426 réponses à ce sujet

[r.anger]

I really liked ME1 writing...they didn't just stick to one line responses and really fleshed out the characters' backgrounds and motivations. For the people who played Mass Effect for it's RPG role, ME1 was clearly the best writing IMO. Of the trilogy, overall I'd have to go with ME2. Good writing, good game play, great characters, epic ending.

[KingZayd]

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.

Sovereign had no  idea why the Citadel relay hadn't opened, only that it hadn't. Saren was acting as a detective.

[Joccaren]

Ok, my opinions?

Story:
ME1>ME2>ME3 [Epic overarching story with some great Villains vs Plot filler story with some plot filler villains vs Bleh with a couple of good moments]
Atmosphere:
ME2>ME1>ME3 [ME2's atmosphere was just brilliant. Everywhere you went felt unique, and I could get seriously immersed in every location I visited in every playthrough. ME1's Citadel's atmosphere is brilliant. That never gets old, nor does looking up into the sky from the Mako and seeing those amazing Skyboxes. In other places like Feros, Noveria and Virmire a lot of the atmosphere is lost after the first playthrough sadly. ME3... Nothing really grabbed me. Earth - both times - was just... lacklustre, the dreams were... Bleh. Rannoch and Tuchanka were good the first time round - and the boarding tube to the Geth Dreadnought + the Krogan Ruins are pretty good, but other than that only Menae really stood out.]
Characters:
ME2>ME3>ME1 [I'm sorry, but other than Wrex I really didn't connect with the ME1 characters that much. ME3 did slightly better, but not by a ton].
Gunplay:
ME3>ME1>ME2 [Another probably odd one. I found ME2 to be lackluster in its gunplay. Sure, the shooting itself was more streamlined and tight, but considering you spent most of the time behind a wall it became really boring really fast. ME1 had variety in how you could fight, and ME3 allowed you to move around without fear of dying in 2 seconds.]
Exploration:
ME1>ME2>ME3 [Exploring surfaces of planets vs scanning planets and doing an occasional mission on one vs playing Pacman with Reapers in space].

[tanisha__unknown]

Admittedly, any game has its flaws. However, the main missions do make sense: On feros you get the cipher from this really old plant (okay, admittedly, now that I write it, it seems a bit ridiculous), on Noveria, you learn about the mu relay, the intrigues make sense and are well done and the Rachni plot is great, Therum is not that great, but I've heard that it was intended to make it longer originally, Virmire's plotline makes sense too. After all, there is little to complain about the main missions.

However in ME3, Cerberus, a covert terrorist organisation somehow acquired a big f***ing army. They took over Omega (why actually?), tried to take over the Citadel (again, why?), tried to set of that bomb on Tuchanka (WHY??!!!). Legion's death does not really make sense, the opening has some of the cheesiest scenes throughout the trilogy which I can't overlook in contrast to the creepy grin after getting out of that pile of rubble in ME1 because the rest of these sections is way too bad, the crucible concept is very lame and don't even let me start on the Rachni. These are major plotholes I can hardly ignore. Granted, it's harder to stay within the frame you already set up than to start fresh, but with a bit more effort the plot of ME3 could have been way better.

Since in the light of the events in ME3 ME2 does not make any sense at all main-plot-wise, ME1s writing of the main plot is the best in the trilogy.

[Kataphrut94]

I like the way the plot developed in 1. You start out testing out your brand new stealth ship to pick up an artefact, you find yourself tracking down a rogue Spectre, and you end up trying to stop an ancient race of sentinent starships from bringing an apocalypse on the galaxy. Compartively, 2 felt more like a really well-done bank heist movie, and while 3 was good, it never really managed to get the same 'wow' factor the first game had.

That said, the other two blow ME1 out of the water in terms of dialogue, acting, graphics and gameplay (obviously) and characters. About the only levels from ME1 that I'd say stand up to the test of time (insofar as 5 years can be considered a test of time) are Virmire, Ilos and the final Citadel run.

[fr33stylez]

If you think ME1's writing "wasn't that great", then you must believe ME2 and ME3's writing is "laughably bad".

Modifié par fr33stylez, 03 juillet 2012 - 11:07 .

[linsanity]

I WILL NOT HEAR SUCH SLANDER!
ME1's writing is brilliant, all base lore, locations and backstories are developed in ME1. It starts well, stays consistent and ends dramatically without any lore changes or additions midway.

[bigbade]

didn't read these 13 pages but to answer the OP:
Nobody knows what kind of information the beacon transmitted. All WE saw was a flash of images, Shepard is able to describe it pretty well actually and even manages to "learn" Prothean all from those flashes...As sudden as it may seem it's easy to overlook simply because the prothean tech could have done a million things to his mind in those few seconds, enough to convince him of what happened. It also doesn't help that Saren is looking for the beacon as well and mentions reapers.

the problem with me3 is some things can't be overlooked, Harbinger not shooting at the Normandy during the beam rush can be overlooked because its a moment set aside to say good bye / because of the normandy's IFF (meh on this one), the catalyst can't be overlooked because it doesn't belong and never has.

