825 réponses à ce sujet

[LaughingDragon]

Eloise K wrote...

I didn't read the previous 22 pages, but I hope that at some point BW will read the whole thread and then realizes what make ME3 average at best and take notes for the next installments.
I don't want to repeat what others have already said, but IMHO what's made ME3 a bad game is not just the ending - which still lacks in execution but its implications were quite interesting (no, not that darn Deus ex Machina that tells my Shep what to do and solves everything we didn't even forecast during the previous games...) - but the unbalanced elements of a RPG and a TPS gaming, the facts that the gamer is alienated from its Shepard (auto-dialogues...), the lack of exploration, the lack of interaction between the characters. Yes, you've already said it all.
Is it clear to me that the future of ME will just bring more casualization to appeal every kind of gamer out there, and if so this will also be the end of BioWare.

BioWare won't listen to anything said here because:

1. their success has gone to their head and their ego's are inflated to the max

2. they think the thoughts expressed on BSN represent a tiny minority of fans

[3DandBeyond]

Oransel wrote...

nedpepper wrote...
People: STOP USING DEUS EX MACHINA as your main point of hatred for ME 3.  The Conduit in ME1 is a giant Deus Ex.  You actually teleport right to the Citadel.....half of the Illusive Man's info about knowing where the Collectors are going to hit?  Deus Ex.  The IM himself is a giant Deus Ex in all of ME2.
.

Wow. Person does not what the term means and tries to teach people. Amazing.

The problem is that the Deus ex Machina is substituted in ME3 for the real goal of 3 games.  In ME1 if the conduit was any kind of DeM (not one actually since it does not come out and save anything-it just gets you to where you need to go), it was not a character that became the ending.

The star kid and his choices become the DeM, in that they will solve the problem, but the problem has changed because they are there.

The problem was the reapers-the goal, their destruction.
The new problem/new goal that the ME3 DeM choices will solve is conflict between synthetics and organics.

A DeM solves the problem.  The conduit merely gets you to a place where you can solve it.  It was introduced early enough and given some explanation as to what it would do, contrary to a real DeM.  A DeM is introduced abruptly and is contrived, suddenly pops up to solve an unsolvable problem.

And TIM didn't know always know where the collectors would hit, he knew where they had recently hit.  TIM doesn't solve any problems at all-he actually creates far more than he solves.  He is continually using Shepard as bait to get the Collectors to attack or reveal themselves.  Shepard solves the problems and actually continually tries to minimize some of the problems TIM creates.

[robertthebard]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Oransel wrote...

nedpepper wrote...
People: STOP USING DEUS EX MACHINA as your main point of hatred for ME 3.  The Conduit in ME1 is a giant Deus Ex.  You actually teleport right to the Citadel.....half of the Illusive Man's info about knowing where the Collectors are going to hit?  Deus Ex.  The IM himself is a giant Deus Ex in all of ME2.
.

Wow. Person does not what the term means and tries to teach people. Amazing.

The problem is that the Deus ex Machina is substituted in ME3 for the real goal of 3 games.  In ME1 if the conduit was any kind of DeM (not one actually since it does not come out and save anything-it just gets you to where you need to go), it was not a character that became the ending.

The star kid and his choices become the DeM, in that they will solve the problem, but the problem has changed because they are there.

The problem was the reapers-the goal, their destruction.
The new problem/new goal that the ME3 DeM choices will solve is conflict between synthetics and organics.

A DeM solves the problem.  The conduit merely gets you to a place where you can solve it.  It was introduced early enough and given some explanation as to what it would do, contrary to a real DeM.  A DeM is introduced abruptly and is contrived, suddenly pops up to solve an unsolvable problem.

And TIM didn't know always know where the collectors would hit, he knew where they had recently hit.  TIM doesn't solve any problems at all-he actually creates far more than he solves.  He is continually using Shepard as bait to get the Collectors to attack or reveal themselves.  Shepard solves the problems and actually continually tries to minimize some of the problems TIM creates.

