321 réponses à ce sujet

[shurikenmanta]

Wow. We finally compared ME3 to Chernobyl.

The Holocaust is only a drama llama away.

[Noelemahc]

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.

Since it invalidates the PLOT of the rest of the game (and most of the plots of the previous two), I'd say that's it's safe to say it invalidates them entirely, at least as works of art. In the strictly utilitarian sense of "pew-pew", of course, it doesn't, but if you say that that's the main reason you play ME, I'm afraid that would be tantamount to forumite suicide.

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?

He serves as a goal-preventing Deus Ex Machina twice. I'd say that puts him in the same category as Ultros from Final Fantasy 6. Except that people LOVED Ultros.

[Rulycar]

shurikenmanta wrote...

Wow. We finally compared ME3 to Chernobyl.

The Holocaust is only a drama llama away.

Actually, Chernobyl is in reference to a product that works 95% of the time ...
... the previous analogy refers to a fridge that doesn't cool
... and the fridge is being compared to ME3

Not exactly the same thing.

[shurikenmanta]

I'm sure it is.

I guess we can compare it to the Black Plague too, cause Europe wasn't dying like flies 95% of the time.

Modifié par shurikenmanta, 08 mai 2012 - 07:17 .

[Deathstroke123]

Noelemahc wrote...

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.

Since it invalidates the PLOT of the rest of the game (and most of the plots of the previous two), I'd say that's it's safe to say it invalidates them entirely, at least as works of art. In the strictly utilitarian sense of "pew-pew", of course, it doesn't, but if you say that that's the main reason you play ME, I'm afraid that would be tantamount to forumite suicide.

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?

He serves as a goal-preventing Deus Ex Machina twice. I'd say that puts him in the same category as Ultros from Final Fantasy 6. Except that people LOVED Ultros.

Oh, so now we're back on the art argument? Listen, I don't care if you think the ending ruined what could've been a 'piece of art', it's a GAME and I judge it as such, and in that regard, the ending does no ruin anything but the ending sequence.

Also, that isn't what a Deus Ex Machina is. At all. I see alot of people here throwing around that term very, very loosely. In games and stories, there have always, ALWAYS, been bad guys who have impended or prevented goals by swooping in and stealing them from your grasp. What makes Kai Leng any different from them? I honestly think that people just didn't like to see Shepard lose, god forbid he actually NOT completely perfect a mission after going against impossible odds for YEARS.

[LeTtotheC]

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.

I would have given the story 4/10.  After the Genophage it started to fall apart badly.  I'm talking in the sheer terms of shoe horning things in, black holes o' plot and of course the ending...  I've had two months to mull it over, and it still leaves me damned angry that they managed to screw it up so badly.  It's not even a case of a few minor plot holes.

It's just what could have been versus what we'd been given.

Production value I fully agree with.  Mass Effect 3 felt rushed, with bugs galore and of course the writing.  It felt a lot more linear and constricted in comparison to ME2 and ME3, which I'm certain was Bioware's method for cutting down on game development time.  Ultimately I lay this at the feet of the multiplayer section.  Mass Effect was never, ever about multiplayer, nor should it have been.  And because they sidelined resources into mutli-player, the main campaign suffered.  Ironically I consider ME3's multiplayer to be the most polished aspect, even if it ends up hidiously repetative.  I believe it was actually forced on Bioware by EA in this case, with EA's attempt to move towards micro transactions - a move shown by the offer to buy the high end packages. 

Overall I would be fair to give it 7/10 if I was being fair.  But I haven't stopped being angry at the story side of things, because ultimately it's ruined the entire series for me.

Modifié par LeTtotheC, 08 mai 2012 - 07:24 .

[vixvicco]

Elite Midget wrote...

You really believe IGN and Gamespot are trustworthy on this regard? They proved where their loyalties lay, it isn't farfetched they may change and remove things on their own site which they have all the power to do if they so as see fit. Besides, we all know how IGN in particular thinks of ME3 Fans atm.

