be in the finale, and add to it that the devs also made it sound like those things would be in the game.

And none of it was. And certain aspects of the game were worse than before.

[Alamar2078]

@OP: I think ME3 can be legitamately called either a great game or a bad game and I wouldn't blink an eye.

[IMHO] What matters is the standards to which you measure what makes a game "good" or "bad". I think what you should be arguing more specifically are what standards should be adopted when determining if a game is good or bad. [Specifically with ME3]

For me if playing a game ruins the entire franchise for me [and possibly hundreds of thousands of other people] ; causes me not to even want to play a video game for 6 weeks afterward ; etc. then by our own personal standards then it would be silly not to call such a game "bad".

On the other hand I find it legit that someone else may have a totally different set of standards by which they measure the game that sound reasonable on paper. By this "reasonable" standard a reasonably objective review could determine that the same game I think is horrid is perfectly fine as is.

**************************************

Summary: By your standards ME3 is in no way a bad game. By my personal standards it is. The difference lies in the standards applied. Note: It's hard to say one set of standards is "right" for everyone and another is "wrong" for everyone.

YMMV.

[Zardoc]

Deathstroke123 wrote...

Leonardo the Magnificent wrote...

While it's not necessarily a bad game, it is by all means mediocre and when you consider the role it was supposed to play and the potential leading up to it, it can be called indeed a bad game in comparison to what it should've been. And in some parts it really was poorly done.

Mediocre? I wanna know what kind of games you play on a regular basis to comparitively call this one mediocre. I must be missing out big time.

Mass Effect 1
Mass Effect 2
Dragon Age: Origins.

[Bad King]

Not bad but mediocre. It's still fairly enjoyable but it suffers from too many flaws to be great. If BioWare had been given 6-12 months more dev time it probably would have been very good.

[Alamar2078]

Deathstroke123 wrote...

Moral of the story: Stop getting caught up in the hype machine.

QFT