So tell me, with out it, how were you getting back out to stop Saren and Sovereign?

[t_i_e_]

LaughingDragon wrote...

Eloise K wrote...

I didn't read the previous 22 pages, but I hope that at some point BW will read the whole thread and then realizes what make ME3 average at best and take notes for the next installments.
I don't want to repeat what others have already said, but IMHO what's made ME3 a bad game is not just the ending - which still lacks in execution but its implications were quite interesting (no, not that darn Deus ex Machina that tells my Shep what to do and solves everything we didn't even forecast during the previous games...) - but the unbalanced elements of a RPG and a TPS gaming, the facts that the gamer is alienated from its Shepard (auto-dialogues...), the lack of exploration, the lack of interaction between the characters. Yes, you've already said it all.
Is it clear to me that the future of ME will just bring more casualization to appeal every kind of gamer out there, and if so this will also be the end of BioWare.

BioWare won't listen to anything said here because:

1. their success has gone to their head and their ego's are inflated to the max

2. they think the thoughts expressed on BSN represent a tiny minority of fans

I some what disagree. Its EA that is the problem. They bought Bioware to spawn numerous studios with their name to lure players in. What is worse is that players are letting them lie, not finish products and milk them for money because of it.  

STOP BUYING EA PRODUCTS PEOPLE!!!! Borrow from a friend, rent or buy pre-used if you must.

There is a reason why they beat out a bank that helped crash the American economy for 'Worst American Business'!!!

Modifié par t_i_e_, 15 juillet 2012 - 07:47 .

[Ticonderoga117]

robertthebard wrote...
So tell me, with out it, how were you getting back out to stop Saren and Sovereign?

A plot device.
The Conduit wasn't contrived.

[xcomcmdr]

robertthebard wrote...

xcomcmdr wrote...

grey_wind wrote...

Objectively, ME3 is a good game, not great, taken as a stand alone title.
But compared to what came before it and what the devs made it out to be, it's a turd.

A bipolar turd.

So I watched most of the vid, and it comes down to I hated most of the endings so the game sucked.

That's a way to sum up a 2 hours video with tons of topics.

[Ozida]

Eloise K wrote...

I didn't read the previous 22 pages, but I hope that at some point BW will read the whole thread and then realizes what make ME3 average at best and take notes for the next installments.
I don't want to repeat what others have already said, but IMHO what's made ME3 a bad game is not just the ending - which still lacks in execution but its implications were quite interesting (no, not that darn Deus ex Machina that tells my Shep what to do and solves everything we didn't even forecast during the previous games...) - but the unbalanced elements of a RPG and a TPS gaming, the facts that the gamer is alienated from its Shepard (auto-dialogues...), the lack of exploration, the lack of interaction between the characters. Yes, you've already said it all.
Is it clear to me that the future of ME will just bring more casualization to appeal every kind of gamer out there, and if so this will also be the end of BioWare.

^ This

[chemiclord]

The OP obviously never had the privilege of playing Ultima IX.

THAT is a bad game.

[Messi Kossmann]

HagarIshay wrote...

 No offence OP, but most of your listed things seem to just fill the list to make it look long.


No Galaxy exploration. No vehicles- Fan's requests. Maybe they will do something in DLC, but you can't blame BioWare on something the fans didn't want.

Game is very short, compared to previous games- not true. ME1 is the shortest, if you ignore side quests. Even then, it takes a long time to finish ME1 with sidequests because of the huge planets. Without it you could finish the game fairly quickly.

Crucible- what exactly is your problem with that?

Choices did not matter- in the ending, maybe (if you don't count the war assets or sliders). But many of our choices have been acknowlaged throughout the ME3.

Catalyst's existence- Elaborate. What did he do to you?

Overall plot is very weak - Actually there are great things in the plot. Uniting the galaxy to stop the reapers, fixing the galaxy's mess. Other things in the plot are also good, just executed very poorly.