Exactly.
Just saw this video: 
 
Maybe its old news now, but it only makes me dislike IGN more.

[Deathstroke123]

Rulycar wrote...

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!"

First, nitpicking is not essential and I have no idea where that logic even enters your brain. Nitpicking would be essential if perfection was a reachable goal, which it is not.

Second, to drive my point across: Here's my score for ME3 factoring in the journal, Kai Leng, and all the other pointless crap people have been getting up in arms over: A solid 8.5/10.

Here's my score IGNORING those things: A solid 8.5/10.

Do you see what I'm getting at here? Those things did absolutely nothing to hinder my enjoyment of the game. Therefore, they are not worthy of consideration. That is why nitpicking is not essential, because then you make a mountain out of an anthill.

[Deathstroke123]

vixvicco wrote...

Elite Midget wrote...

You really believe IGN and Gamespot are trustworthy on this regard? They proved where their loyalties lay, it isn't farfetched they may change and remove things on their own site which they have all the power to do if they so as see fit. Besides, we all know how IGN in particular thinks of ME3 Fans atm.

Exactly.
Just saw this video: 
 
Maybe its old news now, but it only makes me dislike IGN more.

IGN and Gamespot have been outed awhile ago, and no one should take them seriously. However, people are taking their hate for gamespot/ign and applying it to other publications that have had no such scandal.

[FatalX7.0]

http://ps3.ign.com/a.../1221497p1.html Oh, old by the way, but interesting when I first read it nonetheless.

Also, Deathstroke, read other posts before you spout out such arrogant stupidity.

You as*hat.

Modifié par FatalX7.0, 08 mai 2012 - 07:41 .

[Deathstroke123]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

http://ps3.ign.com/a.../1221497p1.html

Also, Deathstroke, read other posts before you spout out such arrogant stupidity.

You as*hat.

I did read the posts, and it seemed like I wasn't the only one to see past your thinly veiled biased pieces of 'evidence'.

But you're right, ma'am. Wouldn't want to do your job for you.

Also, I'm rather surprised. Despite being an IGN article, those views of the game really reflect my own, more then anyone on the BSN, anyway. It's a sad day when IGN of all places is being more rational then us.

Modifié par Deathstroke123, 08 mai 2012 - 07:48 .

[FatalX7.0]

Deathstroke123 wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

http://ps3.ign.com/a.../1221497p1.html

Also, Deathstroke, read other posts before you spout out such arrogant stupidity.

You as*hat.

I did read the posts, and it seemed like I wasn't the only one to see past your thinly veiled biased pieces of 'evidence'.

But you're right, ma'am. Wouldn't want to do your job for you.

Evidence?

Try again, as*hat.

And try to stop being so deluded.

Modifié par FatalX7.0, 08 mai 2012 - 07:46 .

[LeTtotheC]

Deathstroke123 wrote...

Rulycar wrote...

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!"

First, nitpicking is not essential and I have no idea where that logic even enters your brain. Nitpicking would be essential if perfection was a reachable goal, which it is not.

Second, to drive my point across: Here's my score for ME3 factoring in the journal, Kai Leng, and all the other pointless crap people have been getting up in arms over: A solid 8.5/10.

Here's my score IGNORING those things: A solid 8.5/10.

Do you see what I'm getting at here? Those things did absolutely nothing to hinder my enjoyment of the game. Therefore, they are not worthy of consideration. That is why nitpicking is not essential, because then you make a mountain out of an anthill.

Unless of course that anthill is already a pus spewing mountain of "WTF?".  Plot aside,  I honestly think 8.5 is a tad too high for a game which was obviosuly pushed out before they could iron out all the kinks.  There's camera angle issues, occasional clipping issues, crashes and of course dubbing like it's a 70s Chinese Kung-Fu flick.  Whilst none of them are game breaking, they shouldn't be present to this degree in a game which is supposed be as polished as Mass Effect.  That aside it's a lot more linear than the previous two titles, and the combat lacks can get pretty repatitive after a while.  All in all it comes together to produce a good, but flawed game.  But the ME series has largely been about plot, so you really do need to include that, and that's where ME3 stumbles badly.  

