426 réponses à ce sujet

[Mavaras]

I think each of the games have their highs and lows. I do like ME1 the best; not necessarily for the content of its story, but for the pacing. If you didn't wallow in side quests, it had a very Indiana Joneish flow. In ME2, the team building seemed to knock the game's feng shui out of whack. It's upsetting because the character quests were so amazing. I just wish they would have incorporated them more interestingly than go find x. This is reminiscent of my least favorite part of ME1; Find Liara. It would have required changing the premise of Shepard's team building through dossiers, but I think it would have done wonders for the pacing. I would have liked to see Shepard pursuing non character plot points and picking up characters along the way. I don't think much would have been lost as long as they kept the depth of the development.

[txgoldrush]

mauro2222 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Doesn't mean she is sexualized....she also talks about dealing with loss.  Every party member has crass lines...does that make them sexualized? No.

Wrong, you DO get a rebuild pic, I did the same thing...Eve dead, Wrex alive. A special scene is added to the synthesis version. And when does Wrex say he is going to recapture the ancients through war? He never does. He is just trying to rebuild his peoples future. Nevermind he takes into the account his race's high birth rate, so its a necessity.

If Gerrel was a cartoon, than he was in ME2 as well...accept it.

And how is the coup plot idiotic? Nevermind the fact that Cerebrus is trying to keep Shep from uniting the galaxy, such as trying to kill Eve, or detonating the bomb on Tuchanka. Taking the Citadel out of the game would hinder Shep's efforts greatly in trying to unite the galaxy.

Now your messing with me... the damn artbook has an entire sentence on the sexualization part. Bioware needed a new Miranda, they went for Ash who made it pretty clear that she doesn't like nor wear skirts and that she prefers armor to catsuits. The part about crass lines is a big WTF on the topic.

I'm replaying the EC right now, the rebuild pic is nowhere to be found, I choose destroy, not sure about you. Re watch the talk in the tank, when they are going to the needle thingy that cleans the atmosphere.

Exactly my point... every action of Cerberus is stupidity incarnated.

Once again, in the tank, when does Wrex say he will take the war like path. He doesn't. In fact the Wreav counterpoint scene is that he will take everything by force and get revenge. Wrex is NOT interested in revenge, he is interested in expanding so they do not face overpopulation. Try again.

Also compare to the final battle speeches of Wrex and Wreav, they quite different.

So, you don't get the rebuilding scene, but it doesn't show them gearing up for war either, like Wreav's scenes do. Nevermind the fact that Eve herself is key to uniting the clans, more so than Wrex.

Nevermind the fact that Ashley thinks that Miranda is oversexualized if you cheated on her for miranda in ME2. Also giving her more sex appeal =/= oversexualization.

So the notion of stopping Shepard from destroying the reapers so they can be controlled is stupid? Please.

[Siansonea]

ME1 was great because of the promise it had, the potential for widely varying subsequent stories, based on your gameplay decisions. It had a good overall story with a few head scratching moments (I also thought Shepard was a little too devout a Reaper theorist too quickly). To me, the game with the worst story is ME2. I mean, the whole Lazarus Project thing was stupid, and the final boss was epically stupid (giant baby human Reaper drinking Puree O' Humans through straws with glass tubes—wha-what?). But once again, people give it a pass because the new characters were great and because there was so much promise for widely branching subsequent stories from TWO games. ME3? Waah-wah. It was ONE story, with some recolorings and doppelgängers to reflect your "choices". And the ending was bad, on par with the bad ending of ME2. ME3 was supposed to be a highly customized experience, and it was a lot of things, but that wasn't any of them.

[Han Shot First]

The biggest hole in  Mass Effect 1's plot was that Saren spends the entire game searching for the Conduit, and even attacks Eden Prime for it. Here is the problem: The Conduit is later revealed to be a backdoor to the Citadel. That is all well and good if Saren is a rogue Spectre barred from stepping foot on the Citadel, but he wasn't at the start of Mass Effect 1. He didn't need to attack Eden Prime for the Conduit, where as an active Spectre he could have maintained his cover and simply walked into C-Sec.

Don't get me wrong, I love Mass Effect 1. But people tend to vastly overrate that game when bashing the flaws of it's sequels, both real and imagined. They tend to let nostalgia blind them to Mass Effect 1's flaws, which were often as large as or bigger than the flaws of the sequels.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 03 juillet 2012 - 06:04 .

[txgoldrush]

Siansonea II wrote...

