143 réponses à ce sujet

[Allen Spellwaver]

Naughty Bear wrote...

The story in ME 3 was ****** poor, It was truly pathetic but I am glad the op enjoyed it. To me, the characters, gameplay and unfortunately multiplayer were the only redeeming features. I still can not believe how Cerberus was treated, that was really poor writing.

Poor writing?Bad characters?What if you do the writing?I doubt it won't be any better.

[Zeroth Angel]

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

The story in ME 3 was ****** poor, It was truly pathetic but I am glad the op enjoyed it. To me, the characters, gameplay and unfortunately multiplayer were the only redeeming features. I still can not believe how Cerberus was treated, that was really poor writing.

Poor writing?Bad characters?What if you do the writing?I doubt it won't be any better.

Considering the ending...i think anyone can do better.

[Allen Spellwaver]

Wimbini wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

The story in ME 3 was ****** poor, It was truly pathetic but I am glad the op enjoyed it. To me, the characters, gameplay and unfortunately multiplayer were the only redeeming features. I still can not believe how Cerberus was treated, that was really poor writing.

Poor writing?Bad characters?What if you do the writing?I doubt it won't be any better.

Considering the ending...i think anyone can do better.

He means the whole story.Can anyone do better on Tuchankka or Rannoch?

[XqctaX]

merrick97 wrote...

I am also amazed that people still say that 95% of the game is great, its just that the ending is bad.

Yet everyone ignores:

1. The bad journal system
2. The lack of branched dialogue
3. Story cop-outs (Rachni queen anyone?)
4. The horrible beginning
5. The HORRIBLE HORRIBLE eavesdropping fetch quests that got you meaningless war assets.
6. The small number of actual sidequests

and for me the biggest issue was:

7. The linearity.

Its just that the endings are so bad that it makes us ignore the games other faults.


Having said that if Mass Effect 3 is judged as a Sci-fi third person shooter with some RPG Id easily give it an 8. Its great fun in that regard.

However, when judged and compared to the Mass Effect games that place strong emphasis on story and decisions it gets a 6 because all of that gets pushed to the back in favor of action. The ultimate insult comes when the ending completely throws all that out.

I still do not believe that Mass Effect 3 is truly the game that Bioware wanted to make.

I DO believe that they had intended the Indoctrination theory to be the actual ending and that there would be another sequence at the end of the game in which Shepard overcomes the indoctrination and actually ends the reaper threat, but a deadline forced them to cut all of that and just end it with what they had.

I also liked the Dark Energy theory and the more I think about it I felt that the Dark Energy theory would have made ME4 much more possible.

[Zeroth Angel]

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Wimbini wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

The story in ME 3 was ****** poor, It was truly pathetic but I am glad the op enjoyed it. To me, the characters, gameplay and unfortunately multiplayer were the only redeeming features. I still can not believe how Cerberus was treated, that was really poor writing.

Poor writing?Bad characters?What if you do the writing?I doubt it won't be any better.

Considering the ending...i think anyone can do better.

He means the whole story.Can anyone do better on Tuchankka or Rannoch?

I agree that Tuchanka and Rannoch were very good indeed.
But the rest was imo just bad.

[Eain]

the_heat11 wrote...

jreezy wrote...

Good gameplay, bad story. Not exactly a failure but it's nowhere near a success either.

Again, you can hate on me all you want, but I liked the story too (except the ending)

Liking the story is fine. People have differing standards of quality.

I personally thought the (main) story was a poorly cobbled together mess of cliches and crutches.

Modifié par Eain, 10 mai 2012 - 11:45 .

[kbeklla]

the game is a good game and is entertaining but the loop holes has made it feel unfinished which isnt a good thing, their were a few tech issues but then their are with most game out at the moment, it just felt like it was rushed, could be due to the leaks and ea.

most dissapointing for me were,

the way the me2 crew, who would in me2 do anything for you, turned on you and brushed you aside knowing you were the best chance for humanity, the normandy felt so empty.

i would have prefered the arival dlc, or the start of me3, to have included the court so you could justify and defend yourself,
the start of the game should have included your love intrest and not ashley or kaiden,

the fact that bioware forgot what happened in the first game with the info from vigil

the decision to not make udina councillor and then if you smeared him in me2, to only have him councillor in me3 is beyond a joke.

then bioware show what they are capable of with only some aspects of the story,priority tuchanka, priority rannoch were the best parts of the game with thane's conclusion in their as well, i did also enjoy prothy the prothean's story and how liara was wrong even with all her research

whilst as a whole the game isnt a faliure they could have done so much more, and has really limited the replayabilty of the entire franchise for me, i was going to go back and play fem shep from 1 but now really cant be bothered until i see what the ec dlc adds

[MattFini]

Does it have to be either or?