And not just at the end.

From the start I had a raised eyebrow at the Reapers managing to get into Sol without notice, and no real mention of any sort of engagements prior to the invasion of Earth.  It was rushed, a common theme within the game.  The only section of the entire game which felt true to the ME series was curing the Genophage, with other major moments just causing me to go "WTF?" on a regular basis.  Not because I couldn't understand them, but because they were shoe horned in, bastardised or could have been written in a much better fashion.  My conclusion was that Tuchanka had been written ahead of time by the ME2 team, and ported over by the writers of ME3.  Eveything else was ME3's writers attempt at tying together a storyline they had no vision for. 

[Deathstroke123]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Deathstroke123 wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

http://ps3.ign.com/a.../1221497p1.html

Also, Deathstroke, read other posts before you spout out such arrogant stupidity.

You as*hat.

I did read the posts, and it seemed like I wasn't the only one to see past your thinly veiled biased pieces of 'evidence'.

But you're right, ma'am. Wouldn't want to do your job for you.

Evidence?

Try again, as*hat.

And try to stop being so deluded.

I'm sorry, hun. 

Kiss and make up, ya? <3

[Dendio1]

I give Mass effect 3 an 8.8/10. Great game. Incomplete ending. I feel all of the harsher scores are the result of nit picking after the fact.

While gaming, I was not seriously affected by any other the major things people complain about. To go back after all is said and done and make a bigger deal out of things than you experianced while playing is unfair. Go pick apart skyrim and see what butchered score its left with.

While gaming the biggest issue I ran across was the random animation glitches where somebodies head would turn a little too far, or an arm would start doing things arms shouldn't do.

I found away around the journal system or another other *major flaws*...yawn

Game was great until the weird ending.  8.8 outta 10

Modifié par Dendio1, 08 mai 2012 - 07:54 .

[FatalX7.0]

Deathstroke123 wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Deathstroke123 wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

http://ps3.ign.com/a.../1221497p1.html

Also, Deathstroke, read other posts before you spout out such arrogant stupidity.

You as*hat.

I did read the posts, and it seemed like I wasn't the only one to see past your thinly veiled biased pieces of 'evidence'.

But you're right, ma'am. Wouldn't want to do your job for you.

Evidence?

Try again, as*hat.

And try to stop being so deluded.

I'm sorry, hun. 

Kiss and make up, ya? <3

Nope, you're a douche. And you're stupid.

[Deathstroke123]

LeTtotheC wrote...

Deathstroke123 wrote...

Rulycar wrote...

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!"

First, nitpicking is not essential and I have no idea where that logic even enters your brain. Nitpicking would be essential if perfection was a reachable goal, which it is not.

Second, to drive my point across: Here's my score for ME3 factoring in the journal, Kai Leng, and all the other pointless crap people have been getting up in arms over: A solid 8.5/10.

Here's my score IGNORING those things: A solid 8.5/10.

Do you see what I'm getting at here? Those things did absolutely nothing to hinder my enjoyment of the game. Therefore, they are not worthy of consideration. That is why nitpicking is not essential, because then you make a mountain out of an anthill.

Unless of course that anthill is already a pus spewing mountain of "WTF?".  Plot aside,  I honestly think 8.5 is a tad too high for a game which was obviosuly pushed out before they could iron out all the kinks.  There's camera angle issues, occasional clipping issues, crashes and of course dubbing like it's a 70s Chinese Kung-Fu flick.  Whilst none of them are game breaking, they shouldn't be present to this degree in a game which is supposed be as polished as Mass Effect.  That aside it's a lot more linear than the previous two titles, and the combat lacks can get pretty repatitive after a while.  All in all it comes together to produce a good, but flawed game.  But the ME series has largely been about plot, so you really do need to include that, and that's where ME3 stumbles badly.  

