321 réponses à ce sujet

[Father Alvito]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

You're quite the condescending one, aren't you?

When people waste my time by ignoring what I say when crafting a response?  You bet.  Don't want me to be rude?  Don't BE rude.

FatalX7.0 wrote...

And I'm not sure what you mean when you say that bolded sentence.

You say that I'm correct that the game is shorter. I have to address that somehow?

Then you say that the result of the game being smaller is probably due to it being rushed out. I'm not sure how, or even why, I need to address that.

What I mean is that in an actual conversation I respond to what you say and you respond to what I say.  I don't care which part of my statement you choose to respond to, so long as you're responding to what you quote.  It was fairly obvious that you meant to respond to the first part.  The problem was that you didn't.

FatalX7.0 wrote...
What other definition of "fetch quest" is there? There are 31 quests in the game where you eavesdrop on an NPC, go to a location, scan, get an item and give it to the NPC. (But you don't even participate in a conversation like you would in another game)

That is a fetch quest, always has been.

Let's take an example - the Prothean data drives.  One possible classification of that quest is that it's a single fetch quest for seven items.  Another equally valid classification calls it seven distinct fetch quests.  You go out, get a Prothean data disk, bring (e-mail?) it back, and get credits and XP.  This then creates another quest to get another Prothean data disk, which repeats until all seven have been acquired.

So to say that ME1 only has five fetch quests is a pretty serious distortion of the truth.

[FatalX7.0]

humes spork wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

No, because each differently named enemy had differences, even if just a small amount.

Abilities, shields, health, etc. And appearance and location of course.

Yet, they all fought the same way. There was no difference in how one sniper behaved, for example, in comparison to any other. The same goes for anti-tank troopers, infantry, hell even geth juggernauts and krogan had the same behavior; spam heavy attacks, then charge, the only real difference is you want to make sure to dampen krogan, and sabotage (or overload) juggernauts.

Everything fights the same way.

They move towards you, they shoot at you, they move around.

There may have been a bit of variety in enemy behavior in ME 3, but that doesn't make up for the severe lack of enemies overall.

In the end, I didn't care about behavioral variety. It didn't stand out.

[eddieoctane]

Shermos wrote...

I don't take anyone who gives ME3 less than a 7/10 seriously.

Then you likewise can't take any rating above that seriously. A low rating with a proper explanation of why it is low should always been taken seriously. Else, you're disregarding opinions simply because they differ from your own.

[FatalX7.0]

Father Alvito wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

You're quite the condescending one, aren't you?

When people waste my time by ignoring what I say when crafting a response?  You bet.  Don't want me to be rude?  Don't BE rude.

Wha...what?

FatalX7.0 wrote...

And I'm not sure what you mean when you say that bolded sentence.

You say that I'm correct that the game is shorter. I have to address that somehow?

Then you say that the result of the game being smaller is probably due to it being rushed out. I'm not sure how, or even why, I need to address that.

What I mean is that in an actual conversation I respond to what you say and you respond to what I say.  I don't care which part of my statement you choose to respond to, so long as you're responding to what you quote.  It was fairly obvious that you meant to respond to the first part.  The problem was that you didn't.


What?...I don't under...wow, you are really arrogant.

FatalX7.0 wrote...
What other definition of "fetch quest" is there? There are 31 quests in the game where you eavesdrop on an NPC, go to a location, scan, get an item and give it to the NPC. (But you don't even participate in a conversation like you would in another game)

That is a fetch quest, always has been.

Let's take an example - the Prothean data drives.  One possible classification of that quest is that it's a single fetch quest for seven items.  Another equally valid classification calls it seven distinct fetch quests.  You go out, get a Prothean data disk, bring (e-mail?) it back, and get credits and XP.  This then creates another quest to get another Prothean data disk, which repeats until all seven have been acquired.

So to say that ME1 only has five fetch quests is a pretty serious distortion of the truth.

Where did you get that from?

[NS Wizdum]

Why even have a review system if the "professionals" always give a game a 11/10 to keep their jobs, and the user scores can just be artificially inflated whenever someone feels like it?

[FatalX7.0]

NS Wizdum wrote...

Why even have a review system if the "professionals" always give a game a 11/10 to keep their jobs, and the user scores can just be artificially inflated whenever someone feels like it?

'Cause money.

And 'cause of arrogant jackwads like Father Alvito.