It's not a total failure, although the mess of an ending does undo a lot of the franchise's lore. I mean, really, who in the hell thought it would be appropriate to rip-off the Matrix sequels (two movies that aren't exactly critically acclaimed) as a way of ending this great saga?

But yes, the gameplay is fun. And I don't even think the story is that bad. Yes, I wanted something a bit different, but overall I enjoyed it. And ME3 does have, arguably, the most emotional moments in gaming. That's impressive.

But ... if we're being honest and saying that it's not a failure, let's be equally honest and say it's not a masterpiece, either. That journal system sucks. The 'eavesdropping' fetch quests are lazy and the N7 missions are disappointing horde grind fests.

I like the missions in the main quest until Priority: Earth, and a few of the side missions are great: Grissom Academy and the Asari monastery come to mind. But the rest of the side quests are pretty bland and uninspired.

[Naughty Bear]

If anyone has read fan fiction for ME 3, you will know that there are many many good ones. One guy wrote a decent piece of writing about how TIM could of been handled better instead of just being a pantomine villain. The story of ME 3 was poor, the fans can and have shown they could do better. The characters were good.

[XqctaX]

Jonata wrote...

Mass Effect 3 was a truely unique game, just like Mass Effect 2 and 1 were when they came out. But my opinion is that BioWare spoiled his own costumers, that now expect always more, and more, and more from their creations: it's good because it means that they know how to make a game, but when you can't match the inhuman expectations and people start to say that they will never buy another game from you, things get ugly.

* snippage*

1. accually what most people propably expected was ME3 to have the features
that was accually said it contained during PR.  

2. and they  probably expected the game to be at the same level of quality as the 2 previous ones.

and your opinion is that becouse of that, the customers are spoiled and have inhumain expectations.

that's what your saying and guess what,
that is utter bullcrap and you should be ashamed for that missrepresentation.

if you dont know what your talking about,
stop talking or go get informed and then come back with an opinion
thats at least remotely based on reality.

[Naughty Bear]

In fact, look at my friends list and look for Alleyd. He wrote a thread on how TIM could of been handled much better and actually using his intelligence instead of being a Reaper pawn. Alleyd made TIM actually believe he was doing the right thing, not because indoctrination told him it was.

[Allen Spellwaver]

Vurculac wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

The story in ME 3 was ****** poor, It was truly pathetic but I am glad the op enjoyed it. To me, the characters, gameplay and unfortunately multiplayer were the only redeeming features. I still can not believe how Cerberus was treated, that was really poor writing.

Poor writing?Bad characters?What if you do the writing?I doubt it won't be any better.

First of all read the post. He states that the characters is actually one of the redeeming qualities of the game (along with gameplay and MP). And using the whole "can you do it better" argument is total horsesh*t.

Second of all reading some of the head cannon on these threads....I would be inclined to believe that yes...it is completely possible that he could in fact do better.

Face it ME 3 failed on some level. Yes, people had complaints about ME 1 and 2. There will always be people with complaints, can't please everyone all the time. But you can't tell me that it was anywhere near the sh*tstorm that ME3 has generated....not an effing chance. And still going...two months later.

The controversy on the ending amplified the normal complaint.IMO,the story(except the ending)is totally overwhelming the previous two games.If the dialogue and side quests are a little bit well-done,ME3 is obvously the best of the trilogy when ME2 is the worst. 
ME3 has the most compelling story.But despite the great characters,the main storyline of ME2 was just not so good.After recruting squadmates over and over,people are going to forget their enemy is collectors.I think this is a equally huge issue as ME3's ending.

Modifié par Allen Spellwaver, 10 mai 2012 - 12:13 .

[Allen Spellwaver]

Naughty Bear wrote...

In fact, look at my friends list and look for Alleyd. He wrote a thread on how TIM could of been handled much better and actually using his intelligence instead of being a Reaper pawn. Alleyd made TIM actually believe he was doing the right thing, not because indoctrination told him it was.

