426 réponses à ce sujet

[Dougy Fresh]

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.

Ocarina I'm calling bull**** on you.

1. The beacons were left by protheans. In ME3 Javik states that his people communicate and trade large amounts of information through sensory. So it only makes sense that they would leave a warning encrypted this way. Javik also says that it seems to him that communication was still primitve in this cycle.

2. The Cypher was not from the THORIAN (not plant monster, get your lore right) It was used to interpret prothean language so it was not just a confusing flash like what Shep first saw on eden prime. Plus it make most sense that an Asari was to give this to Shep. The Asari did have Prothean technology that they were not sharing with the rest of the Citadel races, which would explain why Asari are on top of the galaxy, their intelligence, longevity of life, and their ability to communicate information through linking minds. All of those qualities are very similar to Prothean. To top it all off Javik mentions that his people saw the potential in the Asari so they "guided" them when necessary.

Its not space magic.

[Mathias]

txgoldrush wrote...

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.

Flawed? Sure every game has it's flawss. But HIGHLY flawed? You can't just call it great and then call it HIGHLY flawed, that's a contradiction.

[txgoldrush]

Zero132132 wrote...

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.

THIS

However, I do have to give you an exception....."I Remember Me"

[DRTJR]

The only two things ME1 has that is irrefutably better is that Wrex is a party member, and Saren.

[LinksOcarina]

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.

Mass Effect was never balanced. It was always more fictiony vs hard science, more Star Wars vs Star Trek.

nothing wrong with that either, I actually prefer that over Star Trek. But it was never something that could happen. 

[Reptilian Rob]

No one writes "great," they only write to the reader's liking.

[SuperVulcan]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

SuperVulcan wrote...

 Judging by some of the responses that I read, I'm guessing many people here have not played the first Mass Effect in some time.

Which ones? I can tell you that I've played ME1 this year, anyway.

One post that comes to mind was when someone criticized who poorly Tali written in ME 1. How she didn't feel human. Really? She's still a kid on her pilgrimmage on a human warship. Her and Garrus only really get buddy-buddy with Shepard in part 2 after they're recruited.

[txgoldrush]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

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.

Flawed? Sure every game has it's flawss. But HIGHLY flawed? You can't just call it great and then call it HIGHLY flawed, that's a contradiction.

No, it was great FOR ITS TIME....

Like Goldeneye for N64 was great for its time...boy does it suck now.

[7he Island Head]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Mass Effect 1 had flaws, yes. But at least it had a logical and sound plot, with relatively few plot holes.

ME3 however is like cheese, cheese with giant holes in it, like... Swiss cheese!

Um...the plot of Mass Effect 1 was that this guy named Shepard saw a vision of a machine-like race that would destroy the galaxy, and had to stop a rouge agent of the ruling galactic body from making these machines invade the galaxy because of said dream.

And add to that you eventually have a green alien give you a cipher to make sense of everything, a cipher that was taken from a mutant plant monster, to fight this said rogue agent who is breeding an army of mutant aliens to fight for him, and rallied robotic aliens to do the same. 

I'm not sure thats a logical plot insomuch as its a straightforward plot that uses plot devices to make everything fit together. It fits in the games universe, but so does Mass Effect 3's plot....

And no one  believed Shep. You got air quotes and stuff

[txgoldrush]

SuperVulcan wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

SuperVulcan wrote...

 Judging by some of the responses that I read, I'm guessing many people here have not played the first Mass Effect in some time.

Which ones? I can tell you that I've played ME1 this year, anyway.

One post that comes to mind was when someone criticized who poorly Tali written in ME 1. How she didn't feel human. Really? She's still a kid on her pilgrimmage on a human warship. Her and Garrus only really get buddy-buddy with Shepard in part 2 after they're recruited.

Because Tali in ME1 was a HUGE example of the "talking codex entry problems" Bioware had.

[The Heretic of Time]

txgoldrush wrote...

Like Goldeneye for N64 was great for its time...boy does it suck now.

Goldeneye 64 is timeless. It's still great!

[Mathias]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

But you're gonna bash the game instead? Cut me a break. Mass Effect 1 had much better storytelling than Mass Effect 3.

If I see things worth criticizing, I will do so. I don't see why you have a problem with that; you're certainly free to argue against any or all points being made.

That was directed towards the thread as a whole, not just you.

[Garrus is my Shepard]

DinoSteve wrote...

Me1's writing > ME3's writing

sorry had to be said.

Ah yes "opinions". We have dismissed that claim.

[shepard1038]

Me1 is only better in story to Me2 and Me3, besides that Me2 and Me3 beat the game by much.

[The Heretic of Time]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Mass Effect 1 had flaws, yes. But at least it had a logical and sound plot, with relatively few plot holes.

ME3 however is like cheese, cheese with giant holes in it, like... Swiss cheese!