Bugs. Tons of them- Maybe I'm lucky, but the only bug I had encountered with is behind Joker's chair.

Endings-  The endings and their problems got fixed in the EC. If you still don't like them for whatever reason, that is your problem.

Artistic integrity- REALLY? Are you serious? What the hell does that have to do with anything? 

the rest of the games are irrelevant-  I always see people saying that. I never understand why. What exactly makes the other two games irrelevant.

Insults from Bioware- I don't recall we were ever been insulted by BioWare. You feeling insulted is a whole different story. And even if they insulted you in any way (which they didn't), it's hardly the game's fault. It's BioWare's themselves.

The game is not bad. You don't like it. I however, love it.

Perfect!! 

But this is the worst of insults from Bioware. WHERE? Saying that will not change the end is not an insult!

Modifié par Messi Kossmann, 15 juillet 2012 - 08:00 .

[Ticonderoga117]

chemiclord wrote...

The OP obviously never had the privilege of playing Ultima IX.

THAT is a bad game.

Because it butchers lore.
Makes characters moronic.
Feels incomplete.

Huh... all of these can be argued for ME3. Funny that.

[robertthebard]

xcomcmdr wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

xcomcmdr wrote...

grey_wind wrote...

Objectively, ME3 is a good game, not great, taken as a stand alone title.
But compared to what came before it and what the devs made it out to be, it's a turd.

A bipolar turd.

So I watched most of the vid, and it comes down to I hated most of the endings so the game sucked.

That's a way to sum up a 2 hours video with tons of topics.

That's just the feeling I came away with.  No disrespect to the reviewer, I'm sure he has a loyal following.

[3DandBeyond]

robertthebard wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

The problem is that the Deus ex Machina is substituted in ME3 for the real goal of 3 games.  In ME1 if the conduit was any kind of DeM (not one actually since it does not come out and save anything-it just gets you to where you need to go), it was not a character that became the ending.

The star kid and his choices become the DeM, in that they will solve the problem, but the problem has changed because they are there.

The problem was the reapers-the goal, their destruction.
The new problem/new goal that the ME3 DeM choices will solve is conflict between synthetics and organics.

A DeM solves the problem.  The conduit merely gets you to a place where you can solve it.  It was introduced early enough and given some explanation as to what it would do, contrary to a real DeM.  A DeM is introduced abruptly and is contrived, suddenly pops up to solve an unsolvable problem.

And TIM didn't know always know where the collectors would hit, he knew where they had recently hit.  TIM doesn't solve any problems at all-he actually creates far more than he solves.  He is continually using Shepard as bait to get the Collectors to attack or reveal themselves.  Shepard solves the problems and actually continually tries to minimize some of the problems TIM creates.

So tell me, with out it, how were you getting back out to stop Saren and Sovereign?

It's a plot device that is not dropped on you from out of nowhere and even if it was a DeM, it is not the main point of the biggest part of the ending of ME1.  It is like an undiscovered road that leads you home. 

It would be like having a road trip movie.  The people are lost, can't get home, and they go to a store and buy a map that shows the road to get home.  A DeM would be if the lost people are driving along, are lost, and out of nowhere an alien in a space ship drops down, lifts up their car, and drops them at home.  An extreme example, but it is contrived, does not fit what's been happening, and comes out of nowhere with no explanation to solve the problem.

The conduit on the other hand was explained, perhaps not well but it was.  And it does not solve the main problem.  It's a miniature mass relay on Ilos that connects with the relay monument on the Citadel.  By contrast there is no way to fully explain, nor do the game even try the existence of the 3 choice consoles on the citadel in ME3-they apparently are suddenly there because Shepard made it to the citadel and they coordinate the actions that the crucible only powers (the crucible being merely like a big battery).

The other reason people do continually say it's a DeM ending is because the choices are drawn from the Deus ex (2000) game.  Control, merge, destroy.

