426 réponses à ce sujet

[77boy84]

Is this what people are doing now?
Actively attacking ME1 to try and make ME3 look not as bad?

Good grief.

ME3 had TWO really great story arcs. Rannoch and Tuchanka. There were also some good character bits, but outside of that, the writing ranged from so-so to downright terrible. Yeah, ME1 isn't as amazing as some people chalk it up to be, and it's got it's flaws, but it sure as hell is better than ME3 in the writing department. ESPECIALLY in the writing department.

Stornskar wrote...

Are we really comparing ME1 and ME3? BW had no idea how successful ME1 would be, yet it was beloved by many and its sequels were sold based on how much everyone loved the original; ME3 has nearly killed the franchise and cause a firestorm of anger such that they actually released free DLC to explain the endings better.

This is really all that needs to be said. It's completely insane to compare the two, ME1 was the birth of a franchise loved by many, ME3 almost killed it completely.

[Binary_Helix 1]

jreezy wrote...

Binary_Helix 1 wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

I'm sorry, i'm calling bull**** on this one. The space magic was strong in Mass Effect 1. REALLY strong if you add up all the clues and how the plot devices worked, from using beacons to leave visions on people, to having an Asari transfer a cipher from a PLANT MONSTER onto you through a mind meld, and so forth...

thats not space magic? 

ME is a sci-fi game not Rainbow Six.

Keyword being the "fi" part of sci-fi.

What made ME so successful was it's balance.

Star Wars is too fantasy focused to where it's unrealistic. Star Trek is too science focused to where it's boring.

[savionen]

77boy84 wrote...

Is this what people are doing now?
Actively attacking ME1 to try and make ME3 look not as bad?

Good grief.

ME3 had TWO really great story arcs. Rannoch and Tuchanka. There were also some good character bits, but outside of that, the writing ranged from so-so to downright terrible. Yeah, ME1 isn't as amazing as some people chalk it up to be, and it's got it's flaws, but it sure as hell is better than ME3 in the writing department. ESPECIALLY in the writing department.

Stornskar wrote...

Are we really comparing ME1 and ME3? BW had no idea how successful ME1 would be, yet it was beloved by many and its sequels were sold based on how much everyone loved the original; ME3 has nearly killed the franchise and cause a firestorm of anger such that they actually released free DLC to explain the endings better.

This is really all that needs to be said. It's completely insane to compare the two, ME1 was the birth of a franchise loved by many, ME3 almost killed it completely.

+1

[Memnon]

It doesn't have to be Shakespeare - all it had to do, and ME1 did this masterfully, was establish a setting and a sense that the world was real and you were a part of it. ME1 was an experience - it set the foundation for the sequels

Talking about the writing of either game is distracting from the point of contention that many people have - it's not that the writing for ME3 was bad overall; at least that's not my issue. It's that everything was thrown by the wayside for the Catalyst, which felt very much out of place and very much outside of the setting established by the previous games. The Catalyst seemed like a rushed ending that a few guys thought up at the 11th hour when everyone realized that they weren't going to have enough time to put in the ending they originally wanted. The endings were bad - I know some people liked them, but if that was the majority opinion BW would not have made the EC and provided it at no cost to help explain them ...

[The Heretic of Time]

jreezy wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Well, that and that I was more in love with my headcanon than the series' story.

Yeah, I remember all your TIM-romance posts, lol.

Not gonna lie, that was awesome stuff. I miss all the renegade type threads now that I think about.

Same here. I enjoyed reading them. And I was always rooting for the renegades and Cerberus supporters. :innocent:

[txgoldrush]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

So it's come to this? We bashing Mass Effect 1 now?

Mass Effect 1 had good writing and was way better than Mass Effect 3's, don't friggin yourselves

If you like wooden explain everything show nothing type writing....

At least ME2 and ME3 shows the characters as more human.

[Binary_Helix 1]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Binary_Helix 1 wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

I'm sorry, i'm calling bull**** on this one. The space magic was strong in Mass Effect 1. REALLY strong if you add up all the clues and how the plot devices worked, from using beacons to leave visions on people, to having an Asari transfer a cipher from a PLANT MONSTER onto you through a mind meld, and so forth...

thats not space magic? 

ME is a sci-fi game not Rainbow Six.

And you have no argument anymore. Thank you for trying but you can leave now. 