OOPS, I WAS RUDE. smh

Modifié par FatalX7.0, 08 mai 2012 - 04:37 .

[humes spork]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

In the end, I didn't care about behavioral variety. It didn't stand out.

That's certainly your prerogative. I'm not going to begrudge you your opinion and preference, so long as you identify it.

Personally, I'm all about behavioral variety. I don't care if it's one, two, or a hundred NPC's, so long as they behave the same it's just one enemy to me. The converse of that is I'm over the moon when encounters differ and enemies are smartly-coded and adaptive, regardless of homogeneity of appearance.

In that regard, the ME series has always been rather lackluster, though 2 was the best case of the entire trilogy for that. Cerberus in 3 put up a good enough show to be worth at least an honorable mention in the context of ME itself, but they're not even on the level of Half-Life's HECU.

Modifié par humes spork, 08 mai 2012 - 04:40 .

[FatalX7.0]

humes spork wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

In the end, I didn't care about behavioral variety. It didn't stand out.

That's certainly your prerogative. I'm not going to begrudge you your opinion and preference, so long as you identify it.

Personally, I'm all about behavioral variety. I don't care if it's one, two, or a hundred NPC's, so long as they behave the same it's just one enemy to me. The converse of that is I'm over the moon when encounters differ and enemies are smartly-coded and adaptive, regardless of homogeneity of appearance.

Even with the variety in behavior, there were so little enemies overall and to me, it just got boring when I saw the same enemies so often.

[FatalX7.0]

I'm gonna skedaddle before Father replies again and I have to deal with his nonsense.

[FS3D]

Funny how BioWare and EA repeatedly tout their "75 perfect scores" line over and over again.

The problem is that this exposes this for the fraud that it truly is. The game is far from perfect, there are a number of flaws, from the narrative (especially that awful ending), to the gameplay mechanics and a drastic dumbing down of the RPG elements, to various glitches within the game engine (many YouTube videos have demonstrated how this can happen in various locations including the Citadel).

So... Given these flaws, the game cannot be perfect, because perfection would mean the game was flawless. Since this is not the case, the perfect scores are dishonest.

Why these scores were given is a conclusion to draw for yourselves, but I know what my opinion is.

[Rip504]

5-7.

[Simocrates]

Rabble rabble rabble rabble...

[Raynulf]

Armass81 wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

Armass81 wrote...

Every review I see that is below 6/10 is a troll review or a REALLY butthurt fanboy. Ending is pretty terrible but there is no way it justifies a drop from 9/10 to 1/10 or something, that is just ridiculous.

But, you know, it does. If someone feels it was a 4/10…it was. For them.

Of course, if you start limiting the range…we should do the other end too. Let‘s agree that 0-2 are ‘troll scores’, and that scores 9-10 are inflated by apologists. So only scores between 3 and 8 are valid.

How’s that sound?

If i see a listing of reasons why someone think its a 4/10 game. Then maybe i can see their point. Just saying it cant be the ending alone. Some people here have said "9/10 game before i got to the end now its a 2/10". Overreaction.

As a standalone game, ignoring the ending? 8/10:
- Several weak plot elements (e.g. Crucible) detracting from the narrative focus of the game
- Rushed opening, with inadequate 'lead in' and (for Bioware) substandard dialogue.
- Poorly implemented antagonist (Kai Leng) and scripted defeat
- Reliance on external sources (ME1, ME2, comics, novels etc) for context and avoidance of 'familiar stranger' syndrome
- Impressive graphics let down by exorcist-worthy appalling animations (heads twisting unnaturally during auto-dialogue, extensive clipping issues, ungainly 'romance' scenes).
- Repetitive opponents (almost all encounters vs Cerberus or Reaper-husks), and overabundance of fetch quests.
- Minimalistic dialogue trees and insufficient 'alignment' options (Paragon/Renegade)

As a standalone game, including the ending: 6/10 (additional detractors)
- Crippling/removing player agency and 'gameplay' in the last 10 minutes
- Sudden loss of character focus, replaced by abstract concepts.
- Loss of Reapers as credible threat, leading to loss of satisfaction from 'defeating' them, or sense of achievement from progress to date.
- Loss of narrative coherence as concepts introduced in the last few minutes contradict what the previous game spent 30 hours showing us.
- Inability to query/question the logic presented.
- Rushed and cumbersome gameplay and railroading from Thessia onwards.
- TIM conversation desperately required editing
- Narratively poorly structured, with semi-denouement (goodbye to squad) introduced mid-rising action, and finale scenes not consistent with events immediately prior.