And not just at the end.

From the start I had a raised eyebrow at the Reapers managing to get into Sol without notice, and no real mention of any sort of engagements prior to the invasion of Earth.  It was rushed, a common theme within the game.  The only section of the entire game which felt true to the ME series was curing the Genophage, with other major moments just causing me to go "WTF?" on a regular basis.  Not because I couldn't understand them, but because they were shoe horned in, bastardised or could have been written in a much better fashion.  My conclusion was that Tuchanka had been written ahead of time by the ME2 team, and ported over by the writers of ME3.  Eveything else was ME3's writers attempt at tying together a storyline they had no vision for. 

Though I do not share many of your feelings on the game, at the very least you are justifying your stance on it way better then just saying "blah blah bad journal, Kai Leng, blah blah". The points you bring up are actually substantial, and for that, your opinion deserves respect. I was merely addressing those who seek any little avenue to fault the game.

[Deathstroke123]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Deathstroke123 wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Deathstroke123 wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

http://ps3.ign.com/a.../1221497p1.html

Also, Deathstroke, read other posts before you spout out such arrogant stupidity.

You as*hat.

I did read the posts, and it seemed like I wasn't the only one to see past your thinly veiled biased pieces of 'evidence'.

But you're right, ma'am. Wouldn't want to do your job for you.

Evidence?

Try again, as*hat.

And try to stop being so deluded.

I'm sorry, hun. 

Kiss and make up, ya? <3

Nope, you're a douche. And you're stupid.

Baby, that stings 

Come now, let's put this behind us, for old times sake? 

[Rulycar]

Deathstroke123 wrote...

Rulycar wrote...

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!"

First, nitpicking is not essential and I have no idea where that logic even enters your brain. Nitpicking would be essential if perfection was a reachable goal, which it is not.

Second, to drive my point across: Here's my score for ME3 factoring in the journal, Kai Leng, and all the other pointless crap people have been getting up in arms over: A solid 8.5/10.

Here's my score IGNORING those things: A solid 8.5/10.

Do you see what I'm getting at here? Those things did absolutely nothing to hinder my enjoyment of the game. Therefore, they are not worthy of consideration. That is why nitpicking is not essential, because then you make a mountain out of an anthill.

LOL ... nitpicking is essential when removing nits (my point).
Your point seems to be that you have different criteria for rating games than others.
If I ignore everything that dissatisfies me, I can also rate it higher ...
... but that would invalidate my critique.

American Heritage Dictionary
critc (noun)
1) One who analyzes, interprets, or evaluates artistic work.
2) fault-finder

I find criticism useful when it includes explanation; this allows me to make an informed decision.

If critics don't "nitpick" enough, they leave out information other people consider important.
Kai Leng doesn't matter to you?  Consider that point irrelevant and move to the next one.
Kai Leng does matter to you?  Read the criticism and explanation then decide how much weight it carries.

[FatalX7.0]

Dendio1 wrote...

I give Mass effect 3 an 8.8/10. Great game. Incomplete ending. I feel all of the harsher scores are the result of nit picking after the fact.

While gaming, I was not seriously affected by any other the major things people complain about. To go back after all is said and done and make a bigger deal out of things than you experianced while playing is unfair. Go pick apart skyrim and see what butchered score its left with.

While gaming the biggest issue I ran across was the random animation glitches where somebodies head would turn a little to far, or an Arm would start doing things arms dont normally do.

I can't begin to pick apart Skyrim, it's just too fun, and the broken parts only make it even more enjoyable. I've played Bethesda games for a long time, you learn to expect certain things.

