301 réponses à ce sujet

[Zero132132]

The crucible, and the fact that if Mordin dies in ME2, you get a suspiciously similar substitute filling the exact same damned role with almost no adjustment in the plot. That the game is around 20 hours long.

[Zaire Taylor]

Not being able to talk to my squadmates. They each get like two conversations. Should have at least 4 or 5 lengthy ones for each considering how small the squad was. Narrative was too Earth-centric, and the idea of the Crucible bothered me. Overall it felt a bit rushed. Solid game, some great moments, but not on par with the first two games.

[Torxen]

Every single thing that every single person said. So let down...

[Cronotis]

savionen wrote...

Everything including and after Thessia was pretty weak.
Only one major city.
Harbinger was missing (one of my favorite characters)
Volus and Elcor were missing. Was hoping to see Elcor actually fight, or something at least.
Too much Cerberus
Auto-Dialogue

^This sorta...
Moving away from RPG, and toward COD/GOWBioware lies (oops ending related ;P)Tali romance payoffFinal earth missions < ME2 Suicide missEA: 10$ Launch DLC
EA: MP tied to SPEA: microtransaction focused MP
EA: The ending? (wild speculation)  Oops.
Oh yeah the ending  too,

Modifié par Cronotis, 01 juillet 2012 - 06:48 .

[N-Seven]

Great game, though I absolutely hated the 'defend the missile battery' sequence at the end. London and the final Cerberus base, as far as action-sequences go, were not as entertaining as the action finales in the previous two games.

[darthnick427]

auto dialog, Tali's face, no Harbinger convo, and Grunt and Legion not being a squadmates....Instead I got James and EDI....who are cool in their own right but they are no Grunt and Legion

Modifié par darthnick427, 01 juillet 2012 - 06:56 .

[s17tabris]

I don't want to list everything down again so I'm gonna mention only one. Autopilot Shep.

[CroGamer002]

Lack of core ME2 squadmates.

Some of my choices going nowhere.

Cerberus becoming a comic book n@azis villains.

No Harbinger.

War Assets not shown in action.

No Suicide Mission style mission.

Modifié par Mesina2, 01 juillet 2012 - 07:02 .

[Wesker1984]

Not having the chance to recruit a krogan.

[EnvyTB075]

Auto-dialogue, the Gears of War combat rehash, the bugs, the crucible (doesn't only exist in the ending), the fetch quests, the N7 missions that are just the multiplayer maps with little substance, the lineararity and the fact that my shep had been taken out of my hands and turned into BioWares shepard.

The only good thing i like about the game is the MP, because thats the only place where the combat works. I can't stand the single player with the way it is now.

Modifié par EnvyTB075, 01 juillet 2012 - 07:11 .

[N-Seven]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

Auto-dialogue, the Gears of War combat rehash, the bugs, the crucible (doesn't only exist in the ending), the fetch quests, the N7 missions that are just the multiplayer maps with little substance, the lineararity and the fact that my shep had been taken out of my hands and turned into BioWares shepard.

The only good thing i like about the game is the MP, because thats the only place where the combat works. I can't stand the single player with the way it is now.

Granted though, a lot of that stuff (auto dialogue, bugs, GoW, fetch missions) comprised the bulk of the first two games.  Where the combat was less fluid, and there was no multiplayer.  So why did you play through those two games?

[MegaSovereign]

The lack of hub worlds. I miss Illium and Omega. ME3's Citadel is better than ME2's but it doesn't justify not having multiple hub worlds.

[o Ventus]

2 major things that annoy me equally.

1. The ******-awful implementation of the ME2 characters (sans Legion and Mordin).

2. The even worse romance continuations of the ME2 characters. Hell, FemShep doesn't even get a ME2 romance in ME3 except for Garrus.

Modifié par o Ventus, 01 juillet 2012 - 07:21 .

[o Ventus]

N-Seven wrote...

EnvyTB075 wrote...

Auto-dialogue, the Gears of War combat rehash, the bugs, the crucible (doesn't only exist in the ending), the fetch quests, the N7 missions that are just the multiplayer maps with little substance, the lineararity and the fact that my shep had been taken out of my hands and turned into BioWares shepard.

The only good thing i like about the game is the MP, because thats the only place where the combat works. I can't stand the single player with the way it is now.

Granted though, a lot of that stuff (auto dialogue, bugs, GoW, fetch missions) comprised the bulk of the first two games.  Where the combat was less fluid, and there was no multiplayer.  So why did you play through those two games?

Wait, what?

There was NO auto-dialogue in ME1 (Save for some DLC). There was very little autodialogue in ME2. At least 40% of the dialogue in ME3 is automated. There may have been fetch quests in ME1 and ME2, but they didn't comprise 70% of the optional content in the SP.

[AxStapleton]

N-Seven wrote...

EnvyTB075 wrote...