As the culmination of the Mass Effect trilogy, including the ending: 4/10 (additional detractors)
- Unnecessary change to established characters (Ashley, Kaidan) breaks immersion
- 'Most important' choices from previous titles had no net effect on Mass Effect 3.
- Reversal superpowering of Cerberus unnecessary and smacking of "Writer's Darling"
- Extensive contradiction and retcon implementation from previous titles
- Tone, narrative style and theme of final act contradict most of them established in the first two titles.
- Ending did not provide resolution on the overall Story and constituent characters.
- Existance of StarChild detracts from achievements earned in the previous two titles by lessening the Reapers
- Too many goddamn plotholes.


It is mostly good as a standalone - indeed, ignoring the ending it would easily qualify as many people's personal game-of-the-year.

Taking into account the core focus of the series is the story, consistency (or lack thereof) with previous titles and ultimate performance as the climax and denouement of the entire trilogy, Mass Effect 3 is lacking. It's not a "WORST GAME EVAH!" or anything, but it's not great, and certainly doesn't hold a candle to its predecessors.

So yes. 4/10 for me.

[GuardianAngel470]

arial wrote...

professional reviewers dont give a bad review to a game because of 5 minutes of content thats not as good as it could be.

"Its about the Journey, not the destination"

Modifié par GuardianAngel470, 08 mai 2012 - 05:28 .

[Deathstroke123]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

arial wrote...

professional reviewers dont give a bad review to a game because of 5 minutes of content thats not as good as it could be.

"Its about the Journey, not the destination"

If your implication is that the ME3 ending is anywhere near the severity of the lincoln assassination, then you're a moron.

Even if the ME3 ending was literally the worst ending in fiction history, a title of which it doesn't reach by a lightyear, the fan response that it somehow invalidates the rest of the game would still be ludicrous.

Modifié par Deathstroke123, 08 mai 2012 - 05:57 .

[Deathstroke123]

Raynulf wrote...

Armass81 wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

Armass81 wrote...

Every review I see that is below 6/10 is a troll review or a REALLY butthurt fanboy. Ending is pretty terrible but there is no way it justifies a drop from 9/10 to 1/10 or something, that is just ridiculous.

But, you know, it does. If someone feels it was a 4/10…it was. For them.

Of course, if you start limiting the range…we should do the other end too. Let‘s agree that 0-2 are ‘troll scores’, and that scores 9-10 are inflated by apologists. So only scores between 3 and 8 are valid.

How’s that sound?

If i see a listing of reasons why someone think its a 4/10 game. Then maybe i can see their point. Just saying it cant be the ending alone. Some people here have said "9/10 game before i got to the end now its a 2/10". Overreaction.

As a standalone game, ignoring the ending? 8/10:
- Several weak plot elements (e.g. Crucible) detracting from the narrative focus of the game
- Rushed opening, with inadequate 'lead in' and (for Bioware) substandard dialogue.
- Poorly implemented antagonist (Kai Leng) and scripted defeat
- Reliance on external sources (ME1, ME2, comics, novels etc) for context and avoidance of 'familiar stranger' syndrome
- Impressive graphics let down by exorcist-worthy appalling animations (heads twisting unnaturally during auto-dialogue, extensive clipping issues, ungainly 'romance' scenes).
- Repetitive opponents (almost all encounters vs Cerberus or Reaper-husks), and overabundance of fetch quests.
- Minimalistic dialogue trees and insufficient 'alignment' options (Paragon/Renegade)

As a standalone game, including the ending: 6/10 (additional detractors)
- Crippling/removing player agency and 'gameplay' in the last 10 minutes
- Sudden loss of character focus, replaced by abstract concepts.
- Loss of Reapers as credible threat, leading to loss of satisfaction from 'defeating' them, or sense of achievement from progress to date.
- Loss of narrative coherence as concepts introduced in the last few minutes contradict what the previous game spent 30 hours showing us.
- Inability to query/question the logic presented.
- Rushed and cumbersome gameplay and railroading from Thessia onwards.
- TIM conversation desperately required editing
- Narratively poorly structured, with semi-denouement (goodbye to squad) introduced mid-rising action, and finale scenes not consistent with events immediately prior.

