56 réponses à ce sujet

[Pinkflamingo22]

ME3 imo is very disappointing and did not met its goals in regards to player choice.
Regardless of your decision in ME1 there is a Rahni queen in 3.
Despite Mordin dying in ME2 and destroying Maleons information, shephard can still cure the genophage, in the eact same way as he could had mordin and the data been saved.

These are just two examples of parts of the game where player choice was irrelevant. Do you think these choices of story were made out of laziness or lack of caring? Or do you think it was the big hand of EA? Do you care?

[Unholyknight800]

Trying to create a trilogy of games where player choices affect the next games was an ambitious undertaking that quite frankly they failed to deliver.

[Dendio1]

StElmo wrote...

When I finished ME3 I was pretty satisfied with 99% of the game, apart from the ending, of course, which wasn't good.

But every time I go onto the forums to see if there is news or opinions or theories about this ending, I keep seeing very valid criticisms of the game come to light, outside the ending.

This is making me more and more unsatisfied with the game, as I begin to compare it to the previous titles as single, rich experiences.

Some things I never would have noticed, if I had gotten a satisfying, high quality, logically written ending:

- Lack of nuetral dialogue options
- Absurd amount of fetch quests
- No really compelling side missions
- Auto-dialogue
- Terrible Prioroty : Earth mission
- Didn't "Take earth back"
- Psuedo-character replacements for deceased characters.
- Lack of choice impacts <-----------------------
- two fairly brown, uninspiring, planets as main mission centres. (Tuchunka and Rannoch)
- only about 20 hours of real action oriented gameplay
- Severe lack of hub worlds, only 1 - citdael.
- Insanity "difficulty" not insane.
- BORING planet scanning
- Glitchy conversations.

Feel free to add more things you happened to notice only after you started hanging out on BSN for news and discussion after the ending.

Would not have noticed or cared if the ending delivered

Modifié par Dendio1, 27 avril 2012 - 02:58 .

[Edolix]

It's because BioWare doesn't want new players to miss out on any content whatsoever. Which is why there is a replacement Rachni Queen, a replacement Mordin, a replacement Council, a replacement Legion, a replacement...

I'll stop. Needless to say I hate this.

[SetecAstronomy]

There were consequences to most choices, they just were not to your satisfaction.

[CHARK19]

I don't know. I saved the Rachni queen in ME1, and then I chose to leave her in ME3. My brother chose to save her (I think) and that meant his Grunt would have died...but in his story, Grunt survived?! Is that possible?
Also, your ems score allowed you to have the "Breath of Hope" scene, which was nice but conflicting, seeing how Bioware stated, "This is the end of Shepard's story".

[Dendio1]

SetecAstronomy wrote...

There were consequences to most choices, they just were not to your satisfaction.

Kelly took a slug between the eyes because I never imagined cerberus would have the temerity to attack the citadel

[Electavire]

Dendio1 wrote...

StElmo wrote...

When I finished ME3 I was pretty satisfied with 99% of the game, apart from the ending, of course, which wasn't good.

But every time I go onto the forums to see if there is news or opinions or theories about this ending, I keep seeing very valid criticisms of the game come to light, outside the ending.

This is making me more and more unsatisfied with the game, as I begin to compare it to the previous titles as single, rich experiences.

Some things I never would have noticed, if I had gotten a satisfying, high quality, logically written ending:

- Lack of nuetral dialogue options
- Absurd amount of fetch quests
- No really compelling side missions
- Auto-dialogue
- Terrible Prioroty : Earth mission
- Didn't "Take earth back"
- Psuedo-character replacements for deceased characters.
- Lack of choice impacts <-----------------------
- two fairly brown, uninspiring, planets as main mission centres. (Tuchunka and Rannoch)
- only about 20 hours of real action oriented gameplay
- Severe lack of hub worlds, only 1 - citdael.
- Insanity "difficulty" not insane.
- BORING planet scanning
- Glitchy conversations.

