51 réponses à ce sujet

[Nefla]

       I expected the little dinky side missions to be short, but I feel like even the main missions were too short. It was kind of weird for me that almost every main mission was either short on its own (Thessia, Sur Kesh) or broken up into multiple very small missions that weren't that well connected. (Tuchanka, Rannoch) I haven't seen anyone mention this, but it's something that has especially been bothering me on additional playthroughs.  Did anyone else feel this way, or am I just being picky?

**edit to add**

       I miss the long multipart main missions of ME1 where there were safe zones, conversations, cutscenes, puzzles, decisions, different areas, characters you could interact with along the way, side missions you could do while within the main mission, etc...(and this is not nostalgia tunnel vision, the last time I beat ME1 was 2 weeks ago ) ME2 quests were a lot shorter but still had a lot of stuff that I liked and in both ME1 and ME2 especially there were usually parts where your squad members would comment on what you were doing or saying. In ME2 it happened in pretty much every mission and usually multiple times. I miss that, it made me feel less alone. Less like I was playing a game and more like I was on a team.
       Thane's recruitment for instance had many parts where you could find and talk to different groups of Salarian workers and rescue them or be an assmunch, taunt Nassana over the radio (and when you meet, she remembers you if you did her quest in ME1  ) the different parts of the building and the bridge are pretty varied, and you get to have a pretty good dialogue with Thane at the end (not to mention seeing his awesomeness as he assasinates) so there were little things like that throughout the mission.

In ME3 it all feels like :
1) Shuttle ride, explain the mission, maybe short squad comment. No safezone, no intel gathering, no chance to investigate 
2) Run through the small level and shoot shoot shoot. Not much variety within the level.  No characters to interact with or conversations, puzzles or choices
3) Get to the end, small cutscene, good job, next.



The exceptions to this in my opinion are: final/main Tuchanka mission and Geth collective (because it's so different, gives you more depth of information and sympathy for the Geth, and the only non-combat mission)

Modifié par Nefla, 30 avril 2012 - 06:31 .

[KyuzoS7]

thessia was way to short.

[Peregrin25]

A few of the missions did seem a tad short. Like poster above said. Priority: Thessia could and should have been a bit longer. I also think Priority: Rannoch could have been longer as well as Priority: Earth. That needed to be about 25-30 minutes of game play longer imo.

Side missions and N7 missions are always fairly quick and that is to be considered fine, but yeah... Only mission I didn't think had enough umph to it and lacked alot was Priority: Earth. Other were short and could have been longer but I was satisfied by the story out come of those missions.

[feliciano2040]

WHAT IS THIS ?! A LEGITIMATE COMPLAINT ?!!

While I really loved Mass Effect 3, mission design is a little sub-standard for my taste, there were some of those missions in Mass Effect 2, like Haetstrom, Purgatory and Korlus, but I wouldn't think there would be so many of those in Mass Effect 3, most of those involved the former squadmates.

Still, when the game gets to Tuchanka, it doesn't stop in it's awesomeness.

[Sanunes]

Peregrin25 wrote...

A few of the missions did seem a tad short. Like poster above said. Priority: Thessia could and should have been a bit longer. I also think Priority: Rannoch could have been longer as well as Priority: Earth. That needed to be about 25-30 minutes of game play longer imo.

Side missions and N7 missions are always fairly quick and that is to be considered fine, but yeah... Only mission I didn't think had enough umph to it and lacked alot was Priority: Earth. Other were short and could have been longer but I was satisfied by the story out come of those missions.

This is how I feel.

I look at the clustered missions on Tuchanka and the Quarian Fleet to be a single mission, so the priority missions that felt short to me were Thessia and Earth and Earth had additional problems with being just a Horde mode fight.

[The Master Chief]

I'm sure if the developers didn't have a multiplayer facet to worry about during the creation of the game, they could have paid much more attention to single player.

Not that I'm complaining about the multiplayer. I think it's great and I'm glad they included it, but they just didn't have enough time to make the single player story in Mass Effect 3 live up to its predecessors. I expected the Earth mission to be the longest in the entire game and it turned out to be almost the total opposite.

[Peregrin25]

Sanunes wrote...

Peregrin25 wrote...

A few of the missions did seem a tad short. Like poster above said. Priority: Thessia could and should have been a bit longer. I also think Priority: Rannoch could have been longer as well as Priority: Earth. That needed to be about 25-30 minutes of game play longer imo.

Side missions and N7 missions are always fairly quick and that is to be considered fine, but yeah... Only mission I didn't think had enough umph to it and lacked alot was Priority: Earth. Other were short and could have been longer but I was satisfied by the story out come of those missions.

This is how I feel.

I look at the clustered missions on Tuchanka and the Quarian Fleet to be a single mission, so the priority missions that felt short to me were Thessia and Earth and Earth had additional problems with being just a Horde mode fight.

Asside from Priority: Earth the missions are very story driven so even if they did seem a tad short the story makes up for it. Especially Thessia and Tuchanka. Those were few of my favorite tear jerker moments in ME3

[Artemis_Entrari]

KyuzoS7 wrote...

thessia was way to short.