[robertthebard]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...
So tell me, with out it, how were you getting back out to stop Saren and Sovereign?

A plot device.
The Conduit wasn't contrived.

Nor was the Catalyst, it is referenced at about the same amount of time into the game, maybe sooner, than the Conduit.  In the exact same place, even, right in front of the Council, so they'd have even more reasons to balk about helping you.  Funny how that works out, isn't it?

The Catalyst may have been poorly implemented, and judging by fan response, yeah, but that does not make it a DeM nor contrived, any more or less than the Conduit.  The Conduit allows you to get inside the closed arms of the Citadel, and Vigil gives you access codes so you can assume control of it, yeah, no contrivances there.  It's one thing to not like how the endings were done, I don't, I think the game ran 5 minutes or so past where it should have actually ended, but it's another to start throwing around DeM just because people are dissatisfied with it.  Or to defend another plot device from an ME game that was introduced in the exact same way as not being the same thing.  You may have a case if the Catalyst was never mentioned, but it is, in your first conversation with the Council.  Sorry to burst the DeM bubble, but being brought up and sought after for the entire game means that it's not brought up at the last minute.

[robertthebard]

3DandBeyond wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

The problem is that the Deus ex Machina is substituted in ME3 for the real goal of 3 games.  In ME1 if the conduit was any kind of DeM (not one actually since it does not come out and save anything-it just gets you to where you need to go), it was not a character that became the ending.

The star kid and his choices become the DeM, in that they will solve the problem, but the problem has changed because they are there.

The problem was the reapers-the goal, their destruction.
The new problem/new goal that the ME3 DeM choices will solve is conflict between synthetics and organics.

A DeM solves the problem.  The conduit merely gets you to a place where you can solve it.  It was introduced early enough and given some explanation as to what it would do, contrary to a real DeM.  A DeM is introduced abruptly and is contrived, suddenly pops up to solve an unsolvable problem.

And TIM didn't know always know where the collectors would hit, he knew where they had recently hit.  TIM doesn't solve any problems at all-he actually creates far more than he solves.  He is continually using Shepard as bait to get the Collectors to attack or reveal themselves.  Shepard solves the problems and actually continually tries to minimize some of the problems TIM creates.

So tell me, with out it, how were you getting back out to stop Saren and Sovereign?

It's a plot device that is not dropped on you from out of nowhere and even if it was a DeM, it is not the main point of the biggest part of the ending of ME1.  It is like an undiscovered road that leads you home. 

It would be like having a road trip movie.  The people are lost, can't get home, and they go to a store and buy a map that shows the road to get home.  A DeM would be if the lost people are driving along, are lost, and out of nowhere an alien in a space ship drops down, lifts up their car, and drops them at home.  An extreme example, but it is contrived, does not fit what's been happening, and comes out of nowhere with no explanation to solve the problem.

The conduit on the other hand was explained, perhaps not well but it was.  And it does not solve the main problem.  It's a miniature mass relay on Ilos that connects with the relay monument on the Citadel.  By contrast there is no way to fully explain, nor do the game even try the existence of the 3 choice consoles on the citadel in ME3-they apparently are suddenly there because Shepard made it to the citadel and they coordinate the actions that the crucible only powers (the crucible being merely like a big battery).

The other reason people do continually say it's a DeM ending is because the choices are drawn from the Deus ex (2000) game.  Control, merge, destroy.

The Conduit was explained just before you use it to get into an otherwise impregnable Citadel.  Yeah, no DeM there, eh?  So you're saying that, even w/out the Conduit, you could have somehow found a way into the Citadel to open the arms so the Fleet could attack Sovereign?  A fight which, btw you have no direct influence on until Sovereign assumes control of Saren's husk, other than to either wait for the arms and focus on Sovereign, or save the Council.  Other than that, it's all movies.  Sorry, but your assessment does not stand up to scrutiny.  Unless you can tell me where, early in the game, you learn exactly what the Conduit is, and what it does, because frankly, I didn't learn that until Ilos.