Feel free to add more things you happened to notice only after you started hanging out on BSN for news and discussion after the ending.

Would not have noticed or cared if the ending delivered

This. I could have overlooked everything if not for the endings.

[sAxMoNkI]

The choices that lead to the decisions you mention, while leading to the same result, play out differently due to the circumstances they occur under.

For example, while the Genophage can be cured without Maelon's data and Wreav can be in charge (instead of Mordin and Wrex), the ramifications of this are vast. Without the leadership of Wrex and Eve the Krogan will expand again and trigger a repeat of the Krogan rebellions.

I grant you immediate differences aren't apparent but its the way these end results play out that is what differentiates them.

Its not a lack of care from Bioware its more of an over-willingness to give new players as much of a chance as those who have played the trilogy in full. the extent to which this happened in ME3 was a mistake in my eyes, but I digress.

I would be more inclined to point out the streamlining of the dialogue system itself as an example of choice being taken away.

[BobbyDylan]

CHARK19 wrote...

I don't know. I saved the Rachni queen in ME1, and then I chose to leave her in ME3. My brother chose to save her (I think) and that meant his Grunt would have died...but in his story, Grunt survived?! Is that possible?
".

For a time, but He'll die along with everyone else when the Relays go Nova.

[xsdob]

My choices matter because ever since I played mass effect 1 I knew that my choices do not affect the major plot points but all the little things between. These games are a choose your own adventure story and Im surprised it took this long for people to realize this.

[VendettaI154]

Edolix wrote...

It's because BioWare doesn't want new players to miss out on any content whatsoever. Which is why there is a replacement Rachni Queen, a replacement Mordin, a replacement Council, a replacement Legion, a replacement...

I'll stop. Needless to say I hate this.

Agreed. BioWare clearly pandered to new players to much. No Casey, Mass Effect 3 is not a great place to jump into the trilogy. IT'S THE FRACKING END OF THE TRILOGY.

[CHARK19]

BobbyDylan wrote...

CHARK19 wrote...

I don't know. I saved the Rachni queen in ME1, and then I chose to leave her in ME3. My brother chose to save her (I think) and that meant his Grunt would have died...but in his story, Grunt survived?! Is that possible?
".

For a time, but He'll die along with everyone else when the Relays go Nova.

But he did survive, right? It doesn't matter which you choose between the queen and Grunt, Grunt survives either way?!?! I COULD HAVE SAVED BOTH?

[Pinkflamingo22]

sAxMoNkI wrote...

The choices that lead to the decisions you mention, while leading to the same result, play out differently due to the circumstances they occur under.

For example, while the Genophage can be cured without Maelon's data and Wreav can be in charge (instead of Mordin and Wrex), the ramifications of this are vast. Without the leadership of Wrex and Eve the Krogan will expand again and trigger a repeat of the Krogan rebellions.

I grant you immediate differences aren't apparent but its the way these end results play out that is what differentiates them.

Its not a lack of care from Bioware its more of an over-willingness to give new players as much of a chance as those who have played the trilogy in full. the extent to which this happened in ME3 was a mistake in my eyes, but I digress.

I would be more inclined to point out the streamlining of the dialogue system itself as an example of choice being taken away.

What end results? I didn't see any different end results for any choices. The point of ME3 was to see the outcomes of our choices. There are none, you can't even lose! I should be able to lose and not defeat the reapers, didn't we all assume that? I do agree with your final comment about dialog.

[Dendio1]

VendettaI154 wrote...

Edolix wrote...

It's because BioWare doesn't want new players to miss out on any content whatsoever. Which is why there is a replacement Rachni Queen, a replacement Mordin, a replacement Council, a replacement Legion, a replacement...

I'll stop. Needless to say I hate this.

Agreed. BioWare clearly pandered to new players to much. No Casey, Mass Effect 3 is not a great place to jump into the trilogy. IT'S THE FRACKING END OF THE TRILOGY.