Auto-dialogue, the Gears of War combat rehash, the bugs, the crucible (doesn't only exist in the ending), the fetch quests, the N7 missions that are just the multiplayer maps with little substance, the lineararity and the fact that my shep had been taken out of my hands and turned into BioWares shepard.

The only good thing i like about the game is the MP, because thats the only place where the combat works. I can't stand the single player with the way it is now.

Granted though, a lot of that stuff (auto dialogue, bugs, GoW, fetch missions) comprised the bulk of the first two games.  Where the combat was less fluid, and there was no multiplayer.  So why did you play through those two games?

Fetch missions where you barely had to get out of the ship didn't even nearly make up the majority of side missions in ME 1 and ME2. They really did in ME3. I felt that was a really weak side to the game. (Finding a book for someone in the middle of an apocalyptic war!)

Modifié par AxStapleton, 01 juillet 2012 - 07:24 .

[dayvancowboy1]

 that the game was rushed and the dev team's vision wasn't truly achieved.

[j78]

Broken quest system, auto dialogue, storylines and choices going nowhere, kaiden and ash being out of their minds, no final battle ,awful textures ,ME2 characters being marginalized .

[EnvyTB075]

N-Seven wrote...

Granted though, a lot of that stuff (auto dialogue, bugs, GoW, fetch missions) comprised the bulk of the first two games.  Where the combat was less fluid, and there was no multiplayer.  So why did you play through those two games?

The fetch missions had substance, the auto-dialogue was idle chatter, nothing actually important character developmentally wise (why couldn't Talis drunken convo have been a cutscene with some dialogue trees?). However, your jab about the combat doesn't make sense to me. Why?

Because the combat was better in ME2. Just because combat is "faster" or "more fluid" does not automatically mean it is better. In ME2 Shepard felt grounded, felt like she existed in the game world with her movement, when running she actually felt like she was running, ME3 it feels like you're a ghost, like a standard FPS. You couldn't just escape by Gears roadie running away, you had to think about your movement, what weapon you were using to counter a specific defense along with your ammo type. ME2 was challenging not by just throwing thousands of enemies at you and buffing the hardest enemies, but by level design and enemy composition.

ME3's combat had none of the things that made ME2 challenging. On insanity its flipping easy with only two exceptions, the three Geth Primes on Rannoch and the missile battery defence, and even those two were barely a battle. On the missile battery battle, three Banshees? Just run around cloaked until the missiles are ready. Its not fun, its repetitive and it feels like a Gears of War rehash. ME2 was better, it had its own character in its combat. It also had points in the combat where you could put your weapon away and explore the surrounding a bit, like Mordins lab. It still felt like an RPG even if many elements were removed. ME3 was just a straight shooter, if you weren't shooting, you were on the Citadel or Normandy.

As for MP, ME never needed MP, but the fact that its better than the SP rings alarm bells in all the wrong places. ME3's best mode should never have been the MP, i shouldn't want to play MP over the SP, but i do.

ME2 is substantially better than ME3 in every single way.

Modifié par EnvyTB075, 01 juillet 2012 - 07:30 .

[N-Seven]

o Ventus wrote...

N-Seven wrote...

EnvyTB075 wrote...

Auto-dialogue, the Gears of War combat rehash, the bugs, the crucible (doesn't only exist in the ending), the fetch quests, the N7 missions that are just the multiplayer maps with little substance, the lineararity and the fact that my shep had been taken out of my hands and turned into BioWares shepard.

The only good thing i like about the game is the MP, because thats the only place where the combat works. I can't stand the single player with the way it is now.

Granted though, a lot of that stuff (auto dialogue, bugs, GoW, fetch missions) comprised the bulk of the first two games.  Where the combat was less fluid, and there was no multiplayer.  So why did you play through those two games?

Wait, what?

There was NO auto-dialogue in ME1 (Save for some DLC). There was very little autodialogue in ME2. At least 40% of the dialogue in ME3 is automated. There may have been fetch quests in ME1 and ME2, but they didn't comprise 70% of the optional content in the SP.

Where are these percentages from?  Anyways, to me there isn't a drastic difference in the amount of dialogue choice in these three games.  And as far as missions go, I don't believe it's any more of a step down than say, ME1.  Scan the keepers, search identical bases over and over, etc.

I am irritated than the underlying insinuation that some people are making (not you, necessarily) is that ME3 is somehow far worse than ME1 or ME2, or that the SP game lacks any merit at all.  That's where this convo is heading though.   Peace out.

Modifié par N-Seven, 01 juillet 2012 - 07:41 .

[o Ventus]

N-Seven wrote...

Where are these percentages from?  Anyways, to me there isn't a drastic difference in the amount of dialogue choice in these three games.  And as far as missions go, I don't believe it's any more of a step down than say, ME1.  Scan the keepers, search identical bases over and over, etc.