[shodiswe]

After the EC I think it's a good game with a few rough spots.... An uncut diamond... or partialy uncut.

[Ticonderoga117]

robertthebard wrote...

Nor was the Catalyst, it is referenced at about the same amount of time into the game, maybe sooner, than the Conduit.  In the exact same place, even, right in front of the Council, so they'd have even more reasons to balk about helping you.  Funny how that works out, isn't it?

The Catalyst may have been poorly implemented, and judging by fan response, yeah, but that does not make it a DeM nor contrived, any more or less than the Conduit.  The Conduit allows you to get inside the closed arms of the Citadel, and Vigil gives you access codes so you can assume control of it, yeah, no contrivances there.  It's one thing to not like how the endings were done, I don't, I think the game ran 5 minutes or so past where it should have actually ended, but it's another to start throwing around DeM just because people are dissatisfied with it.  Or to defend another plot device from an ME game that was introduced in the exact same way as not being the same thing.  You may have a case if the Catalyst was never mentioned, but it is, in your first conversation with the Council.  Sorry to burst the DeM bubble, but being brought up and sought after for the entire game means that it's not brought up at the last minute.

The problem is is that the Catalyst is contrived in his current form.
It goes from we don't know what it is, to being the Citadel, to being an AI who partially resides in the Citadel and is the leader of the Reapers.

The first part is fine. The second is "WTF just happened? Why is the leader of the Reapers helping me stop them?"

Then we find out why. Oh, we aren't solving our problem, we're solving his problem using three contrived measures. Control - Why can't I just tell him? Nope, gotta grab the nods. Synthesis - The entirety of this solution is by definition artificial and fits about the same in this story as Gandalf being in there. Destroy - Kill ALL the synthetics, not just the Reapers who are killing us because.... no idea.

So yes, The Catalyst is a DEM delivered by a convient plot device. He gives us all the solutions and the means to carry them out. You just have to choose. Wanna choose something more sensical? Too bad! Refuse is broken.

[Thore2k10]

robertthebard wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

The problem is that the Deus ex Machina is substituted in ME3 for the real goal of 3 games.  In ME1 if the conduit was any kind of DeM (not one actually since it does not come out and save anything-it just gets you to where you need to go), it was not a character that became the ending.

The star kid and his choices become the DeM, in that they will solve the problem, but the problem has changed because they are there.

The problem was the reapers-the goal, their destruction.
The new problem/new goal that the ME3 DeM choices will solve is conflict between synthetics and organics.

A DeM solves the problem.  The conduit merely gets you to a place where you can solve it.  It was introduced early enough and given some explanation as to what it would do, contrary to a real DeM.  A DeM is introduced abruptly and is contrived, suddenly pops up to solve an unsolvable problem.

And TIM didn't know always know where the collectors would hit, he knew where they had recently hit.  TIM doesn't solve any problems at all-he actually creates far more than he solves.  He is continually using Shepard as bait to get the Collectors to attack or reveal themselves.  Shepard solves the problems and actually continually tries to minimize some of the problems TIM creates.

So tell me, with out it, how were you getting back out to stop Saren and Sovereign?

It's a plot device that is not dropped on you from out of nowhere and even if it was a DeM, it is not the main point of the biggest part of the ending of ME1.  It is like an undiscovered road that leads you home. 

It would be like having a road trip movie.  The people are lost, can't get home, and they go to a store and buy a map that shows the road to get home.  A DeM would be if the lost people are driving along, are lost, and out of nowhere an alien in a space ship drops down, lifts up their car, and drops them at home.  An extreme example, but it is contrived, does not fit what's been happening, and comes out of nowhere with no explanation to solve the problem.