So you rather they just chop the game up, so that people who killed off characters miss out on entire arcs? Its either that or what we got, because they arent adding alternate arcs for past choices.

[The Angry One]

Dendio1 wrote...

VendettaI154 wrote...

Edolix wrote...

It's because BioWare doesn't want new players to miss out on any content whatsoever. Which is why there is a replacement Rachni Queen, a replacement Mordin, a replacement Council, a replacement Legion, a replacement...

I'll stop. Needless to say I hate this.

Agreed. BioWare clearly pandered to new players to much. No Casey, Mass Effect 3 is not a great place to jump into the trilogy. IT'S THE FRACKING END OF THE TRILOGY.

So you rather they just chop the game up, so that people who killed off characters miss out on entire arcs? Its either that or what we got, because they arent adding alternate arcs for past choices.

Why shouldn't they? Maybe they could divert resources used to voice 20 minutes of Blasto and the Codex, which are nice but unecesarry and do alternate arcs.
They don't have to do it for everything, but there's no excuse for the laziness of what they did with the Rachni.

[ahandsomeshark]

so anyone with programming/development experience feel free to respond cause I'm generally curious. Is it impossible to do or just hard to do? Cause I've seen a ton of people saying that they couldn't live up to their promises because of how lofty that explanation seems weird to me because it's not like the people at bioware didn't know what programming entailed. So is it likely that it was more of a choice because of time/resources or because it would take ten years of development and 2 new generations of consoles to actually implement (hyperbole here)?

[nitefyre410]

Dendio1 wrote...

VendettaI154 wrote...

Edolix wrote...

It's because BioWare doesn't want new players to miss out on any content whatsoever. Which is why there is a replacement Rachni Queen, a replacement Mordin, a replacement Council, a replacement Legion, a replacement...

I'll stop. Needless to say I hate this.

Agreed. BioWare clearly pandered to new players to much. No Casey, Mass Effect 3 is not a great place to jump into the trilogy. IT'S THE FRACKING END OF THE TRILOGY.

So you rather they just chop the game up, so that people who killed off characters miss out on entire arcs? Its either that or what we got, because they arent adding alternate arcs for past choices.

 

Yep I would...

You killed that  Character - you miss out on that arc of the story...   consequence.  Go back play the games again and  keep that character alive. 

[ahandsomeshark]

And people always bring up the Tuchanka/genophage story line as proof choices do matter but I think basically EVERYONE on this forum agrees that the Tuchanka story-line was everything we wanted and expected it to be. So yes Tuchanka delivered on the promises, that's why you don't see anyone complaining about Tuchanka. It's the rest of the game that was lacking in consequences and outcomes for choices.

[sAxMoNkI]

Pinkflamingo22 wrote...

sAxMoNkI wrote...

The choices that lead to the decisions you mention, while leading to the same result, play out differently due to the circumstances they occur under.

For example, while the Genophage can be cured without Maelon's data and Wreav can be in charge (instead of Mordin and Wrex), the ramifications of this are vast. Without the leadership of Wrex and Eve the Krogan will expand again and trigger a repeat of the Krogan rebellions.

I grant you immediate differences aren't apparent but its the way these end results play out that is what differentiates them.

Its not a lack of care from Bioware its more of an over-willingness to give new players as much of a chance as those who have played the trilogy in full. the extent to which this happened in ME3 was a mistake in my eyes, but I digress.

I would be more inclined to point out the streamlining of the dialogue system itself as an example of choice being taken away.

What end results? I didn't see any different end results for any choices. The point of ME3 was to see the outcomes of our choices. There are none, you can't even lose! I should be able to lose and not defeat the reapers, didn't we all assume that? I do agree with your final comment about dialog.

I meant in the sense of what is implied for the future rather than what is directly observed on screen.
Short term: Both result in cured Krogan
Long term: One series of events results in war, one series of events results in a stable and arguably improved Krogan people.