TIM never realize he was indocrinated.He thought he was doing exact what he wanted.
Through this what I feel is the subtle but extraordinary power of indoctrination and a little admiration to TIM.

[Peregrin25]

First I will start with what I liked about ME3. I really enjoyed the squad relationships. I mean especially Garrus, Tali, Liara, Ashely or Kaiden. Those characters had been with you since game one save Liara in ME2. It was nice to have those chats with your squad remembering old times.

The Choices having an effect on Priority: Rannoch and Tuchanka. That was awesome. As for everything else, the quest system was kinda crap tastic as well was the quest log and journal. Priority: Thessia and Earth felt rushed. Kai Leng was an unnecessary addition as far as an antagonist goes. And then there is the lack luster ending that makes no sense. But overall, I really enjoyed the game save those issues, which still do rub me the wrong way. I however because of the faults have not been able to get back intop the ME series. I just a bit too depressed knowing how it ends. And I really do not have a lot of hope for BioWare with the Extended Cut DLC. I think it will end up raising more questions than it answers.

If I had to critique it I would give it a 5/10

Story was pretty good though. I just wish it followed more true to ME 1 and 2

[legion999]

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Vurculac wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

The story in ME 3 was ****** poor, It was truly pathetic but I am glad the op enjoyed it. To me, the characters, gameplay and unfortunately multiplayer were the only redeeming features. I still can not believe how Cerberus was treated, that was really poor writing.

Poor writing?Bad characters?What if you do the writing?I doubt it won't be any better.

First of all read the post. He states that the characters is actually one of the redeeming qualities of the game (along with gameplay and MP). And using the whole "can you do it better" argument is total horsesh*t.

Second of all reading some of the head cannon on these threads....I would be inclined to believe that yes...it is completely possible that he could in fact do better.

Face it ME 3 failed on some level. Yes, people had complaints about ME 1 and 2. There will always be people with complaints, can't please everyone all the time. But you can't tell me that it was anywhere near the sh*tstorm that ME3 has generated....not an effing chance. And still going...two months later.

The controversy on the ending amplified the normal complaint.IMO,the story(except the ending)is totally overwhelming the previous two games.If the dialogue and side quests are better,ME3 is obvously the best of the trilogy when ME2 is the worst. 
ME3 has the most compelling story.But despite the great characters,the main storyline of ME2 was just not so good.After recruting squadmates over and over,people are going to forget their enemy is collectors.I think this is a equally huge issue as ME3's ending.

And when playing the story of Mass Effect 3 I forget the main enemy are the Reapers not Cerberus.

[Allen Spellwaver]

legion999 wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Vurculac wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

The story in ME 3 was ****** poor, It was truly pathetic but I am glad the op enjoyed it. To me, the characters, gameplay and unfortunately multiplayer were the only redeeming features. I still can not believe how Cerberus was treated, that was really poor writing.

Poor writing?Bad characters?What if you do the writing?I doubt it won't be any better.

First of all read the post. He states that the characters is actually one of the redeeming qualities of the game (along with gameplay and MP). And using the whole "can you do it better" argument is total horsesh*t.

Second of all reading some of the head cannon on these threads....I would be inclined to believe that yes...it is completely possible that he could in fact do better.

Face it ME 3 failed on some level. Yes, people had complaints about ME 1 and 2. There will always be people with complaints, can't please everyone all the time. But you can't tell me that it was anywhere near the sh*tstorm that ME3 has generated....not an effing chance. And still going...two months later.

The controversy on the ending amplified the normal complaint.IMO,the story(except the ending)is totally overwhelming the previous two games.If the dialogue and side quests are better,ME3 is obvously the best of the trilogy when ME2 is the worst. 
ME3 has the most compelling story.But despite the great characters,the main storyline of ME2 was just not so good.After recruting squadmates over and over,people are going to forget their enemy is collectors.I think this is a equally huge issue as ME3's ending.

And when playing the story of Mass Effect 3 I forget the main enemy are the Reapers not Cerberus.

Cerberus worked with Reapers and Reapers' presence was not rare.

