143 réponses à ce sujet

[macrocarl]

I love ME3 including the ending and MP. So BOO YAH BSN!

[AlanC9]

Fireblader70 wrote...
Squad dialogue? Same in ME2 as it is in ME3 - only difference I noticed is that you can ask the same questions again and again in ME2, but there is rarely anything new to talk about until after certain missions... like ME3.

Yep. Just played through Rannoch last night, and people have stuff to say about each sub-missinn at that world. We didn't have anything like that many interactions in ME2, even if the new convos are only one-liners.

I wonder if people actually liked starting a cinematic conversation only to find out that the companion had nothing new to say. I didn't like that in DA:O any more than I liked it in ME2, but mileages vary.

Considering the journal; exactly what do people need it to do that it isn't doing? The Citadel maps show anyone you've got an artifact for.

Modifié par AlanC9, 10 mai 2012 - 07:48 .

[Grimwick]

AlanC9 wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...
Squad dialogue? Same in ME2 as it is in ME3 - only difference I noticed is that you can ask the same questions again and again in ME2, but there is rarely anything new to talk about until after certain missions... like ME3.

Yep. Just played through Rannoch last night, and people have stuff to say about each sub-missinn at that world. We didn't have anything like that many interactions in ME2, even if the new convos are only one-liners.

I wonder if people actually liked starting a cinematic conversation only to find out that the companion had nothing new to say. I didn't like that in DA:O any more than I liked it in ME2, but mileages vary.

The problem for me is that I find the lines/lack of cinematics that occur after each mission incredibly boring and often de-immersifying. It felt to me like I was watching Shepard, not playing as Shepard.

In ME2 there were about 3-5 decent length conversations/cinematics you could have with each squad member after each mission. These conversations were great, they touched on a variety of personal issues, ME context and story points and I enjoyed them. Often, talking to them without them having anything to say would repeat the conversation but in rare cases such as Mordin they sometimes had something new to say.

From a pure, personal point of view - as far as entertainment and immersion go - I'd take the 3-5 decent length, well written cinematics after a few lines of 3rd person autodialogue any day.
[That said I do enjoy the banter between squadmates, that was good]

[Fireblader70]

Grimwick wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...
Squad dialogue? Same in ME2 as it is in ME3 - only difference I noticed is that you can ask the same questions again and again in ME2, but there is rarely anything new to talk about until after certain missions... like ME3.

Yep. Just played through Rannoch last night, and people have stuff to say about each sub-missinn at that world. We didn't have anything like that many interactions in ME2, even if the new convos are only one-liners.

I wonder if people actually liked starting a cinematic conversation only to find out that the companion had nothing new to say. I didn't like that in DA:O any more than I liked it in ME2, but mileages vary.

The problem for me is that I find the lines/lack of cinematics that occur after each mission incredibly boring and often de-immersifying. It felt to me like I was watching Shepard, not playing as Shepard.

In ME2 there were about 3-5 decent length conversations/cinematics you could have with each squad member after each mission. These conversations were great, they touched on a variety of personal issues, ME context and story points and I enjoyed them. Often, talking to them without them having anything to say would repeat the conversation but in rare cases such as Mordin they sometimes had something new to say.

From a pure, personal point of view - as far as entertainment and immersion go - I'd take the 3-5 decent length, well written cinematics after a few lines of 3rd person autodialogue any day.
[That said I do enjoy the banter between squadmates, that was good]

That's fair enough. It really is just subjective, and everyone has their own tastes. Personally? I don't mind my Shepard having his own personality that I influence, but I definitely understand why people would hate that.

[Locutus_of_BORG]

Not a failure, just a giant and surprising disappointment... It seemed so good going in.

[the_heat11]

M920CAIN wrote...

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)

Someone please smack the OP over the head! with a hammer! A BIG HAMMER! U BIG STUPID JELLY-OP!

Am i not entitled to my own opinion?

[arathor_87]

ME 3 wrote...

arathor_87 wrote...


I do understand why people complain about the fetch quests, but I can't undestand why some people say that all of the side quests in ME3 are bad. They also say: Look at ME2, the side quests was much better. Why? Only because it was more of them? Lets  take a look at the ME2 sidequests.

ME2 SIDEQUESTS:

C = Collect an item during another mission and deliver it to a person.
T = Talk and solve a problem.
O = Other (find missing person or play a minigame)

The following quests from ME2 are either collect an item and deliver, solve a problem by talking to people, find a person or other very very short quests:
Citadel: Crime in progress (t), Found forged ID (t), Krogan sushi (t).
Illium:) Blue rose of Illium (t), Indentured Service (t), Medical Scans (t), Lost locket found ©, Salarian family data ©, Smuggling evidence ©, Stolen goods found ©, System Hacking (o),
Normandy: FBA Couplings ©, Serrice ice brandy ©, Special ingredients ©
Omega: Batarian bartender (t), Datapad recovered ©, Missing assistant (o), Packages for Ish ©, Struggling quarian (t), The Patriach (t).
Tuchanka: Combustion Manifold ©, Killing pyjaks (o), Missing Scout (o).