As the culmination of the Mass Effect trilogy, including the ending: 4/10 (additional detractors)
- Unnecessary change to established characters (Ashley, Kaidan) breaks immersion
- 'Most important' choices from previous titles had no net effect on Mass Effect 3.
- Reversal superpowering of Cerberus unnecessary and smacking of "Writer's Darling"
- Extensive contradiction and retcon implementation from previous titles
- Tone, narrative style and theme of final act contradict most of them established in the first two titles.
- Ending did not provide resolution on the overall Story and constituent characters.
- Existance of StarChild detracts from achievements earned in the previous two titles by lessening the Reapers
- Too many goddamn plotholes.


It is mostly good as a standalone - indeed, ignoring the ending it would easily qualify as many people's personal game-of-the-year.

Taking into account the core focus of the series is the story, consistency (or lack thereof) with previous titles and ultimate performance as the climax and denouement of the entire trilogy, Mass Effect 3 is lacking. It's not a "WORST GAME EVAH!" or anything, but it's not great, and certainly doesn't hold a candle to its predecessors.

So yes. 4/10 for me.

Yeah, 4 out of 10 when you start factoring insignificant things as gamebreakers.

For one, I can't believe you put Kai Leng up there. The inclusion of a generic henchmen character who is fairly unimportant to the plot acts as a point against the game? Please. Imagine if you read a professional review, and along the sides, they put "this one small time villain wasn't so good, so I'm docking the game for it.", instead of focusing on actual things that matter, like sound quality, graphics, story and gameplay.

This is nitpicking to the highest degree.

[Deathstroke123]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Deathstroke123 wrote...

Larryboy_Dragon wrote...

One of the worst things about the ending outcry is that it glosses over Me3’s other issues:
Fewer missions, more lame fetch missions, less dialogue options, no real new RPG options, limited enemy selection compared to ME1 (where did the wall climbing geth and giant-tank geth go), only one hub to explore, much less companion dialogue and so forth.

There were more unique missions in ME3 then in ME1 or 2. By unique, I mean the mission actually had voice acting, a point, and weren't set in the same box room a thousand times.

The fetch quests were meant as a time sink, which each game had. Gotta love selective memory. I recall wasting way more time in the first and second game either driving around a flat, dull landscape, scanning planets for hours for minerals, or playing pointless unlocking games.

Limited enemies compared to ME1... you mean the game where you fight Geth troopers and maybe once or twice a collosus for 95% of the game? Yeah, whole lotta variety in that game. Give me a ****ing break.

There was only one hub in ME1, and it was largely empty and dull. But oops, we're not supposed to say anything bad about ME1, sorry.

Less companion dialogue... THAT is rich. Honestly it is. I'm starting to question whether or not you actually bought the real game and not a Russian bootleg.

I like how this chart assumes that each individual quest, no matter the catergory, contained the same amount of content. This makes the fetch quest's seem like they take up the majority of the run time, when that is simply not true. Then again, why would I expect you to actually look at this chart analytically, when, as it stands, biased and rigged, it already supports your preconceived notions.

Next. And this time, try using a well-made chart instead of this abomination.

[Deathstroke123]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Armass81 wrote...

Enemy types are about the same in all 3 games, let me clarify:

ME1:
Pirates, mercenaries, Saren's cronies etc. your basic humanoid fighter
Rachni
Geth

ME2:

Random Mercenary Scum
Geth
Collectors

ME3:

Cerberus
Geth
Reaper Troops

Its about the same.

Here, I made my own. You'll have to view in another tab.

And most of those troops are different in name only. Most have the same exact abilities and can barely be told apart from one another. The ME3 enemies, instead, actually seem unique. See all of those merc types? They might as well all be called Merc Trooper, because they acted the exact same as each other, never doing anything past just shooting at you, the only difference being what kind of protection they had.

This also doesn't change the fact that in ME1, 90% of enemies were geth, and in ME2, 90% were mercs. At least in the third game I finally feel like I'm fighting, you know, Reapers, the main bad guys instead of pointless henchmen.

Honestly, try thinking before you post these things, please.

[GuardianAngel470]

Deathstroke123 wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

arial wrote...

professional reviewers dont give a bad review to a game because of 5 minutes of content thats not as good as it could be.

"Its about the Journey, not the destination"

If your implication is that the ME3 ending is anywhere near the severity of the lincoln assassination, then you're a moron.