[the_heat11]

Its nice to see that everyone here has their own opinion, and they can back it up well. like i said in my post, games are all about preference and one can only know if they like a game by actually playing it, not by listnening to what other people say. although i heard about all the madness about me3, i still decided to try it. and im glad i did

[legion999]

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

legion999 wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Vurculac wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

The story in ME 3 was ****** poor, It was truly pathetic but I am glad the op enjoyed it. To me, the characters, gameplay and unfortunately multiplayer were the only redeeming features. I still can not believe how Cerberus was treated, that was really poor writing.

Poor writing?Bad characters?What if you do the writing?I doubt it won't be any better.

First of all read the post. He states that the characters is actually one of the redeeming qualities of the game (along with gameplay and MP). And using the whole "can you do it better" argument is total horsesh*t.

Second of all reading some of the head cannon on these threads....I would be inclined to believe that yes...it is completely possible that he could in fact do better.

Face it ME 3 failed on some level. Yes, people had complaints about ME 1 and 2. There will always be people with complaints, can't please everyone all the time. But you can't tell me that it was anywhere near the sh*tstorm that ME3 has generated....not an effing chance. And still going...two months later.

The controversy on the ending amplified the normal complaint.IMO,the story(except the ending)is totally overwhelming the previous two games.If the dialogue and side quests are better,ME3 is obvously the best of the trilogy when ME2 is the worst. 
ME3 has the most compelling story.But despite the great characters,the main storyline of ME2 was just not so good.After recruting squadmates over and over,people are going to forget their enemy is collectors.I think this is a equally huge issue as ME3's ending.

And when playing the story of Mass Effect 3 I forget the main enemy are the Reapers not Cerberus.

Cerberus worked with Reapers and Reapers' presence was not rare.

So the Reapers allowed TIM to research ways to control them? If the Reapers controlled TIM the entire time then why did Cerberus fight them on Sanctuary.

[Allen Spellwaver]

legion999 wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

legion999 wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Vurculac wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

The story in ME 3 was ****** poor, It was truly pathetic but I am glad the op enjoyed it. To me, the characters, gameplay and unfortunately multiplayer were the only redeeming features. I still can not believe how Cerberus was treated, that was really poor writing.

Poor writing?Bad characters?What if you do the writing?I doubt it won't be any better.

First of all read the post. He states that the characters is actually one of the redeeming qualities of the game (along with gameplay and MP). And using the whole "can you do it better" argument is total horsesh*t.

Second of all reading some of the head cannon on these threads....I would be inclined to believe that yes...it is completely possible that he could in fact do better.

Face it ME 3 failed on some level. Yes, people had complaints about ME 1 and 2. There will always be people with complaints, can't please everyone all the time. But you can't tell me that it was anywhere near the sh*tstorm that ME3 has generated....not an effing chance. And still going...two months later.

The controversy on the ending amplified the normal complaint.IMO,the story(except the ending)is totally overwhelming the previous two games.If the dialogue and side quests are better,ME3 is obvously the best of the trilogy when ME2 is the worst. 
ME3 has the most compelling story.But despite the great characters,the main storyline of ME2 was just not so good.After recruting squadmates over and over,people are going to forget their enemy is collectors.I think this is a equally huge issue as ME3's ending.

And when playing the story of Mass Effect 3 I forget the main enemy are the Reapers not Cerberus.

Cerberus worked with Reapers and Reapers' presence was not rare.

So the Reapers allowed TIM to research ways to control them? If the Reapers controlled TIM the entire time then why did Cerberus fight them on Sanctuary.

Because TIM has strong willpower and refuses to be indoc.What Reapers did was just some subtle mis-leading and make him believe Reapers should not be destroied but still need to be stopped.TIM was on the process of being indoc but not totally be untill the ending,or maybe right in the middle of  the Sanctuary mission.I guess it's really possible considering he ordered Kai Leng to take Miranda's father's data.He may want to give it to the Reapers which is contradicted to his previous orders for his troops.Oh,besides there is no other troops in the last half of that mission,right?They could be given a totally different order and evacuated.
He worked with Reapers because what Shep is doing actually threatening the Reapers or his plan.

Modifié par Allen Spellwaver, 10 mai 2012 - 12:35 .

[kbeklla]

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

legion999 wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

legion999 wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Vurculac wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

The story in ME 3 was ****** poor, It was truly pathetic but I am glad the op enjoyed it. To me, the characters, gameplay and unfortunately multiplayer were the only redeeming features. I still can not believe how Cerberus was treated, that was really poor writing.