The conduit on the other hand was explained, perhaps not well but it was.  And it does not solve the main problem.  It's a miniature mass relay on Ilos that connects with the relay monument on the Citadel.  By contrast there is no way to fully explain, nor do the game even try the existence of the 3 choice consoles on the citadel in ME3-they apparently are suddenly there because Shepard made it to the citadel and they coordinate the actions that the crucible only powers (the crucible being merely like a big battery).

The other reason people do continually say it's a DeM ending is because the choices are drawn from the Deus ex (2000) game.  Control, merge, destroy.

The Conduit was explained just before you use it to get into an otherwise impregnable Citadel.  Yeah, no DeM there, eh?  So you're saying that, even w/out the Conduit, you could have somehow found a way into the Citadel to open the arms so the Fleet could attack Sovereign?  A fight which, btw you have no direct influence on until Sovereign assumes control of Saren's husk, other than to either wait for the arms and focus on Sovereign, or save the Council.  Other than that, it's all movies.  Sorry, but your assessment does not stand up to scrutiny.  Unless you can tell me where, early in the game, you learn exactly what the Conduit is, and what it does, because frankly, I didn't learn that until Ilos.

it didnt solve the problem of sovereign and the geth.

but most important it was nothing we hadnt seen before. it was a mass relay, nothing more nothing less and established in the games lore. not some "i merge all organic and synthetic life by a human jumping into a beam of light" machine.

[brettc893]

Bad game?

Alright then. Fair enough.

I'd like to take this time to point out, since we're doing this apparently, that Skyrim is the biggest, glitchiest, most poorly designed pile of depthless **** I've ever played and doesn't deserve half of the awards it received. And don't even get me started on the writing or ending.

Anybody else have some Facts they wish to share? Because that's what these are; Total facts. Nothing more nothing less.





/Sarcasm for the mentally challenged

[robertthebard]

Thore2k10 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

The problem is that the Deus ex Machina is substituted in ME3 for the real goal of 3 games.  In ME1 if the conduit was any kind of DeM (not one actually since it does not come out and save anything-it just gets you to where you need to go), it was not a character that became the ending.

The star kid and his choices become the DeM, in that they will solve the problem, but the problem has changed because they are there.

The problem was the reapers-the goal, their destruction.
The new problem/new goal that the ME3 DeM choices will solve is conflict between synthetics and organics.

A DeM solves the problem.  The conduit merely gets you to a place where you can solve it.  It was introduced early enough and given some explanation as to what it would do, contrary to a real DeM.  A DeM is introduced abruptly and is contrived, suddenly pops up to solve an unsolvable problem.

And TIM didn't know always know where the collectors would hit, he knew where they had recently hit.  TIM doesn't solve any problems at all-he actually creates far more than he solves.  He is continually using Shepard as bait to get the Collectors to attack or reveal themselves.  Shepard solves the problems and actually continually tries to minimize some of the problems TIM creates.

So tell me, with out it, how were you getting back out to stop Saren and Sovereign?

It's a plot device that is not dropped on you from out of nowhere and even if it was a DeM, it is not the main point of the biggest part of the ending of ME1.  It is like an undiscovered road that leads you home. 

It would be like having a road trip movie.  The people are lost, can't get home, and they go to a store and buy a map that shows the road to get home.  A DeM would be if the lost people are driving along, are lost, and out of nowhere an alien in a space ship drops down, lifts up their car, and drops them at home.  An extreme example, but it is contrived, does not fit what's been happening, and comes out of nowhere with no explanation to solve the problem.

The conduit on the other hand was explained, perhaps not well but it was.  And it does not solve the main problem.  It's a miniature mass relay on Ilos that connects with the relay monument on the Citadel.  By contrast there is no way to fully explain, nor do the game even try the existence of the 3 choice consoles on the citadel in ME3-they apparently are suddenly there because Shepard made it to the citadel and they coordinate the actions that the crucible only powers (the crucible being merely like a big battery).

The other reason people do continually say it's a DeM ending is because the choices are drawn from the Deus ex (2000) game.  Control, merge, destroy.