[ahandsomeshark]

Dendio1 wrote...

VendettaI154 wrote...

Edolix wrote...

It's because BioWare doesn't want new players to miss out on any content whatsoever. Which is why there is a replacement Rachni Queen, a replacement Mordin, a replacement Council, a replacement Legion, a replacement...

I'll stop. Needless to say I hate this.

Agreed. BioWare clearly pandered to new players to much. No Casey, Mass Effect 3 is not a great place to jump into the trilogy. IT'S THE FRACKING END OF THE TRILOGY.

So you rather they just chop the game up, so that people who killed off characters miss out on entire arcs? Its either that or what we got, because they arent adding alternate arcs for past choices.

yes, that's why so many of us have multiple shepards/playthroughs. As it is I have no real interest in playing through my other shepard's because the games are too similar despite all the different choices I made.

And why wouldn't they have added alternate arcs for past choices? Isn't that exactly what they promised? And it's not like they would have had to have drastically different arcs, they did it pretty perfectly with Tuchanka. I think most of us would have been happy with a few different side missions here and there based on your choices. Or at least not having them ENTIRELY retconned out.

[sAxMoNkI]

nitefyre410 wrote...

Yep I would...

You killed that  Character - you miss out on that arc of the story...   consequence.  Go back play the games again and  keep that character alive. 

Man's got a point. Though in terms of real world business practise they were smart to appeal to as wide a market as possible. Sad truth is the potential for increased revenue usually trumps preferable design choices.

Modifié par sAxMoNkI, 27 avril 2012 - 03:26 .

[ahandsomeshark]

sAxMoNkI wrote...

Pinkflamingo22 wrote...

sAxMoNkI wrote...

The choices that lead to the decisions you mention, while leading to the same result, play out differently due to the circumstances they occur under.

For example, while the Genophage can be cured without Maelon's data and Wreav can be in charge (instead of Mordin and Wrex), the ramifications of this are vast. Without the leadership of Wrex and Eve the Krogan will expand again and trigger a repeat of the Krogan rebellions.

I grant you immediate differences aren't apparent but its the way these end results play out that is what differentiates them.

Its not a lack of care from Bioware its more of an over-willingness to give new players as much of a chance as those who have played the trilogy in full. the extent to which this happened in ME3 was a mistake in my eyes, but I digress.

I would be more inclined to point out the streamlining of the dialogue system itself as an example of choice being taken away.

What end results? I didn't see any different end results for any choices. The point of ME3 was to see the outcomes of our choices. There are none, you can't even lose! I should be able to lose and not defeat the reapers, didn't we all assume that? I do agree with your final comment about dialog.

I meant in the sense of what is implied for the future rather than what is directly observed on screen.
Short term: Both result in cured Krogan
Long term: One series of events results in war, one series of events results in a stable and arguably improved Krogan people.

but they don't even show us that?

If I wanted to make up my own outcomes I could do that for free. When I buy a game I don't expect to have to assume things turn out one way or another. I mean why does one result in war, there's tons of other variables I could think of that would lead to tons of other outcomes.

[Delta_V2]

I was satisfied with how your choices affected the Genophage and Rannoch arcs. Your actions regarding Wrex, Mordin, and Maelon's data all affected how the genophage story played out. These arcs gave me hope that we would see this level of impact in the main arc. But that never happened. Priority: Earth was where all of your previous choices should have come together, but it failed horribly.

Oh, and the replacement for the Rachni Queen was an absolutely lazy cop-out. Not to mention Udina replacing Anderson as the human councilor without a single word about it in the game. I know it happened in one of the books, but there is no excuse for it to not being mentioned in the game.

[grey_wind]

The choices were ridiculously superficial. I feel that BioWare simply did not want to punish players for making bad choices in previous games because they thought it might hurt them (in the short term at least), so instead they made every choice meaningless.