Poor writing?Bad characters?What if you do the writing?I doubt it won't be any better.

First of all read the post. He states that the characters is actually one of the redeeming qualities of the game (along with gameplay and MP). And using the whole "can you do it better" argument is total horsesh*t.

Second of all reading some of the head cannon on these threads....I would be inclined to believe that yes...it is completely possible that he could in fact do better.

Face it ME 3 failed on some level. Yes, people had complaints about ME 1 and 2. There will always be people with complaints, can't please everyone all the time. But you can't tell me that it was anywhere near the sh*tstorm that ME3 has generated....not an effing chance. And still going...two months later.

The controversy on the ending amplified the normal complaint.IMO,the story(except the ending)is totally overwhelming the previous two games.If the dialogue and side quests are better,ME3 is obvously the best of the trilogy when ME2 is the worst. 
ME3 has the most compelling story.But despite the great characters,the main storyline of ME2 was just not so good.After recruting squadmates over and over,people are going to forget their enemy is collectors.I think this is a equally huge issue as ME3's ending.

And when playing the story of Mass Effect 3 I forget the main enemy are the Reapers not Cerberus.

Cerberus worked with Reapers and Reapers' presence was not rare.

So the Reapers allowed TIM to research ways to control them? If the Reapers controlled TIM the entire time then why did Cerberus fight them on Sanctuary.

Because TIM has strong willpower and refuses to be indoc.What Reapers did was just some subtle mis-leading and make him believe Reapers should not be destroied but still need to be stopped.TIM was on the process of being indoc but not totally be untill the ending,or maybe right in the middle of  the Sanctuary mission.I guess it's really possible considering he ordered Kai Leng to take Miranda's father's data.He may want to give it to the Reapers which is contradicted to his previous orders for his troops.Oh,besides there is no other troops in the last half of that mission,right?They could be given a totally different order and evacuated.
He worked with Reapers because what Shep is doing actually threatening the Reapers or his plan.

TIM was under reaper influence befor the group cerberus started off due to the artifact on shanxi, so the start of ceberus would/could have been part of the reapers plan or at least they know about it, the reaper control is what the reapers want you to invest in, so allow cerberus to continue reasearching it and then attack, making humanity think that control is the only way forward

[Yervan]

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

The story in ME 3 was ****** poor, It was truly pathetic but I am glad the op enjoyed it. To me, the characters, gameplay and unfortunately multiplayer were the only redeeming features. I still can not believe how Cerberus was treated, that was really poor writing.

Poor writing?Bad characters?What if you do the writing?I doubt it won't be any better.

To be honest, I really liked the story! There's nothing wrong with it though.

Yeah and what if you do the writing, the whole universe will puke at your's

*no offense*

[Allen Spellwaver]

kbeklla wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

legion999 wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

legion999 wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Vurculac wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

The story in ME 3 was ****** poor, It was truly pathetic but I am glad the op enjoyed it. To me, the characters, gameplay and unfortunately multiplayer were the only redeeming features. I still can not believe how Cerberus was treated, that was really poor writing.

Poor writing?Bad characters?What if you do the writing?I doubt it won't be any better.

First of all read the post. He states that the characters is actually one of the redeeming qualities of the game (along with gameplay and MP). And using the whole "can you do it better" argument is total horsesh*t.

Second of all reading some of the head cannon on these threads....I would be inclined to believe that yes...it is completely possible that he could in fact do better.

Face it ME 3 failed on some level. Yes, people had complaints about ME 1 and 2. There will always be people with complaints, can't please everyone all the time. But you can't tell me that it was anywhere near the sh*tstorm that ME3 has generated....not an effing chance. And still going...two months later.

The controversy on the ending amplified the normal complaint.IMO,the story(except the ending)is totally overwhelming the previous two games.If the dialogue and side quests are better,ME3 is obvously the best of the trilogy when ME2 is the worst. 
ME3 has the most compelling story.But despite the great characters,the main storyline of ME2 was just not so good.After recruting squadmates over and over,people are going to forget their enemy is collectors.I think this is a equally huge issue as ME3's ending.

And when playing the story of Mass Effect 3 I forget the main enemy are the Reapers not Cerberus.

Cerberus worked with Reapers and Reapers' presence was not rare.

So the Reapers allowed TIM to research ways to control them? If the Reapers controlled TIM the entire time then why did Cerberus fight them on Sanctuary.