ME1 was great because of the promise it had, the potential for widely varying subsequent stories, based on your gameplay decisions. It had a good overall story with a few head scratching moments (I also thought Shepard was a little too devout a Reaper theorist too quickly). To me, the game with the worst story is ME2. I mean, the whole Lazarus Project thing was stupid, and the final boss was epically stupid (giant baby human Reaper drinking Puree O' Humans through straws with glass tubes—wha-what?). But once again, people give it a pass because the new characters were great and because there was so much promise for widely branching subsequent stories from TWO games. ME3? Waah-wah. It was ONE story, with some recolorings and doppelgängers to reflect your "choices". And the ending was bad, on par with the bad ending of ME2. ME3 was supposed to be a highly customized experience, and it was a lot of things, but that wasn't any of them.

Please....there are no dopplegangers to "reflect your choices"....Padok and Mordin are foils, Wrex and Wreav are foils, Dagg and Grunt are foils. Nevermind a huge aspect of the future of the Krogan was determined in ME1, and the future of th eQuarians and Geth is decided in ME2...your choices matter.

[Siansonea]

Han Shot First wrote...

The biggest hole in  Mass Effect 1's plot was that Saren spends the entire game searching for the Conduit, and even attacks Eden Prime for it. Here is the problem: The Conduit is later revealed to be a backdoor to the Citadel. That is all well and good if Saren is a rogue Spectre barred from stepping foot on the Citadel, but he wasn't at the start of Mass Effect 1. He didn't need to attack Eden Prime for the Conduit, where as an active Spectre he could have maintained his cover and simply walked into C-Sec.

Don't get me wrong, I love Mass Effect 1. But people tend to vastly overrate that game when bashing the flaws of it's sequels, both real and imagined. They tend to let nostalgia blind them to Mass Effect 1's flaws, which were often as large as or bigger than the flaws of the sequels.

If Saren had known that all along, you'd have a point, but Saren was just as confused by his vision as Shepard was. I'm not sure where Saren got the information on the Conduit in the first place, but apparently Sovereign thought finding the Conduit was important. Until they talk to Vigil, no one knows what the Conduit is or what it does. Just like the Crucible, now that I think about it... Funny, for all three games, the protagonist runs around preparing for something they have no idea about. In ME1, Shepard chases the Conduit, not know what it is. In ME2, Shepard prepares to go through the Omega 4 Relay, not knowing what he'll find or what he'll need. In ME3, Shepard runs around doing the bidding of various dignitaries to gather fleets for epic space battles that are essentially just a time-buying maneuver for the Crucible, which has unknown properties and function.

Hey, at least it's green, what with all the recycling. We even got another showdown on the Citadel where we can convince the Indoctrinated antagonist to kill himself, though TIM's Reaper implants didn't allow him to transform into a Geth Hopper on crack, so ME1's showdown with Saren gets the better grade here. 

[Frybread76]

So folks who like ME2 or ME3 have to bash ME1 rather than let the latter games stand on their own merits. Figures.

I'm not saying ME1 was Shakespeare, but it has much better writing than ME2 or ME3. Easily.

[Siansonea]

txgoldrush wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

ME1 was great because of the promise it had, the potential for widely varying subsequent stories, based on your gameplay decisions. It had a good overall story with a few head scratching moments (I also thought Shepard was a little too devout a Reaper theorist too quickly). To me, the game with the worst story is ME2. I mean, the whole Lazarus Project thing was stupid, and the final boss was epically stupid (giant baby human Reaper drinking Puree O' Humans through straws with glass tubes—wha-what?). But once again, people give it a pass because the new characters were great and because there was so much promise for widely branching subsequent stories from TWO games. ME3? Waah-wah. It was ONE story, with some recolorings and doppelgängers to reflect your "choices". And the ending was bad, on par with the bad ending of ME2. ME3 was supposed to be a highly customized experience, and it was a lot of things, but that wasn't any of them.

Please....there are no dopplegangers to "reflect your choices"....Padok and Mordin are foils, Wrex and Wreav are foils, Dagg and Grunt are foils. Nevermind a huge aspect of the future of the Krogan was determined in ME1, and the future of th eQuarians and Geth is decided in ME2...your choices matter.

If I want foil, I'll go to the supermarket and buy some Reynold's Wrap. And I don't see how they can be "foils" for each other, since they fill the SAME role in the game in each case. Foils generally play off each other. And congratulation, you picked the ONE set of choices in ME2 that make a difference in the game. It just makes all the cosmetic choices look all the more irrelevant. And funny how the resolution of the geth/quarian conflict only matters to those who like to micromanage their Mission Success Health bar, it has zero impact at the end of the game.