I am irritated than the underlying insinuation that some people are making (not you, necessarily) is that ME3 is somehow far worse than ME1 or ME2, or that the SP game lacks any merit at all.  That's where this convo is heading though.   Peace out.

Really? Renegade and Paragon both feel and sound very different to me. Also, scanning the keepers isn't a fetch quest, nor were the bases and anomalies in ME1. Not to mention that at least the bases had more depth than "press button, gather war assets".

[Gogzilla]

1.Auto-dialog

How war assets never got screen time.
The council is the same live or die, not even extra dialog(ME1's final decisions were effectively canned)
The Space battle was rather short, ME1 had a better space battle.

[EnvyTB075]

Dialogue in ME3 is scaled waaaaaaaaay down. Barely any neutral options, barely any investigatory options and either paragon/renegade response never feel that disparate, you never really get to choose the way in which you respond, because BioWare has taken Shepard out of your hands and now tells you what your character is feeling.

Shepard is no longer your character to create, one of the biggest issues i have with the game.

[xsdob]

The journal system, enjoyed everything else just fine.

[dayvancowboy1]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

N-Seven wrote...

Granted though, a lot of that stuff (auto dialogue, bugs, GoW, fetch missions) comprised the bulk of the first two games.  Where the combat was less fluid, and there was no multiplayer.  So why did you play through those two games?

The fetch missions had substance, the auto-dialogue was idle chatter, nothing actually important character developmentally wise (why couldn't Talis drunken convo have been a cutscene with some dialogue trees?). However, your jab about the combat doesn't make sense to me. Why?

Because the combat was better in ME2. Just because combat is "faster" or "more fluid" does not automatically mean it is better. In ME2 Shepard felt grounded, felt like she existed in the game world with her movement, when running she actually felt like she was running, ME3 it feels like you're a ghost, like a standard FPS. You couldn't just escape by Gears roadie running away, you had to think about your movement, what weapon you were using to counter a specific defense along with your ammo type. ME2 was challenging not by just throwing thousands of enemies at you and buffing the hardest enemies, but by level design and enemy composition.

ME3's combat had none of the things that made ME2 challenging. On insanity its flipping easy with only two exceptions, the three Geth Primes on Rannoch and the missile battery defence, and even those two were barely a battle. On the missile battery battle, three Banshees? Just run around cloaked until the missiles are ready. Its not fun, its repetitive and it feels like a Gears of War rehash. ME2 was better, it had its own character in its combat. It also had points in the combat where you could put your weapon away and explore the surrounding a bit, like Mordins lab. It still felt like an RPG even if many elements were removed. ME3 was just a straight shooter, if you weren't shooting, you were on the Citadel or Normandy.

As for MP, ME never needed MP, but the fact that its better than the SP rings alarm bells in all the wrong places. ME3's best mode should never have been the MP, i shouldn't want to play MP over the SP, but i do.

ME2 is substantially better than ME3 in every single way.

come on man, this is bull****. ME3's combat is ME2's combat with added things like all weapons available to every class, a nice weight system, and of course the rolling and running mechanic which made combat more active and intensive.

also, the AI in ME2 was abysmal. bar the reaper enemies, none of the enemies made any attempt whatsoever to advance on your position or flank you. you could just hide behind the same cover the entire fight and shoot everyone until they die(yes, even on insanity). in ME3 the AI is super aggressive and constantly forces to keep moving, a huge improvement. also, level design? seriously? level design in ME2 was like this: enter the room, "hmm a lot of convenient cover laying around, fight inc", enemies coming fron the front. in ME3 combat took place in a bigger variety of environments and enemies sometimes came from unexpected places(banshees coming from the cieling for example). obviously comabt was still predictable enough, but much less than in ME2.

another thing that's better in ME3 is that except for biotic, none of the classes(to me at least) ever felt overpowered(even at level 60) on insanity. in ME2 about half-way through the game combat became a total cakewalk(even on insanity), in ME3 while combat becomes easier as you level up it never became easy and remained fairly challenging even at the end of the game.

i don't mean to be disrepectful or anything, i just say this with conviction because combat is without a doubt the only thing ME3 did better than the other 2 games, and it's the only reason multiplayer works. with ME2's combat multiplayer would've been a failure.
the only advantage i can give to ME2's combat was the abilty to carry heavy weapons all the time. real shame they took that out...

IMO everyone would've been ecstatic about the game with ME2's combat and more emphasis on Mass Effect's signature features. but they had to improve the system to include multiplayer obviously. i hate it but it's important to give credit where credit's due, even if it's an improvement that to some extent is irrelevant to Mass Effect as a franchise.
for the record i also believe the game was rushed to could've used another year or so in development. although i've never seen EA maintain a development cycle longer than 3 years so that was never an option sadly...

Modifié par dayvancowboy1, 01 juillet 2012 - 08:11 .