N7:
We have 19 N7 missions in total. Many of them are like this. Scan a planet, land on the planet, kill something and go back to Normandy. The N7 missions are fun, but if you look closer they are not that long. Most of them takes between 5-15 (most of them 10-15 mintues) minutes to complete, without a story. 

For example, look at the quest Aria gives you in Omega, the N7: Eclipse Smuggling Depot. Land on the planet and kill 3 of the mechs who destroys the valuable cargos. It takes 5 minutes to complete. And there are several N7 missions like this, without a story or much gameplay.

In ME3 we have 6 N7 missions in total and the Benning: Evidence. We can compare those to the N7 missions in ME2. Land on a planet or ship, kill some enemies and back to Normandy. No real story, just action and some codex entries (ME2). 

But in ME3 we also get the following quests with a good story: Krogan Team (Grunt), Ardat-Yakshi Monastery (Samara), Grissom Academy (Jack), Rannoch (two quest), Tuchanka (two quests) and Arrae (Jacob). All those are side quests with a story. I don't know about you, but I prefer quality over quantity, and all of them are better than the best side quest in ME2.

Cheers!

 There were at least 50 proper side missions in ME2, and some of them linked together to create a mini story. 
In ME3 there were only 12 actual side quests (fetch quests don't count IMO) which is a pathetic number, compared to the amount in the past two games.

That's just a load of bullsh*t and a lie. There are not 50 proper side quests in ME2, many of them are very short (talk or collect and deliver). Take a closerlook at the side quest list again.

The only gameplay quests you get are the N7 missions, and many of them have no story or are very short. The gameplay side quests in ME3 are better than in ME2. But people like to whine about everything..

Modifié par arathor_87, 10 mai 2012 - 09:12 .

[AlanC9]

Grimwick wrote...
In ME2 there were about 3-5 decent length conversations/cinematics you could have with each squad member after each mission. These conversations were great, they touched on a variety of personal issues, ME context and story points and I enjoyed them. Often, talking to them without them having anything to say would repeat the conversation but in rare cases such as Mordin they sometimes had something new to say.

From a pure, personal point of view - as far as entertainment and immersion go - I'd take the 3-5 decent length, well written cinematics after a few lines of 3rd person autodialogue any day.
[That said I do enjoy the banter between squadmates, that was good]

But  the one-liners didn't replace full-length convos. ME3 has those too. Plus things like Shepard and Garrus having their shooting party.

How many full convos does Garrus have in ME2? I can think of only three offhand. The one you get after you recruit him, the one you get when his LM comes us, and the post-LM convo which is a gateway into the romance if you're going that route  ("reach and flexibility"). That's about as many full convos as he gets in ME3, isn't it?

Modifié par AlanC9, 10 mai 2012 - 09:05 .

[Grimwick]

AlanC9 wrote...

Grimwick wrote...
In ME2 there were about 3-5 decent length conversations/cinematics you could have with each squad member after each mission. These conversations were great, they touched on a variety of personal issues, ME context and story points and I enjoyed them. Often, talking to them without them having anything to say would repeat the conversation but in rare cases such as Mordin they sometimes had something new to say.

From a pure, personal point of view - as far as entertainment and immersion go - I'd take the 3-5 decent length, well written cinematics after a few lines of 3rd person autodialogue any day.
[That said I do enjoy the banter between squadmates, that was good]

But  the one-liners didn't replace full-length convos. ME3 has those too. Plus things like Shepard and Garrus having their shooting party.

How many full convos does Garrus have in ME2? I can think of only three offhand. The one you get after you recruit him, the one you get when his LM comes us, and the post-LM convo which is a gateway into the romance if you're going that route  ("reach and flexibility"). That's about as many full convos as he gets in ME3, isn't it?

But there are many more characters in ME2 to talk to and many have more than 3 conversations which overall means more cinematics than ME3, not to mention the number of non-normandy npcs without cinematics in ME3.

I admit, the conversations/cinematics we had in ME3 were great - the goodbyes, Garrus on the citadel, Liara's LI scene/project are some of the best scenes in the trilogy. But there were far too few and I prefer lots of decent convos with a few amazing ones (LotSB definitely) in ME2 than only a handful of amazing ones.

[brfritos]

arathor_87 wrote...
Yes, but in ME2 you worked for Cerberus, in ME3 you're back with the Alliance. Zaeed is a bounty hunter/mercenary. He goes were he gets paid, and the Alliance won't pay him for his services. Samara has an oath/strict code that she has to follow. Grunt has a clan, he's a Urdnot now, and a solider in their army. Thane has a deadly health condition.

And Miranda and Jacob have a history with Cerberus, do you think the Alliance want to work with them? If you follow the story you know that people within the council and the alliance are suspicious against Shepard for working with Cerberus in ME2. And if you didn't play Arrival DLC in ME2, you will be under arrest in the beginning of ME3 for working with Cerberus in ME2, not for blowing up the relay. So now we are down to two persons, Kasumi (a DLC character) and Jack. I would be happy to have Jack as a squad-member, but she wanted a new lifestyle, a fresh start after all her problems. And she got it at the Grissom Academy. She deserves it! Kasumi is great, but she's also a DLC character. For some people, she would be as a new squad-member. Not all people buys DLC.