[Han Shot First]

Even if Saren doesn't exactly know what the Conduit does, the plot of Mass Effect 1 is still a bit nonsensical. As a Spectre Saren could have just taken a casual stroll on the Citadel and laid out the welcome mat for the Reapers. No one would have been the wiser and another extinction cycle would have been completed without a hitch. For him to delay that to go attack Eden Prime and reveal himself as a rogue, is still a little ridiculous.

[RiouHotaru]

Calibrations Expert wrote...

You think the story was bad? try the game play.

This.  SO MUCH THIS.  By comparison, ME1 is almost physically painful to play through, and even ME2 feels like you're slogging through mud.

[txgoldrush]

Siansonea II wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

ME1 was great because of the promise it had, the potential for widely varying subsequent stories, based on your gameplay decisions. It had a good overall story with a few head scratching moments (I also thought Shepard was a little too devout a Reaper theorist too quickly). To me, the game with the worst story is ME2. I mean, the whole Lazarus Project thing was stupid, and the final boss was epically stupid (giant baby human Reaper drinking Puree O' Humans through straws with glass tubes—wha-what?). But once again, people give it a pass because the new characters were great and because there was so much promise for widely branching subsequent stories from TWO games. ME3? Waah-wah. It was ONE story, with some recolorings and doppelgängers to reflect your "choices". And the ending was bad, on par with the bad ending of ME2. ME3 was supposed to be a highly customized experience, and it was a lot of things, but that wasn't any of them.

Please....there are no dopplegangers to "reflect your choices"....Padok and Mordin are foils, Wrex and Wreav are foils, Dagg and Grunt are foils. Nevermind a huge aspect of the future of the Krogan was determined in ME1, and the future of th eQuarians and Geth is decided in ME2...your choices matter.

If I want foil, I'll go to the supermarket and buy some Reynold's Wrap. And I don't see how they can be "foils" for each other, since they fill the SAME role in the game in each case. Foils generally play off each other. And congratulation, you picked the ONE set of choices in ME2 that make a difference in the game. It just makes all the cosmetic choices look all the more irrelevant. And funny how the resolution of the geth/quarian conflict only matters to those who like to micromanage their Mission Success Health bar, it has zero impact at the end of the game.

Wrex and Wreav do play off eachother....try again. They are both in the game if Wrex lives. Same with Padok Wiks and Mordin. Dagg and Grunt are exact opposites.

Nevermind the fact that you decisions in the first two can determine if someone lives or dies, or change the calculus of a situation, such as Grissom Academy.

And please, in past Bioware games, your choices hardly mattered either, take off the lead coat.

[txgoldrush]

Han Shot First wrote...

Even if Saren doesn't exactly know what the Conduit does, the plot of Mass Effect 1 is still a bit nonsensical. As a Spectre Saren could have just taken a casual stroll on the Citadel and laid out the welcome mat for the Reapers. No one would have been the wiser and another extinction cycle would have been completed without a hitch. For him to delay that to go attack Eden Prime and reveal himself as a rogue, is still a little ridiculous.

THIS

[Dusen]

Han Shot First wrote...

Even if Saren doesn't exactly know what the Conduit does, the plot of Mass Effect 1 is still a bit nonsensical. As a Spectre Saren could have just taken a casual stroll on the Citadel and laid out the welcome mat for the Reapers. No one would have been the wiser and another extinction cycle would have been completed without a hitch. For him to delay that to go attack Eden Prime and reveal himself as a rogue, is still a little ridiculous.

I think the general idea is that throughout ME1, Saren is struggling with the effects of indoctrination. At first, he's consumed with hatred for humanity, and Sovereign uses this to get Saren to read the Prothean beacon on Eden prime as only organics can understand it(according to ME Wiki). Sovereign slowly indoctrinates Saren further during the course of the game. Later, we are treated to a cutscene showing Saren physically struggling with the increasing effects of indoctrination until we finally see him on Virmire, a mental, and physical slave to Sovereign. By now though he has been banned from the Citadel, hence why he is forced to use the conduit. Why does Sovereign have Saren looking for the Conduit long before Saren was banned from the citadel, presumably so Sovereign can determine how the Protheans stop stopped him from wirelessly activating the Citadel in the first place.

EDIT: Above all though, it would have been a really short game if Saren had just strolled into the Citadel during the opening cinematics.

Modifié par Dusen, 03 juillet 2012 - 07:32 .

[Dusen]

txgoldrush wrote...