I picked apart Mass Effect 3 as I played through it, and after I finished, I had even more time to pick it apart. Mass Effect 3 is hardly the game that I thought I was purchasing, and I was already dreading it because of the multiplayer and the scanning system.

Modifié par FatalX7.0, 08 mai 2012 - 07:58 .

[Dendio1]

Deathstroke123 wrote...

LeTtotheC wrote...

Deathstroke123 wrote...

Rulycar wrote...

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!"

First, nitpicking is not essential and I have no idea where that logic even enters your brain. Nitpicking would be essential if perfection was a reachable goal, which it is not.

Second, to drive my point across: Here's my score for ME3 factoring in the journal, Kai Leng, and all the other pointless crap people have been getting up in arms over: A solid 8.5/10.

Here's my score IGNORING those things: A solid 8.5/10.

Do you see what I'm getting at here? Those things did absolutely nothing to hinder my enjoyment of the game. Therefore, they are not worthy of consideration. That is why nitpicking is not essential, because then you make a mountain out of an anthill.

Unless of course that anthill is already a pus spewing mountain of "WTF?".  Plot aside,  I honestly think 8.5 is a tad too high for a game which was obviosuly pushed out before they could iron out all the kinks.  There's camera angle issues, occasional clipping issues, crashes and of course dubbing like it's a 70s Chinese Kung-Fu flick.  Whilst none of them are game breaking, they shouldn't be present to this degree in a game which is supposed be as polished as Mass Effect.  That aside it's a lot more linear than the previous two titles, and the combat lacks can get pretty repatitive after a while.  All in all it comes together to produce a good, but flawed game.  But the ME series has largely been about plot, so you really do need to include that, and that's where ME3 stumbles badly.  

And not just at the end.

From the start I had a raised eyebrow at the Reapers managing to get into Sol without notice, and no real mention of any sort of engagements prior to the invasion of Earth.  It was rushed, a common theme within the game.  The only section of the entire game which felt true to the ME series was curing the Genophage, with other major moments just causing me to go "WTF?" on a regular basis.  Not because I couldn't understand them, but because they were shoe horned in, bastardised or could have been written in a much better fashion.  My conclusion was that Tuchanka had been written ahead of time by the ME2 team, and ported over by the writers of ME3.  Eveything else was ME3's writers attempt at tying together a storyline they had no vision for. 

Though I do not share many of your feelings on the game, at the very least you are justifying your stance on it way better then just saying "blah blah bad journal, Kai Leng, blah blah". The points you bring up are actually substantial, and for that, your opinion deserves respect. I was merely addressing those who seek any little avenue to fault the game.

Any game under the amount of scrutiny mass effect is enduring would have its review score decimated. Go nit pick through skyrim about the dragons flying backwards glitch.

[FatalX7.0]

Dendio1 wrote...

Deathstroke123 wrote...

LeTtotheC wrote...

Deathstroke123 wrote...

Rulycar wrote...

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!"

First, nitpicking is not essential and I have no idea where that logic even enters your brain. Nitpicking would be essential if perfection was a reachable goal, which it is not.

Second, to drive my point across: Here's my score for ME3 factoring in the journal, Kai Leng, and all the other pointless crap people have been getting up in arms over: A solid 8.5/10.

Here's my score IGNORING those things: A solid 8.5/10.

Do you see what I'm getting at here? Those things did absolutely nothing to hinder my enjoyment of the game. Therefore, they are not worthy of consideration. That is why nitpicking is not essential, because then you make a mountain out of an anthill.

Unless of course that anthill is already a pus spewing mountain of "WTF?".  Plot aside,  I honestly think 8.5 is a tad too high for a game which was obviosuly pushed out before they could iron out all the kinks.  There's camera angle issues, occasional clipping issues, crashes and of course dubbing like it's a 70s Chinese Kung-Fu flick.  Whilst none of them are game breaking, they shouldn't be present to this degree in a game which is supposed be as polished as Mass Effect.  That aside it's a lot more linear than the previous two titles, and the combat lacks can get pretty repatitive after a while.  All in all it comes together to produce a good, but flawed game.  But the ME series has largely been about plot, so you really do need to include that, and that's where ME3 stumbles badly.  