Because TIM has strong willpower and refuses to be indoc.What Reapers did was just some subtle mis-leading and make him believe Reapers should not be destroied but still need to be stopped.TIM was on the process of being indoc but not totally be untill the ending,or maybe right in the middle of  the Sanctuary mission.I guess it's really possible considering he ordered Kai Leng to take Miranda's father's data.He may want to give it to the Reapers which is contradicted to his previous orders for his troops.Oh,besides there is no other troops in the last half of that mission,right?They could be given a totally different order and evacuated.
He worked with Reapers because what Shep is doing actually threatening the Reapers or his plan.

TIM was under reaper influence befor the group cerberus started off due to the artifact on shanxi, so the start of ceberus would/could have been part of the reapers plan or at least they know about it, the reaper control is what the reapers want you to invest in, so allow cerberus to continue reasearching it and then attack, making humanity think that control is the only way forward

Yep,but it's not contradict with my guessing.

[Naughty Bear]

kbeklla wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

legion999 wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

legion999 wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Vurculac wrote...

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

The story in ME 3 was ****** poor, It was truly pathetic but I am glad the op enjoyed it. To me, the characters, gameplay and unfortunately multiplayer were the only redeeming features. I still can not believe how Cerberus was treated, that was really poor writing.

Poor writing?Bad characters?What if you do the writing?I doubt it won't be any better.

First of all read the post. He states that the characters is actually one of the redeeming qualities of the game (along with gameplay and MP). And using the whole "can you do it better" argument is total horsesh*t.

Second of all reading some of the head cannon on these threads....I would be inclined to believe that yes...it is completely possible that he could in fact do better.

Face it ME 3 failed on some level. Yes, people had complaints about ME 1 and 2. There will always be people with complaints, can't please everyone all the time. But you can't tell me that it was anywhere near the sh*tstorm that ME3 has generated....not an effing chance. And still going...two months later.

The controversy on the ending amplified the normal complaint.IMO,the story(except the ending)is totally overwhelming the previous two games.If the dialogue and side quests are better,ME3 is obvously the best of the trilogy when ME2 is the worst. 
ME3 has the most compelling story.But despite the great characters,the main storyline of ME2 was just not so good.After recruting squadmates over and over,people are going to forget their enemy is collectors.I think this is a equally huge issue as ME3's ending.

And when playing the story of Mass Effect 3 I forget the main enemy are the Reapers not Cerberus.

Cerberus worked with Reapers and Reapers' presence was not rare.

So the Reapers allowed TIM to research ways to control them? If the Reapers controlled TIM the entire time then why did Cerberus fight them on Sanctuary.

Because TIM has strong willpower and refuses to be indoc.What Reapers did was just some subtle mis-leading and make him believe Reapers should not be destroied but still need to be stopped.TIM was on the process of being indoc but not totally be untill the ending,or maybe right in the middle of  the Sanctuary mission.I guess it's really possible considering he ordered Kai Leng to take Miranda's father's data.He may want to give it to the Reapers which is contradicted to his previous orders for his troops.Oh,besides there is no other troops in the last half of that mission,right?They could be given a totally different order and evacuated.
He worked with Reapers because what Shep is doing actually threatening the Reapers or his plan.

TIM was under reaper influence befor the group cerberus started off due to the artifact on shanxi, so the start of ceberus would/could have been part of the reapers plan or at least they know about it, the reaper control is what the reapers want you to invest in, so allow cerberus to continue reasearching it and then attack, making humanity think that control is the only way forward

Yes and no. Just because he came into contact with indoctrination does not mean you are fully indoctrinated full stop. There are stages and you need to be in constant presence for days. Shepard has possibly been in contact with Reaper tech more than TIM.

[Lenseflare]

Isolated, ME3 is a overall good game compared to other games on consule/pc.

Playing on action mode,
Mass Effect 3 has an avarage combat system. Its got very good story elements and voice acting and some slight influence of rpg elements (weapon upgrades).

However the problem is, Mass Effect 3 is not isolated.
And the reason why you played and enjoyed Mass Effect 1 & 2,
is not the reason why you would enjoy Mass Effect 3.


I am dissapointed, still I enjoyed playing it for a while.
But I cant see ME3 as a game I would keep comming back to,
as opposed to ME1 & ME2.