Even if the ME3 ending was literally the worst ending in fiction history, a title of which it doesn't reach by a lightyear, the fan response that it somehow invalidates the rest of the game would still be ludicrous.

Yeah, that joke just went right over your head.

"Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"

[Deathstroke123]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Deathstroke123 wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

arial wrote...

professional reviewers dont give a bad review to a game because of 5 minutes of content thats not as good as it could be.

"Its about the Journey, not the destination"

If your implication is that the ME3 ending is anywhere near the severity of the lincoln assassination, then you're a moron.

Even if the ME3 ending was literally the worst ending in fiction history, a title of which it doesn't reach by a lightyear, the fan response that it somehow invalidates the rest of the game would still be ludicrous.

Yeah, that joke just went right over your head.

"Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"

Could be because it was an awful analogy. Just my 2 cents.

Modifié par Deathstroke123, 08 mai 2012 - 06:32 .

[Jadebaby]

Eain wrote...

ArchDuck wrote...

I personally would peg it on the 5-7/10 range. Anything higher is as absurd as anything lower really. Both are not defensible unless you are ignoring the good or ignoring the bad.

This.

Actually if I'd have to rate it for parts it would look like this:

Story: 5/10 (maybe 4 on an angry day).
Production value: 6/10. Lots of corners have been cut, and it shows. The game is rushed.
Gameplay: 8/10. Good TPS gameplay but not as good as Gears, which I rate one point higher.
Multiplayer: 8/10. Very entertaining, but needs a versus mode to keep things exciting. With a versus mode, arguably the most fun you could have online right now.

Story: 8/10-excluding ending, 4/10-including ending.
Production value: 5/10, yes signs of being rushed, the lipsyncing was atrocious.. dont c how they took a step backwards from ME2
Gameplay: 8/10.
Multiplayer: 4/10, repetitive and boring, although if I want to vs. wave after wave of enemies, I play horde in GoW3.
Versus in ME3 would be terrible. That's never been what ME is about and one step closer to making it "Call of Duty: Mass Effect 3.

[GuardianAngel470]

Deathstroke123 wrote...


Could be because it was an awful analogy. Just my 2 cents.

No one said analogies had to have the same scale so long as the conveyed the same meaning. You got hung up on the scale as if I meant something by it and missed the point entirely. Not really my fault, if you'd ever heard that joke my point should have been clear.

[shurikenmanta]

OK, I'm going to nip this whole '0/10 is totally justified' thing in the bud.

This is Superman 64.

It is regarded by most of the free world as one of the worst games ever made. Even IGN, considered by all as Satan, gave this game 3.4 out of 10. And that was one of the high reviews. This is a 2/10, 3/10 caliber game.

Does ME3 even compare to this? In any way, shape or form?

No. It does not. Not without hamming it up something chronic.

Modifié par shurikenmanta, 08 mai 2012 - 06:53 .

[Rulycar]

MadRabbit999 wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Laurencio wrote...

...

You do realize, some of those are reasonable. I'd rate my fridge 0/10 if it didn't cool my food. If ME3 doesn't take my choices into account, which was kinda the point, it's not hard to argue a 0/10 rating for that reason.

You do realize that is pure nonsense?

You do NOT rate 0/10 something that works for the 95% of the times.. that is just plain stupid...

My Ferrari goes up to +300kmph the pain job is amazing the seats of pure leather, perfect friction with the road, everything about driving is perfect... but the cup holder is slightly smaller than my personal cup that I fit in so I cannot carry drinks in it.. so I rate this car 0/10.....    huh O.o?

I mean, without offense to the disabled, because actually they have more brain than the retards that write such things...

So, if I understand your point ...
... Chernobyl reactor 4 would rate 8/10 and anyone rating it 0/10 is mistaken?

Personally, I value the ending more than that.
Maybe we could rate it by replayability ...
... ME1) 10/10
... ME2) 20/10
... ME3) 0.9/10 ... nope, still junk.

[Rulycar]

Deathstroke123 wrote...
...
This is nitpicking to the highest degree.

... and yet, my children can't go to school if they have even one nit in their hair.
A single "nit" is important, and "nitpicking" is essential.

It seems you prefer:
BioWare: "So, other than everything you are dissatisfied with, how do you like the game?"
Customer: "... discounting those things? 10/10
BioWare: "There you have it!  Another perfect score!"