And not just at the end.

From the start I had a raised eyebrow at the Reapers managing to get into Sol without notice, and no real mention of any sort of engagements prior to the invasion of Earth.  It was rushed, a common theme within the game.  The only section of the entire game which felt true to the ME series was curing the Genophage, with other major moments just causing me to go "WTF?" on a regular basis.  Not because I couldn't understand them, but because they were shoe horned in, bastardised or could have been written in a much better fashion.  My conclusion was that Tuchanka had been written ahead of time by the ME2 team, and ported over by the writers of ME3.  Eveything else was ME3's writers attempt at tying together a storyline they had no vision for. 

Though I do not share many of your feelings on the game, at the very least you are justifying your stance on it way better then just saying "blah blah bad journal, Kai Leng, blah blah". The points you bring up are actually substantial, and for that, your opinion deserves respect. I was merely addressing those who seek any little avenue to fault the game.

Any game under the amount of scrutiny mass effect is enduring would have its review score decimated. Go nit pick through skyrim about the dragons flying backwards glitch.

I thought that that little glitch made Dragons more interesting. They tend to be pretty annoying, and that glitch definitely spiced up the encounters.

But, they fixed it.

[shurikenmanta]

Most of the technical issues would have gone unnoticed were it not for the ending. They were amped up cause people wanted to find more to dislike.

[Dendio1]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Dendio1 wrote...

I give Mass effect 3 an 8.8/10. Great game. Incomplete ending. I feel all of the harsher scores are the result of nit picking after the fact.

While gaming, I was not seriously affected by any other the major things people complain about. To go back after all is said and done and make a bigger deal out of things than you experianced while playing is unfair. Go pick apart skyrim and see what butchered score its left with.

While gaming the biggest issue I ran across was the random animation glitches where somebodies head would turn a little to far, or an Arm would start doing things arms dont normally do.

I can't begin to pick apart Skyrim, it's just too fun, and the broken parts only make it even more enjoyable.

I picked apart Mass Effect 3 as I played through it, and after I finished, I had even more time to pick it apart. Mass Effect 3 is hardly the game I thought I was buying, and I was already dreading it because of the multiplayer and they left in the scanning system.

Im sure someone can come along and turn skyrim into trash after nitpicking through it. O the world is soulless, O the dragons aren't hard enough, O why do I have such a small amount of loot space. O this game is too easy. O the glitches are so unprofessional. O the story is bland compared to other triple A rpgs like witcher 2 or Mass effect. O skyrim feels too big or Fast travel takes away from exploring.

Nit pickers will go on about the terrible intro or bethesda's infatuation with having the hero locked up at the start of the game. Lets start a game about exploration, by having the player locked up.

Nit pick about the character custormization being underwhelming or the dungeon grinding being repetative. Quest line breaking bugs or characters that don't have real significance.

Put skyrim under Mass effects microscope and it'll come out 3/10 as well

My point being that both games are fine, nit pickers are looking for reasons to complain...most of us enjoyed the game and were not hampered by the *flaws* ( and often didn't notice them)

Modifié par Dendio1, 08 mai 2012 - 08:02 .

[FatalX7.0]

shurikenmanta wrote...

Most of the technical issues would have gone unnoticed were it not for the ending. They were amped up cause people wanted to find more to dislike.

I think the ending simply broke the "illusion" for a lot of people.


We were indoctrinated by EA and believed the lies that they spit out about the game, choices that matter, closure, no space magic, not A, B, or C, fans are co-creators, lots of dialogue, blah, blah, blah.

Then the ending sucks and knocks people back down to Earth.

Modifié par FatalX7.0, 08 mai 2012 - 08:05 .