Modifié par brain_damage, 03 juillet 2012 - 10:16 .
LinksOcarina wrote...
Thats the quivalent to what I just said above then. So i'm failing to see what your trying to say at this point, becuase we can argue which one was bigger or not but looking at the scenes side by side might make things different.
Modifié par tonnactus, 03 juillet 2012 - 10:22 .
thisisme8 wrote...
Don't listen to Tonnactus, he's just arguing for no reason. The point is, ME1 had a decent beginning and a pretty good end, but a middle that was disjointed, not clearly defined, and full of side quests that completely pulled you out of the "save the galaxy/race against time" theme of the game by having you take the time to explore random worlds and do bull**** sidequests for everyone on the Citadel. Here's me summing up any conversation in ME1:
Modifié par mauro2222, 03 juillet 2012 - 10:18 .
mauro2222 wrote...
You're always helping someone who lost a wallet in a gas giant
Sajuro wrote...
I don't think anyone even said Reapers, maybe the beacon said it but Shepard just sat up and was like "Reapers!" He should have at least learned about the Reapers after receiving the cipher.
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".
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.
Guest_JamesBondHero_*
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.
Han Shot First wrote...
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.
.
Krunjar wrote...
FINALLY! someone to see that ME isn't some Shakespearean work of genius and just a damn well told space opera with tonnes of awesome cg.
Modifié par WarBaby2, 03 juillet 2012 - 11:44 .
brain_damage wrote...
The original Mass Effect's writing was intelligent. It was presented intelligently. It created an entirely new world, fleshed out an amazing atmosphere. Intelligently. Playing it kind of felt like reading a book.
The writing of Mass Effect 2 is basically "ERMAGERD EXPLOSIONS, look guys, there are explosions over there, and there, and there OH MY GOD EXPLOSIONS and look, some plot, but nevermind, DRAMA DRAMA EXPLOSIONS". It felt rushed, like a PG13 action movie(with some side boob for bonus points).
CronoDragoon wrote...
GenericEnemy wrote...
Better than ME2 at least.
SHEPARD, I KNOW WE HAVE IMPORTANT THINGS TO DO, BUT SOLVE MY DADDY ISSUES PLOX!
Fun fact: Miranda's loyalty turns out to be more important than the Rachni.
mauro2222 wrote...
thisisme8 wrote...
Don't listen to Tonnactus, he's just arguing for no reason. The point is, ME1 had a decent beginning and a pretty good end, but a middle that was disjointed, not clearly defined, and full of side quests that completely pulled you out of the "save the galaxy/race against time" theme of the game by having you take the time to explore random worlds and do bull**** sidequests for everyone on the Citadel. Here's me summing up any conversation in ME1:
But this happens in the three games
You're always helping someone who lost a wallet in a gas giant
Tirranek wrote...
brain_damage wrote...
The original Mass Effect's writing was intelligent. It was presented intelligently. It created an entirely new world, fleshed out an amazing atmosphere. Intelligently. Playing it kind of felt like reading a book.
The writing of Mass Effect 2 is basically "ERMAGERD EXPLOSIONS, look guys, there are explosions over there, and there, and there OH MY GOD EXPLOSIONS and look, some plot, but nevermind, DRAMA DRAMA EXPLOSIONS". It felt rushed, like a PG13 action movie(with some side boob for bonus points).
Sure, because having to argue the merits of infanticide to preserve galactic peace is totally a PG13 kinda thing <_<
voteDC wrote...
What I love about the first Mass Effect is the same thing I enjoy about A New Hope or the first Matrix movie. The story is complete there. You could have never have seen anything else and never have felt you were missing out.
UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...
people love to pull off the " FIRST ONE IS BEST BECAUSE ITS FIRST" thing alot
Modifié par Stornskar, 04 juillet 2012 - 03:34 .
fr33stylez 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".
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.
The characters weren't bland at all. Your squadmates were all distinct and unique. I liked that Garrus was sick of the beaurocratic red tape, the Wrex was searching for deeper meaning the killing for credits, etc. As it's a trilogy, you see most of the characters develop, that's not the main role of ME1. ME2 absolutely has great characters and charater development. Unfortuately, it came at the expense of the etire story arc. Seriously, the first 10 minutes of ME2 is probably just behind the ME3 ending in terms of WTF. We seriously were railroaded into working for Cereberus through a death and resurrection (with the power of money).
I'm not sure how you can say ME3 got the story right while admitting the Crucible, on of the biggest points of the plot (and the infamous ending) was terrible. ME3 tried to ties things up, and had some good moments (Tuchunka, Rannoch), but mostly fell short. The transformation of Cerberus, the Kai Leng saga, the rushed and nonsensical beginning, and the ending puts ME3 @ the bottom for me.
Retour en haut