[Krunjar]

Eeeerm im not sure where I have seen it but this really isn't the first sci fi to pull a god machine out at the end. And most of those got good reviews. I wonder how much uproar there would be if EC was as the game was released tbh. I think people are holding on to their current argument because they like arguing with people. ME1 was nothing special. But it did have no constraints whatsoever on it from the previous games. Direct sequels tend to degrade and this is often inevitable as the prequels constrain what can and can't happen and much of the effort is involved in creating consistency rather than telling the story. This is exponentially more so of the ME universe where player choice can alter things. Of course the "storytelling" is not quite so driven in 3 it was never going to be. The final chapter in a series like this is always going to be about tying up loose ends. But Me1 was never genius or Shakespeare it's a good space opera that is being idolized simply because it is the ONLY one available.

[BrookerT]

My favourite part of Mass Effect 1 is when Saren grabs you, and precedes to hole you up for several seconds, as well as throwing away his gun. His hand doesn't even tighten. But as its in ME1 it doesn't matter, because mass effect 1 is perfect /sarcasm

[fr33stylez]

BrookerT wrote...

My favourite part of Mass Effect 1 is when Saren grabs you, and precedes to hole you up for several seconds, as well as throwing away his gun. His hand doesn't even tighten. But as its in ME1 it doesn't matter, because mass effect 1 is perfect /sarcasm

If someone like that actually bothered you in ME1, your brain should've exploded in the first hour of playing ME3.

[The Heretic of Time]

fr33stylez wrote...

If you think ME1's writing "wasn't that great", then you must believe ME2 and ME3's writing is "laughably bad".

That indeed I do. ME2 and ME3's writing are indeed laughably bad (especially ME3).

[voteDC]

BrookerT wrote...

My favourite part of Mass Effect 1 is when Saren grabs you, and precedes to hole you up for several seconds, as well as throwing away his gun. His hand doesn't even tighten. But as its in ME1 it doesn't matter, because mass effect 1 is perfect /sarcasm

Not really hard to explain to be honest.

Saren is angry that you've attacked his base, destroyed people and research and generally made a big nuisance of yourself.

He's pissed when he jumps off that platform, he wants you to know that he holds your life in his hands. He's enjoying the power he has over a human.

Plus at the back of my mind I like to think that he recognises that he's not fully in control of himself, that Sovereign is influencing him. Letting Shepard live in that moment may have been him trying to resist indoctrination.

[BrookerT]

voteDC wrote...

BrookerT wrote...

My favourite part of Mass Effect 1 is when Saren grabs you, and precedes to hole you up for several seconds, as well as throwing away his gun. His hand doesn't even tighten. But as its in ME1 it doesn't matter, because mass effect 1 is perfect /sarcasm

Not really hard to explain to be honest.

Saren is angry that you've attacked his base, destroyed people and research and generally made a big nuisance of yourself.

He's pissed when he jumps off that platform, he wants you to know that he holds your life in his hands. He's enjoying the power he has over a human.

Plus at the back of my mind I like to think that he recognises that he's not fully in control of himself, that Sovereign is influencing him. Letting Shepard live in that moment may have been him trying to resist indoctrination.

Just a small question, are you bothered by the harbinger not shooting at the normandy thing.

[BrookerT]

fr33stylez wrote...

BrookerT wrote...

My favourite part of Mass Effect 1 is when Saren grabs you, and precedes to hole you up for several seconds, as well as throwing away his gun. His hand doesn't even tighten. But as its in ME1 it doesn't matter, because mass effect 1 is perfect /sarcasm

If someone like that actually bothered you in ME1, your brain should've exploded in the first hour of playing ME3.

Nah, its a point that all of the mass effect games have plotholes, funnily enough, they all have plot hole which render the whole story redundant, both ME1 and ME3.

[stonbw1]

ME1 introduced a futuristic world, multiple different species, a dozen characters that are ranked among the series favorites, advanced scientific concepts, "non-gun" combat, and oh yeah.... an eternal race of beings that clear cuts the universe to perpetuate a cycle of rebirth . . . . in ONE GAME. I can't say that I fully comprehended every nuance of ME1, but I followed these storylines fairly well. To introduce all this in one game, I'd say that's pretty great writing. Some plot holes, sure, but overall, quite a tall order done extremely well.

[Zero132132]

fr33stylez wrote...

If you think ME1's writing "wasn't that great", then you must believe ME2 and ME3's writing is "laughably bad".

Not really. As people have explained over and over (and over), characters in ME1 were bland as ****. There was no real development. Also, I never really felt like the stakes were high; On Feros, you can save a grand total of 16 people, maybe a bit under 30 if you count the people hiding in that small area on the way to Exo Geni HQ. In Noveria, it's just some guards who try to kill you if you don't sneak into the area you're going to, and a handful of scientists. None of these people give me any reason to give a **** about them. On Therum, you're saving literally one Asari scientist, one that you have no reason at all to trust or care about unless you've already recruited them. On Vermire, you're not even allowed to try to find and preserve the genophage cure; you're only option is to blow the base to hell. The main story arc doesn't even really make sense, since the conduit leads to an area on the Presidium that Saren could have walked to, and the bulk of the Geth forces were actually coming from the main relay. There was no real reason for him to take EVERY SINGLE ACTION IN THE GAME when he could have just walked there for nearly identical results. The main difference is that what he did created a lot of risk, exposed him to the possibility of discovery, which is the only reason Shepard got involved and saved the **** out of the galaxy.