We can only speculate of course, I'm very aware of this, but forget the ME3 story and how the ME2 characters are presented for a minute.

Miranda could be recruited allowing her to use the Alliance resources to find her sister for example. Also this could be used to create some interesting situations, like conflicts with some recruits and squadmembers because she is ex-Cerberus.
Being ex-Cerberus is not the problem, Hackett complains but will work regardless with the Geth, remember?

Zaeed also presents an opportunity, I have this crazy idea of him being involved in Priority Citadel II when you are forced to choose between him or the VS.
Jacob is hated or disliked by a large portion of the fan base, in fact he would be my choice for a permanent squadmember because of that. LOL

This can go on and on, but common', the devs have manny opportunities to bring back at least one of them, regardless of our preferences or their roles in ME2.
You need to create a believable justification for them to return, is just a matter of writing a plot.

Also, just to clarify, I don't have nothing against Vega.
In fact, he's the first real grunt Alliance soldier to behave exactly like a mindless grunt, his personallity - or the lack of it - is very good.

But...
In ME1 we have Ashley, an Alliance soldier tormented by her past.
In ME2 we have Jacob, an ex-Alliance soldier tormented by his past.
In ME3 we have Vega, an Alliance soldier...tormented by his past!

I mean, AGAIN?! Really?
This is too much of reusing some "assets" from previous games.

Modifié par brfritos, 10 mai 2012 - 09:16 .

[Tazzmission]

the_heat11 wrote...

Ok, so the ending was really dissapointing.  And maybe there were some other problems with the game
*cough* quest system *cough*. But In all honesty, i still think Mass Effect 3 was a truly great game.  Hate on me all you want, but it is actually one of my favourite games.

agreed and nicely put op

[brfritos]

AlanC9 wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...
Squad dialogue? Same in ME2 as it is in ME3 - only difference I noticed is that you can ask the same questions again and again in ME2, but there is rarely anything new to talk about until after certain missions... like ME3.

Yep. Just played through Rannoch last night, and people have stuff to say about each sub-missinn at that world. We didn't have anything like that many interactions in ME2, even if the new convos are only one-liners.

I wonder if people actually liked starting a cinematic conversation only to find out that the companion had nothing new to say. I didn't like that in DA:O any more than I liked it in ME2, but mileages vary.

Considering the journal; exactly what do people need it to do that it isn't doing? The Citadel maps show anyone you've got an artifact for.

You know what is more funny?
ME3 nailed on spot how your choices in previous games impact on dialogs and NPC interaction.
Usually people only quote the big decisons changes, but you have TONS of dialog changes in almost every quest or conversation in the game.

This coherence is what attracted me in ME1 and is very well done in ME3.
The NPCs interaction between them is also very good, what a difference from ME1/ME2!

Unfortunelly there are some aspects in the game that disappointed me, my overall feeling of ME3 is disappointment, not hate.
It's a good stand-alone game, not a masterpiece, but a good game that stands on his own.

Wich is also a problem BTW, because ME3 isolated is good, but he's the final part of a trilogy.

Modifié par brfritos, 10 mai 2012 - 09:36 .

[av196vad]

1. Limited dialog options

2. No planet exploration like in ME1 & ME2

3. Forced to play multiplayer in order to get Shepard to live

4. Lazy development of all romances (including Tali's photoshopped face)

5. Did I forget to mention that terrible ending?
     a. Plot holes
     b. Lack of closure
     c. Past choices don't matter
     d. No real choice in ending (all are virtually the same)

Sorry but ME3 is a failure in my book 

Modifié par av196vad, 10 mai 2012 - 10:29 .

[Mykel54]

The ony thing that was improved in my book is gameplay, which i suspect is related to the inclusion of multiplayer. Everything else was worse that past ME games, except very minor things (like squadmates chatting among them or improved graphics/some animations) that fail to redeem the game in my eyes.

[BooPi]

As for the story, put it this way: The plot wasn't great. The subplots and characters, though, were stellar.

It's everyone's personal opinion, but overall I don't regret playing ME3. Also one of my favorite games of all time, and I've been playing games a long time. My disappointment is of the "it could have been so much more" variety.

[DJ CAVE SLAVE]

Locutus_of_BORG wrote...

Not a failure, just a giant and surprising disappointment... It seemed so good going in.

That's what she said.

[napushenko]

ofcourse it isnt, its a perfect game with less then perfect ending.

[Erlex]

Allen Spellwaver wrote...

Erlex wrote...

Face it the game wasnt nearly as good as the first two, and its supposed to be a LOT better because its the FINAL game, and because they promised it -.-

To prove ME3 is some piece of garbage and make everybody consider it as some piece of garbage,is that what you want?

I never said its garbage, looking at some other games its pretty damn good,  ME will still stay one of my favourite franchise, but what im trying to say is, its not that much worse that the other games but when you see it as A FINAL game, I mean they could do so much more, they had so much potential, and just wasted half of it. And not to talk about the ending, thats a completely different thing. Anyway quoting on kmol here
"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.
"

Thats what im thinking, and what im trying to say...