Um...the plot of Mass Effect 1 was that this guy named Shepard saw a vision of a machine-like race that would destroy the galaxy, and had to stop a rouge agent of the ruling galactic body from making these machines invade the galaxy because of said dream.

And add to that you eventually have a green alien give you a cipher to make sense of everything, a cipher that was taken from a mutant plant monster, to fight this said rogue agent who is breeding an army of mutant aliens to fight for him, and rallied robotic aliens to do the same. 

I'm not sure thats a logical plot insomuch as its a straightforward plot that uses plot devices to make everything fit together. It fits in the games universe, but so does Mass Effect 3's plot....

It fits in the games universe and is significantly more solid than ME3's plot.

At least ME1's plot didn't have gaping holes in it.

[Mathias]

txgoldrush wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

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.

Flawed? Sure every game has it's flawss. But HIGHLY flawed? You can't just call it great and then call it HIGHLY flawed, that's a contradiction.

No, it was great FOR ITS TIME....

Like Goldeneye for N64 was great for its time...boy does it suck now.

See I don't think like that. I'm not gonna look at something that was great when it came out and say "Pff...you're old news, nobody likes you anymore."

No, i'm gonna give it the respect it deserves. It's a great game, and still is. It might not be as fun to play these days as it was back then, but i'm not gonna knock off points from the game because of that.

[Eluril]

Regardless of the writing I think ME1 is clearly the least polished and most clunky of the three games. I enjoyed ME1 a ton when it was released but parts of it are downright painful to replay now having seen the other two games. But still there are a lot of classic moments in the game, especially the Sovereign conversation and the ending sequence with m4 playing.

[LinksOcarina]

Dougy Fresh 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.

Ocarina I'm calling bull**** on you.

1. The beacons were left by protheans. In ME3 Javik states that his people communicate and trade large amounts of information through sensory. So it only makes sense that they would leave a warning encrypted this way. Javik also says that it seems to him that communication was still primitve in this cycle.

2. The Cypher was not from the THORIAN (not plant monster, get your lore right) It was used to interpret prothean language so it was not just a confusing flash like what Shep first saw on eden prime. Plus it make most sense that an Asari was to give this to Shep. The Asari did have Prothean technology that they were not sharing with the rest of the Citadel races, which would explain why Asari are on top of the galaxy, their intelligence, longevity of life, and their ability to communicate information through linking minds. All of those qualities are very similar to Prothean. To top it all off Javik mentions that his people saw the potential in the Asari so they "guided" them when necessary.

Its not space magic.

Two things.

1. That is using knowledge found in game 3 in hindsight. Remember the characters have no idea how the beacons worked, and when given that information its still far-fetched because of point 2...

2. The fact that the use of a sort of 'psychic" feel to read and comprehend a language, or to find an item called the conduit (introduced towards the end of game 1, by the way) or to even receive this vision from the Protheans is a bit high fantasy. I mean come on, linking minds is not space magic? 

So in essence, the plot items in question are devices that are the same as the Catalyst in terms of their treatment and execution. Basically, If you call one space magic, you have to call the others the same, because they are treated as such in the narrative. 

And I know the Thorian is more than a plant monster  thats just some hyperbolic generalization because you knew what I was talking about. 

[77boy84]

Zero132132 wrote...

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.

Virmire instantly pops into my head as being the stand out of ME1, and I'd say it stands above most of the trilogy as well. And well, no duh the characters were info dumps. For Shepard, most of these guys are his first time actually talking with their respective species. It's not a stretch at all that he'd go to them to learn about their species. I agree that it got a bit problematic (especially with Tali), but to say they had NO characterization is just flat out wrong.

I'm sorry, but that's how it is. If you played ME1, and thought the squadmates were infodumps and infodumps ONLY with no personality you are just flat out wrong.

Here's my advice to you, my friend. Stop posting in this thread. Go reinstall ME1 (or put it in your xbox!), and replay it right now. Don't rush through it, take your time, and just talk it out with your squadmates, and pay attention to what they say.

Maybe do one of their side quests, that'll help.

[Zero132132]

Anyone else reading this and getting a bizarre desire to replay ME1? So far, I've done femshep and renagon, but I want to do a full paragon runthrough, since femshep VA seems to do better on paragon lines.

Seriously, I know the discussion is about its flaws, but is anyone else getting nostalgic?

[The Heretic of Time]

txgoldrush wrote...

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.

Futurama is better human drama in a sci fi universe than Mass Effect (and it's a goddamn comedy series!).

Mass Effect is like a soap series with herrderrppp daddy isues slapped on every single character in an attempt to make them more interesting, which it didn't.


I played Mass Effect for it's lore and universe, which are now destroyed by ME3's terrible story and gaping plot holes.

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 03 juillet 2012 - 04:01 .