LOL no

Refer to my previous post as to why ME became so popular.

[Mathias]

77boy84 wrote...

Is this what people are doing now?
Actively attacking ME1 to try and make ME3 look not as bad?

Good grief.

Exactly. This thread needs to be smacked. Nobody is ever gonna tell me with a straight face that Mass Effect 1 had crummy storytelling and not except an earful from me.

[txgoldrush]

Binary_Helix 1 wrote...

jreezy wrote...

Binary_Helix 1 wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

I'm sorry, i'm calling bull**** on this one. The space magic was strong in Mass Effect 1. REALLY strong if you add up all the clues and how the plot devices worked, from using beacons to leave visions on people, to having an Asari transfer a cipher from a PLANT MONSTER onto you through a mind meld, and so forth...

thats not space magic? 

ME is a sci-fi game not Rainbow Six.

Keyword being the "fi" part of sci-fi.

What made ME so successful was it's balance.

Star Wars is too fantasy focused to where it's unrealistic. Star Trek is too science focused to where it's boring.

Star Trek is full of Space Magic...like the Prophets in DS9.

[Seboist]

jreezy wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Well, that and that I was more in love with my headcanon than the series' story.

Yeah, I remember all your TIM-romance posts, lol.

Not gonna lie, that was awesome stuff. I miss all the renegade type threads now that I think about.

Those were the days, back before I stopped treating ME's story, it's lore and politics more seriously than a Disney WW2 cartoon.

[Mathias]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

So it's come to this? We bashing Mass Effect 1 now?

Better to put it on a pedestel and try to keep it away from any and all criticism?

Who's putting it on a pedestel? I'm sure not. But you're gonna bash the game instead? Cut me a break. Mass Effect 1 had much better storytelling than Mass Effect 3.

[The Heretic of Time]

Binary_Helix 1 wrote...

What made ME so successful was it's balance.

Star Wars is too fantasy focused to where it's unrealistic. Star Trek is too science focused to where it's boring.

Speak for yourself.

I love Star Wars because it's fantasy influence is unorthodox. 
I love Star Trek because it's soo focused on science.

And Mass Effect? Well... it seems Mass Effect doesn't know what it wants to be. At one moment is tried to be hard sci-fi, while at the other moment it's more like high-fantasy in space.

[txgoldrush]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

77boy84 wrote...

Is this what people are doing now?
Actively attacking ME1 to try and make ME3 look not as bad?

Good grief.

Exactly. This thread needs to be smacked. Nobody is ever gonna tell me with a straight face that Mass Effect 1 had crummy storytelling and not except an earful from me.

ME1 is FAR from crappy, and for 2007 it was great.....

But it is HIGHLY flawed, especially when it comes to characterization.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 03 juillet 2012 - 03:48 .

[tobin1455]

Let me count how many times I have finished each game.

Mass effect 1 14 times and counting.

Mass effect 2 17 times and counting.

Mass effect 3 so far 2 times, and replayed the last 15 minutes 4 times.Will play at least twice more over the next 2 years hopefully with some good single player DLC.

Your right op the game that`s played the least is the best Right? (WRONG. Mass effect 3 auto dialog garbage). Mass effect 3 is the worst of the three because of the limited game play choices.

[Seboist]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

See, these are the kind of posts I miss seeing.

I still smh at the notion of nothing being done with TIM the womanizer and femshep but meanwhile she can go get her pelvis broken by Garrus' literal boner. Tisk tisk.

[The Heretic of Time]

Seboist wrote...

Those were the days, back before I stopped treating ME's story, it's lore and politics more seriously than a Disney WW2 cartoon.

Disney WW2 cartoons are awesome! 

[savionen]

Every sci-fi series has lots of space magic, but there's enough there for you to believe it.

ME1's space magic - We can alter the mass of stuff with our implants!
ME3's space magic - Lets give robots DNA with a space laser.

Modifié par savionen, 03 juillet 2012 - 03:48 .

[LinksOcarina]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

In Mass Effect 2, save for Zaeed and Kasumi because of the nature of the DLC (although they were good too in retrospect)  can you not say that all 10 squadmates had personalities that were not only interesting, but dynamic enough to be engaged in their plights.

Right, you didn't find ME2 to be kind of a one-trick-pony with almost every single character (except for a few) having daddy issues? How is that interesting or dynamic at all?

LinksOcarina wrote...