The point is, the plot to all 3 games was pretty incoherent at many points, but in ME1, even though you could accept these (as I can in the other games), there was no character development, and no really compelling story arc. The main thing they got right was building the lore, the background of different species, their cultures, and generally the setting that the rest of the games take place in. The main thing ME2 got right was character development. In my honest opinion, what ME3 got right (except for the Crucible, **** that thing) was the story, since the stakes are very obviously high (survival of humanity), but they also kept moving the characters forward. ****, Tuchanka gave me a whole new appreciation for Mordin. "I made a mistake!" is something that never would have appeared in the first installment to the series, because characters all were mainly expositional devices.

[Tirranek]

Agree with the criticisms of ME1, in that I think people's nostalgia of how they felt when the game was a fresh series really sticks with them. It was full of new and exciting concepts, both mechanically and as a setting. Obviously the latter games don't have this advantage, but imo all three games are at the top of my wub list <3 It just irks me when people refuse to accept the virtues and flaws of game X, because they're trying to make a point.

[Han Shot First]

shadey wrote...

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.

You completely missed the point.

We aren't complaining about Mass Effect 1 at all. I love Mass Effect 1 and have played through it multiple times. I just disagree with those on this forum who put ME1 on a pedestal, and like to pretend that it had vastly superior writing than it's sequels when it clearly did not. Out of nostalgia, people have a tendency to overlook Mass Effect 1's flaws because it was their introduction to the Mass Effect universe.

If the Saren & the Conduit plothole had been in Mass Effect 3 instead, there would be multiple complaint threads dedicated to it.

[Tirranek]

Han Shot First wrote...

shadey wrote...

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.

You completely missed the point.

We aren't complaining about Mass Effect 1 at all. I love Mass Effect 1 and have played through it multiple times. I just disagree with those on this forum who put ME1 on a pedestal, and like to pretend that it had vastly superior writing than it's sequels when it clearly did not. Out of nostalgia, people have a tendency to overlook Mass Effect 1's flaws because it was their introduction to the Mass Effect universe.

If the Saren & the Conduit plothole had been in Mass Effect 3 instead, there would be multiple complaint threads dedicated to it.

Probably a petition as well

[vixvicco]

I liked all three, but second for me was best, though it was missing that strong feeling I had when playing the first...not sure what that was...

[Prosarian]

Zero132132 wrote...

fr33stylez wrote...

If you think ME1's writing "wasn't that great", then you must believe ME2 and ME3's writing is "laughably bad".

 The main story arc doesn't even really make sense, since the conduit leads to an area on the Presidium that Saren could have walked to, and the bulk of the Geth forces were actually coming from the main relay. There was no real reason for him to take EVERY SINGLE ACTION IN THE GAME when he could have just walked there for nearly identical results. The main difference is that what he did created a lot of risk, exposed him to the possibility of discovery, which is the only reason Shepard got involved and saved the **** out of the galaxy.

People keep bringing this up as a major plot hole, but it's simply not. At the end of ME1, Saren went to the citadel controls to hand over control of the station to Sovereign, they had attached themselves to the top of the tower. You'd think someone would notice this if Saren had attempted it at the start of the game.

[Han Shot First]

Prosarian wrote...

Zero132132 wrote...

fr33stylez wrote...

If you think ME1's writing "wasn't that great", then you must believe ME2 and ME3's writing is "laughably bad".

 The main story arc doesn't even really make sense, since the conduit leads to an area on the Presidium that Saren could have walked to, and the bulk of the Geth forces were actually coming from the main relay. There was no real reason for him to take EVERY SINGLE ACTION IN THE GAME when he could have just walked there for nearly identical results. The main difference is that what he did created a lot of risk, exposed him to the possibility of discovery, which is the only reason Shepard got involved and saved the **** out of the galaxy.

People keep bringing this up as a major plot hole, but it's simply not. At the end of ME1, Saren went to the citadel controls to hand over control of the station to Sovereign, they had attached themselves to the top of the tower. You'd think someone would notice this if Saren had attempted it at the start of the game.

Sovereign and the Geth fleet could have attacked the Citadel at the start of Mass Effect 1, with Saren already in place in C-Sec and no one suspecting he is a traitor, and with no advance warning of any enemy attack. The plan would have succeeded without a hitch and another extinction cycle would have been carried out without any problems.

The Saren/Conduit storyline is the biggest plothole in the entire series.

Most of us are just able to overlook it because Mass Effect 1 was a fun ride despite it.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 03 juillet 2012 - 05:29 .

[Bleachrude]

The conduit.

Yeah...once you look at it, it does make you do a double take...

"So, Saren was searching for the beacon to fid out about about the conduit which leads to a backdoor in the citadel....Why didn't he just walk in the front door?