Please....there are no dopplegangers to "reflect your choices"....Padok and Mordin are foils, Wrex and Wreav are foils, Dagg and Grunt are foils. Nevermind a huge aspect of the future of the Krogan was determined in ME1, and the future of th eQuarians and Geth is decided in ME2...your choices matter.

Most of them were unnecessary foils though. Wrex had a foil in every other Krogan in the series minus Eve while Dagg was clearly and unashamedly put in to replace Grunt if he died in the last game because Bioware wrote themselves into a hole that they apparently didn't have the creativity (or time/money, thanks to EA) to write themselves out of. Padok was the most egregious of the wrongs though. Throughout ME2 Mordin is characterized as the most brilliant Salarian in the galaxy, if the genophage can be cured it would only be by him. Yet, Padok comes out of nowhere as Mordin's doppelganger who somehow manages to cure the genophage as well. It would have made much more sense to have given gravity to Mordin's possible ME2 death by making it impossible to cure the genophage in ME3. As it stands now there are no real, lasting consequences to team deaths in ME2.

[Dusen]

txgoldrush wrote...
How does ME3 destroy the Rachni arc? Shepard told the queen to go away forever, and thats what she is trying to do. No "destruction" here......in fact, the tragic nature of what happens makes the Rachni arc better. Fans just wanted a Rachni army, they didn't get it, so it sucks....lol

Once again...a plot hole is a contradiction, not because something isn't explained. There is no plot hole with the Citadel coup.

That would be your opinion on whether the tragic nature of what happens is better or worse. I simply dislike how contrived the Rachni story thread is in ME3. Bioware needed a way to explain why the reapers had Rachni warriors so they chose the easiest way they could: a cloned Rachni queen, even though the one in ME1 was supposed to be possibly the only one in existance. Of course I realize that there could have been another one but it's just such cheap storytelling on Bioware's part. It's like all the other doppelgangers in the game that simply watered down our choices in ME1 and ME2 to the point that it basically didn't matter who died in either game, there's a good probability that their "clone" will appear in ME3 no matter what.

Well, according to wikipedia, a plot hole may consist of "unanswered questions, unlikely events or chance occurrences" that appear to go against the logical flow of a story. "A plot hole is one that is essential to the story's outcome". The citadel coup was an important part of the story that left unaswered questions such as how the citadel fleet ignored the Cerberus invasion, or how lightly defended the citadel was even after Saren's attack in ME1 and the ongoing Reaper war that should warrent extra protection of the galaxy's leadership, so I would say that it is a plot hole. 

[Zero132132]

txgoldrush wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

ME1 was great because of the promise it had, the potential for widely varying subsequent stories, based on your gameplay decisions. It had a good overall story with a few head scratching moments (I also thought Shepard was a little too devout a Reaper theorist too quickly). To me, the game with the worst story is ME2. I mean, the whole Lazarus Project thing was stupid, and the final boss was epically stupid (giant baby human Reaper drinking Puree O' Humans through straws with glass tubes—wha-what?). But once again, people give it a pass because the new characters were great and because there was so much promise for widely branching subsequent stories from TWO games. ME3? Waah-wah. It was ONE story, with some recolorings and doppelgängers to reflect your "choices". And the ending was bad, on par with the bad ending of ME2. ME3 was supposed to be a highly customized experience, and it was a lot of things, but that wasn't any of them.

Please....there are no dopplegangers to "reflect your choices"....Padok and Mordin are foils, Wrex and Wreav are foils, Dagg and Grunt are foils. Nevermind a huge aspect of the future of the Krogan was determined in ME1, and the future of th eQuarians and Geth is decided in ME2...your choices matter.

Not saying I disagree. It's readily apparent that Wrex and Wreave are foils. How do you judge Mordin Solus and Padok Wilks as different, though? The dialogue is slightly different, but they serve the exact same purpose. The same with Dagg and Grunt; the only difference is that Grunt survives. What do you mean when you say that they're foils to each other?

I like what happens with Jack, because she has no replacement. If she's not in ME3, then the kids in Grissom Academy don't have some other instructor guiding them, and it does alter the outcome a bit. Same with Thane, if Kirrahe isn't alive (although IMO, he shouldn't have been there instead of Thane, they should have just had the worst case scenario happen).

[Wowky]

There are plot holes and writing mistakes in all three games. I just don't give a **** about them because the gameplay is so good, the characters are so well-designed, the story is compelling and the game sucks you in and evokes emotions that not many other games can.

Modifié par Wowky, 03 juillet 2012 - 09:11 .

[Gibb_Shepard]

The writing was mediocre at best. But at least it was consistent and logically coherent.