So really, if you were to look at the plots of both games, there is no difference at all because the main plot is roughly the same length.

Really? ME2 has only 3 missions revolving round the main plot. ONLY THREE FLIPPING MISSIONS!

In ME1, every mission revolved around the main plot (except for the side-quests).

LinksOcarina wrote...

The side stuff is what matters. Mass Effect 3 is different because the main plot finally takes precedence here. Is that good or bad? Well, up until the finale it seemed to work for most people so I guess it is a good thing.

It would be a good thing if the plot didn't totally suck.

LinksOcarina wrote...

Point is, the game does have an actual plot and purpose. You choose to ignore it because it suits your argument. 

Plot? Maybe. Purpose? Well, if ME2's plot had any purpose or significance, than please enlighten me. ME2 didn't move the main plot of the series forward one bit.

Here is a list of missions that pertain to the  main plot of Mass Effect 1

Eden Prime
The Citadel Part 1 (Exposing Saren)
Finding Liara
Feros
Noveria
Virmire
Ilos
The Citadel Part 2 (Finale vs Saren) 

Here is what pertained to the main plot of Mass Effect 2

Shepards Revival
Freedoms Progress
Horizon
Collector Base
Dirlect Reaper
The Suicide mission (in 4 parts, approach, vents, long walk, finale vs human Reaper) 

That is more than 3 missions right there.

And you know what, the point of Mass Effect 2 pretty much set up mass Effect 3: who lived, died, and how the major conflicts and some characters as war assets, would aid you. Especially for the Genophage and Rannoch, where doing loyalty missions for Mordin, Tali, Legion, and making a decision about Wrex in game 1, were critical to how they play out. 


As for the daddy issue thing, lets go over the suspects.

Miranda, Jacob, and Thane, and Thane is the reverse of the daddy issues.

Thats all really. Jack had trust issues, Mordin and Legion ethical, Tali had daddy issues in the background, Grunt was going through puberty, Samara was wrestling with her duty vs her devotion as a mother, and Garrus was dealing with the wayward student. 

Miranda had father issues yes, Jacob discovered father issues, and Thane as I said, was the reverse, trying to rekindle a relationship with his son. You can argue Tali and maybe Samara, but that does not fit the bill of it being a "daddy issue" quest, unless if you have a meaning for it I am missing. 

Oh, and it wasn't a one trick pony, because each character did have unique issues, some can be seen as similar, but only in simple terms, in looking at the conflict overall. Basically, it becomes a cliche because its been done, but the real question is how it was done, not if its been done, already.

[Mathias]

txgoldrush wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

So it's come to this? We bashing Mass Effect 1 now?

Mass Effect 1 had good writing and was way better than Mass Effect 3's, don't friggin yourselves

If you like wooden explain everything show nothing type writing....

At least ME2 and ME3 shows the characters as more human.

Mass Effect 1 was essentially an info dump and was introducing you to this brand new universe that was filled with all kinds of lore. It focuses on story and setting, while ME2 focused on character and a more personal journey.

[Zero132132]

77boy84 wrote...

ME3 had TWO really great story arcs. Rannoch and Tuchanka. There were also some good character bits, but outside of that, the writing ranged from so-so to downright terrible. Yeah, ME1 isn't as amazing as some people chalk it up to be, and it's got it's flaws, but it sure as hell is better than ME3 in the writing department. ESPECIALLY in the writing department.

You're wrong. Give ONE good story arc in ME1.

The characters all lacked characterization. Every mission felt sort of pointless, and you only got marginally closer to the main objective. Almost all of ME1 was exposition; characters were treated as sources of information, which is why nobody had a personality. Everyone except Saren (and maybe Joker) serves primarily as an expositional device. There are almost no moments that tug at your heartstrings, make you actually give a damn.

[txgoldrush]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Binary_Helix 1 wrote...

What made ME so successful was it's balance.

Star Wars is too fantasy focused to where it's unrealistic. Star Trek is too science focused to where it's boring.

Speak for yourself.

I love Star Wars because it's fantasy influence is unorthodox. 
I love Star Trek because it's soo focused on science.

And Mass Effect? Well... it seems Mass Effect doesn't know what it wants to be. At one moment is tried to be hard sci-fi, while at the other moment it's more like high-fantasy in space.

No, its a human drama in a sci fi universe...which sets it apart from other space opera or space themed sci fi shows.