M25105 wrote...
First of all, and I really shouldn't specify this, this is my own opinion. If you don't like it, then you don't, end of story.
I'm writing this, cause when you write an opinion piece on BSN it gets flooeded with the usual people who rushes in and posts "Well thanks for speaking for all of us /sarcasm" or some other smart ass comment. Ok? Ok.
Now that I got that out of the way, this will be my first long post on here that's somewhat serious.
If you're like me, then you remember back when it was very hard for a game to get 9/10 or 10/10 scores. But things changed as the gaming industry got bigger and bigger. I'm going to use a local example to show you how it changed.
If you live in Denmark and you play PC games, chances are that you've heard of a magazine called PC Player. I used to buy this magazine a lot. I've bought it when Warcraft 2 came out, maybe even earlier, I can't remember. It used to be a cool magazine and what stood out to me the most, was a review of Fallout. The reviewer liked the game, but didn't think too much of it, so he gave it a 6/10 score. This prompted another reviewer, who was far more in to RPG than the original reviewer, to write a little protest in a small box on the same page. There he explained very briefly why he thought the game was better than that and gave it 8/10. Wow, this seems to be a good site, I thought to myself.
Then somewhere along the road, I don't know when exactly, they sold out. Not in an open way, but in a "subtle" way, that many missed out on. They were invited to EA's Westwood's development studios in the U.S. They actually flew them to America, and treated them like royalty. They made a big article about it, writing how awesome it was to see all those big stars that acted in the game and how everything looked so amazing. The game in question? Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun.
Then lo and behold! Some months later, the game came out, but they had the review ready for it. And it was a perfect 10/10. This made many of the readers, myself included, rush out and buy it. Funny enough Starcraft, which was reviewed a few months earlier got 8/10. Many couldn't understand this, but we guessed it was because that PC Player had very high standards. Until C&C: Tiberian Sun, only Half Life and Dungeon Keeper, and Dungeon Keeper 2 got 10/10. The warning signs were there with Dungeon Keeper 2. The only games I agree on is Half-Life and Dungeon Keeper.
Well, it turned out that Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun was a very forgetable game. I didn't complete it. I wasn't impressed as I played and began to think "This game sucks". I couldn't understand how this game got 10/10. Neither could many others, and whenever the topic is brought up in their website, they're quick to lock the threads due to the fact it's old news. The game didn't deserve anything other than maybe a 6/10.
It woke me up however, and made me understand that gone are the days of honest reviewers. You can still find a few honest reviewers, but it's not like there is a whole lot of them. These days, you gotta check youtube to see an honest review, like that Totalbiscuit or Halibut guy.
So the whole 75 perfect reviews for Mass Effect 3 is a joke. If you want to give the game an honest score, like in the old days, it would get a 7/10. A good game, that's fun, but certainly not perfect.
Here's a quick summary of Mass Effect 3.
The good stuff.
- Excellent combat system, the cover and cover movement works very well.
- Lots of different weapons with the ability to Customise them.
- Melee can be very handy in certain situations.
- Skill tree is easy to work around.
- Enemies seem to work together and they mix up well.
- Insanity is hard, but still doable for an experienced gamer.
- Multiplayer is pretty ok.
- Return of well loved characters.
- No scanning of planets.
- Sound and music are top notch.
- Health and healing system flows well with the combat.
- Pretty cool choices during the game, like the cure of the genophage, siding with the Geth or not.
Bad stuff.
- The game is WAY TOO SHORT! It's the shortest of all three games, even if you do every single side-mission.
- Multiplayer affects the singleplayer ending if you want the best ending (destroy with Shepard alive). Which is a terrible idea to force those that care only about playing singleplayer to play multiplayer.
- Extremely linear, there is one direction and that's forward, every path you see is an illusion.
- Wasted potential of certain levels. The ones where you walk around with the flash lights on your gun turned on in the complete dark. Now that would've been awesome to fight in.
- Squad mates still being stupid in combat. It's OK for Vega to be stupid and rush in, since he's tough and can handle it, but why on earth does Liara and EDI do the same thing? You have to constantly control them and park them in the back where they are safe.
- Sprites and funny head movements, shows that the game didn't get enough time to get polished. It's very annoying to see Shepard look like the girl from the exorcist.
- Lack of boss battles.
- The game expects you to know things that's in the novels.
- Journal system incredible inefficient.
- Pandering to IGN.
- Introduction of the universally hated spacebrat. If you like this character you should read a good book for a change, something other than Dragonlance or cheap sci-fi novels.
- The ending leaves you disappointed, which affects the replay value of the game.
- Day one DLC that's already on the disk, and it's not something that useless or of zero importance, but a freaking Prothean.
Conclusion.
Based on what we've experienced Mass Effect 3 is a 7/10 game. Meaning it's a good game, it's fun, but it has too many flaws to get 8/10 and higher. It's main saving grace is the amazing sound and the combat system.
Before the drones rush in and say "How can you give it 7/10. You admitted you had FUN playing it, didn't you?!" Well I also had fun playing Puzzle Quest, Puzzle Agent and Zuma's Revenge. Are those 10/10 games? No? Then your point is stupid. You're letting yourself get blinded and you ignore the issues infront of you.
So you're giving your criticism, but you don't want us criticize your opinion? Then what the hell was the point of posting this here? So other people could circlejerk over your opinion?
[*]The hell? The game is just as long as ME2, much longer than ME1. ME1 could have been completed in like 4 hours. Did you skip the side quests/missions? My last playthrough was 20 hours, and that was doing everything and skipping dialogue. That is the same exact freaking length as the first two games. Besides, quantity!=quality.[*]This issue was addressed in the EC.[*]The previous games were about as "linear" as this one. Stop it with the rosy retrospection. Besides, being linear is a narrative strength. There is less inconsistency and makes events in the game feel more significant. What, did you expect to go to Thessia right after ****ing leaving Earth, and then go save the Primarch? That would make no sense in ME3's war plot.[*]That's not exactly a strong criticism, to criticize something for not being in the game that nobody asked for and something BioWare never promised. I guess Mass Effect 1 had wasted potential with missions because they could have been scarier![*]What are you talking about? If anything the animations improved from ME1 and ME2.
Do you even remember this from Mass Effect 2?[*]I suppose that's a valid criticism, but boss battles have never been a strong suit in the series.[*]The hell? The game never expected that from me. Please provide an example.[*]I'll give you that on the journal.[*]Not really pandering, she just happens to work for IGN. I doubt BioWare hired her simply because she worked for IGN. Your logic doesn't really make any sense.
[*]"haha, if u lyke dis charctr ur not as intellectual as me!" I don't give a **** about your recommendations, stop acting pretentious.[*]In the original endings, yes. The Extended Cut left many truly feeling uplifted and victorious, assuming they had a high EMS. Some people will never be pleased with the endings, no matter how much fanservice BioWare gives them.[*]In the end his character doesn't change the story too much. He has no knowledge on the Crucible, was born during his cycle's war with the Reapers, and is only a soldier. His character provides some nice insight into the Protheans, and by extension the universe's backstory, but is not essential in the slightest.
Retour en haut
...if you think so...but this is getting way to offtopic...