Thessia would have been awesome if we'd gotten to see more of it.  Unfortunately, the only part of it we got to see was the plot driven part so that we could get our butts kicked in cinematics (even if we kicked butt in the actual fight).

[Peregrin25]

The Master Chief wrote...

I'm sure if the developers didn't have a multiplayer facet to worry about during the creation of the game, they could have paid much more attention to single player.

Not that I'm complaining about the multiplayer. I think it's great and I'm glad they included it, but they just didn't have enough time to make the single player story in Mass Effect 3 live up to its predecessors. I expected the Earth mission to be the longest in the entire game and it turned out to be almost the total opposite.

I can accept people enjoying mp game play, but in all honesty I think online multiplayer on console games does not belong in a BioWare title, regardless of the action aspect of the game. Can't even really blame BioWare for that either. I could probably guarantee it was all EA's doing making them add multiplayer in to appease the Gears of War and Call of Duty fan base. If there was no mp in ME3 the single player would have been immaculate.

[Nefla]

Sanunes wrote...
I look at the clustered missions on Tuchanka and the Quarian Fleet to be a single mission, so the priority missions that felt short to me were Thessia and Earth and Earth had additional problems with being just a Horde mode fight.

I saw it that way at first, but since you can skip a lot of the quests involved, and since those smaller quests don't entirely flow smoothly together I was a bit disappointed.

Modifié par Nefla, 30 avril 2012 - 06:28 .

[Teamsleeper]

the missions were really short , all of them .

[Sanunes]

Peregrin25 wrote...

snip

Asside from Priority: Earth the missions are very story driven so even if they did seem a tad short the story makes up for it. Especially Thessia and Tuchanka. Those were few of my favorite tear jerker moments in ME3

I agree, the only mission missing story is Earth.  I just would have liked to have had more missions on Thessia even if it was like the clustered missions on Tuchanka and the Quarian Fleet.

[dr888]

Hi, same feeling here, especially Rannoch and Thessia were way too short (even If You consider Geth Fighter base and saving admiral a part of Rannoch mission). They had such a potential.Geth misssions used to be my favourite in ME2,; and what about Geth withoud shields? They used to be engagaing enemies, now thanks to sabotage working through shields it is a breeze.... The overall game length is quite OK for mee though, and side missions are really nice.I hope we will cross Getha gain, maybe on Hydra map DLC ?

[Fixers0]

None of the main plot mission post Mass Effect 1 had the quality of Missions such as Noveria or Virmire.

[res27772]

Yeah, I think most of the missions, both "Priority" and otherwise, were too short - which is one reason why I say ME3 is more of a shooter than a RPG.

[SalsaDMA]

I asume it's because of the limitations of hardware that are several years old.

[Allen Spellwaver]

res27772 wrote...

Yeah, I think most of the missions, both "Priority" and otherwise, were too short - which is one reason why I say ME3 is more of a shooter than a RPG.

Does length of missions has anything to do with game genres?
Some missions in ME2 were short,too.Its stage design is worse than those in ME3 either.

Modifié par Allen Spellwaver, 30 avril 2012 - 10:41 .

[Ghostfc3s]

Missions can always be longer in my book, more is better. However smoother and faster game play can make missions feel shorter too, remember we can sprint forever now. We had to walk through ME1 and 2. I wanted post Reaper but kicking missions where we drove them off Earth but there is still a galactic war going on everywhere now.

Reapers can indoctrinate with very small amounts of tech and still try and re-control and rebuild, even with wrecked ships (and there will be thousands of them) they can still influence and control organic life.

[res27772]

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

res27772 wrote...

Yeah, I think most of the missions, both "Priority" and otherwise, were too short - which is one reason why I say ME3 is more of a shooter than a RPG.

Does length of missions has anything to do with game genres?
Some missions in ME2 were short,too.Its stage design is worse than those in ME3 either.

Of course not, and I'm not going to disagree that some missions in ME2 were short as well, because they were - though most of the 'important' ones weren't.  All I'm saying is that ME3 plays more like a shooter - which I guess is almost to be expected since it's essentially a war game... but still, I miss the RPG feel of 1 & 2.

[AlanC9]

RPG = long missions?

[Sebbe1337o]

Nefla wrote...

In ME3 it all feels like :
1) Shuttle ride, explain the mission, maybe short squad comment. No safezone, no intel gathering, no chance to investigate 
2) Run through the small level and shoot shoot shoot. Not much variety within the level.  No characters to interact with or conversations, puzzles or choices
3) Get to the end, small cutscene, good job, next.

I agree, this is the way of almost all missions. It fits very well in some missions, and in others it would be nice to have a safe zone before going out.

Though, we do have those as well.

[res27772]

AlanC9 wrote...

RPG = long missions?

Not necessarily, but for me they are a factor in making a RPG... I'm sure people disagree, and that's fine.

[dunstan1993]

Besides Thessia being a bit short and all the damn fetch quests (I hate them more than DA2's recycled dungeons), I thought all the missions were fantastic.

I'm sorry to bring this up for the millionth time, but the only real let down for me was the ending.

[Gibb_Shepard]

each mission was about as short as a recruitment mission in ME2. The difference is that there were double the amount in ME2.