ME3's last hour is something that can only be possible in an alternate universe that uses a different set of basic logic. A universe where the concept behind moving forward results in a carrot.

[Eain]

Han Shot First wrote...

Even if Saren doesn't exactly know what the Conduit does, the plot of Mass Effect 1 is still a bit nonsensical. As a Spectre Saren could have just taken a casual stroll on the Citadel and laid out the welcome mat for the Reapers. No one would have been the wiser and another extinction cycle would have been completed without a hitch. For him to delay that to go attack Eden Prime and reveal himself as a rogue, is still a little ridiculous.

This is what I've always been saying too. Noone would've suspected a thing had he just barged into citadel control and went "spectre authority, I'm suspecting a massive impending attack. I need to close these arms."

Then Sovereign and the Geth show up and lay waste to a completely unprepared Citadel fleet, everyone runs around with flailing arms and Saren goes "see? told you so! Leave this to me, I'll handle it."

Then Sovereign docks, opens the relay, game over.

This would leave them another 50.000 years to discover this supposed conduit.

Modifié par Eain, 03 juillet 2012 - 09:34 .

[shadey]

good grief you people complain about everything.



me1 was "so bad" that you bought me2 AND me3 as well :
it's really sad how people try and appear intellectual bu just trash talking everything.

Modifié par shadey, 03 juillet 2012 - 09:44 .

[AxStapleton]

txgoldrush wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

Me1's writing > ME3's writing

sorry had to be said.

WRONG

ME3 portraying its characters as multifacted, multidimenisionl, and more "human" beings >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>. ME1 treatement of characters as "talking codex entries".

Try Again.

ME2 is better on both fronts here. Apart from the Lazarus project crap which was a cheap way to make a time skip and a couple of other absurdities, ME2's characterisation  completely trumps both 1 and 3.

One thing I'd like to add is that 3 felt incredibly linear while the others, though they still had a core plot, left a lot more wiggle room for player choice in the order of what goes on (which of the main missions to do first, which characters to recruit and when etc.). 

I will say that Shepard was written a lot better in ME3 though this ended up negating a bit of player choice. (Though why are they dreaming of a kid rather than one of the squadmates they've lost? VS maybe?)

Modifié par AxStapleton, 03 juillet 2012 - 09:51 .

[Asch Lavigne]

Wowky wrote...

There are plot holes and writing mistakes in all three games. I just don't give a **** about them because the gameplay is so good, the characters are so well-designed, the story is compelling and the game sucks you in and evokes emotions that not many other games can.

My thoughts exactly. Though some plotholes and writing mistakes do bug me. But it's like two or three, not fifty.

[nitefyre410]

Han Shot First wrote...

Even if Saren doesn't exactly know what the Conduit does, the plot of Mass Effect 1 is still a bit nonsensical. As a Spectre Saren could have just taken a casual stroll on the Citadel and laid out the welcome mat for the Reapers. No one would have been the wiser and another extinction cycle would have been completed without a hitch. For him to delay that to go attack Eden Prime and reveal himself as a rogue, is still a little ridiculous.

I was expecting him to do that the whole game.  Him being on  Eden Prime and shooting Nilhulus was really...um not needed.

Then lets add the complete  Idoit Ball carrying Council 

Yeah the writing for the entire ME series in the end was not all they great. Bioware gets too much praise for they have done and not what they are doing.

Modifié par nitefyre410, 03 juillet 2012 - 09:55 .

[ElementL09]

chemiclord wrote...

No, ME1's writing really wasn't all that great.

It's called fans looking at the past through rose-colored glasses. They like ME1, so they gloss over its flaws. They don't like ME3, so they harp endlessly on those same flaws.

Human nature, really. You'll excuse the failings of a friend, but roast an enemy over the coals for those same failings.

The only flaw that ME1 had for me was its combat, its story-telling was great for the first entry into the trilogy.

[KaeserZen]

My face when I read the title of this thread : http://t1.gstatic.co...Um9kI3lK38aVEDg

Let's put a stop to most of the nonsense here. ME1's main storyline clearly is by far the best writing of the entire series. It is epic in scale and makes sense.
Recruitment is very seamless and goes along the flow of the storyline.

ME2's goal is the characterization, but you spend the game dealing with everyone's family issues (Miranda, Jacob, Tali, Jack to an extent, Samara, ...). ME2 is over characterized compared to ME1, in the sense that the character sidequests, even though enticing, do not fit in well with the main story arc.

A thing that bugged me with ME3 was the characterization of Shepard. They wanted to force their artistically integer idea of who he was down my throat.