The Conduit was explained just before you use it to get into an otherwise impregnable Citadel.  Yeah, no DeM there, eh?  So you're saying that, even w/out the Conduit, you could have somehow found a way into the Citadel to open the arms so the Fleet could attack Sovereign?  A fight which, btw you have no direct influence on until Sovereign assumes control of Saren's husk, other than to either wait for the arms and focus on Sovereign, or save the Council.  Other than that, it's all movies.  Sorry, but your assessment does not stand up to scrutiny.  Unless you can tell me where, early in the game, you learn exactly what the Conduit is, and what it does, because frankly, I didn't learn that until Ilos.

it didnt solve the problem of sovereign and the geth.

but most important it was nothing we hadnt seen before. it was a mass relay, nothing more nothing less and established in the games lore. not some "i merge all organic and synthetic life by a human jumping into a beam of light" machine.

Are you a gymnast, because it's amazing how far you can bend over backwards to avoid the point.

Which is, in the final conflict with Sovereign and the Geth, you are a spectator, because you're on foot, opening the arms that nobody else could open because you've just ridden a DeM to get inside the closed arms of the Citadel.  If you hadn't done so, then when the arms opened, the combined fleets would have had a really big surprise when a fleet of Reapers came out instead, all while you're busy playing around with the Geth, the ultimate Reaper cannon fodder.

So where does "It doesn't do anything to alleviate the end conflict" come from, because w/out it, you're going to miss the destruction of everything at the Citadel, while being safely tucked away at Ilos.

[XqctaX]

LaughingDragon wrote...

Eloise K wrote...

I didn't read the previous 22 pages, but I hope that at some point BW will read the whole thread and then realizes what make ME3 average at best and take notes for the next installments.
I don't want to repeat what others have already said, but IMHO what's made ME3 a bad game is not just the ending - which still lacks in execution but its implications were quite interesting (no, not that darn Deus ex Machina that tells my Shep what to do and solves everything we didn't even forecast during the previous games...) - but the unbalanced elements of a RPG and a TPS gaming, the facts that the gamer is alienated from its Shepard (auto-dialogues...), the lack of exploration, the lack of interaction between the characters. Yes, you've already said it all.
Is it clear to me that the future of ME will just bring more casualization to appeal every kind of gamer out there, and if so this will also be the end of BioWare.

BioWare won't listen to anything said here because:

1. their success has gone to their head and their ego's are inflated to the max

2. they think the thoughts expressed on BSN represent a tiny minority of fans

too bad for them that there success was built on Drew K's brilliance. 
and now when hes gone everything they do is just horrible bad

[TheIdiocyWizard2.0]

robertthebard wrote...

Thore2k10 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

The problem is that the Deus ex Machina is substituted in ME3 for the real goal of 3 games.  In ME1 if the conduit was any kind of DeM (not one actually since it does not come out and save anything-it just gets you to where you need to go), it was not a character that became the ending.

The star kid and his choices become the DeM, in that they will solve the problem, but the problem has changed because they are there.

The problem was the reapers-the goal, their destruction.
The new problem/new goal that the ME3 DeM choices will solve is conflict between synthetics and organics.

A DeM solves the problem.  The conduit merely gets you to a place where you can solve it.  It was introduced early enough and given some explanation as to what it would do, contrary to a real DeM.  A DeM is introduced abruptly and is contrived, suddenly pops up to solve an unsolvable problem.

And TIM didn't know always know where the collectors would hit, he knew where they had recently hit.  TIM doesn't solve any problems at all-he actually creates far more than he solves.  He is continually using Shepard as bait to get the Collectors to attack or reveal themselves.  Shepard solves the problems and actually continually tries to minimize some of the problems TIM creates.

So tell me, with out it, how were you getting back out to stop Saren and Sovereign?

It's a plot device that is not dropped on you from out of nowhere and even if it was a DeM, it is not the main point of the biggest part of the ending of ME1.  It is like an undiscovered road that leads you home. 

It would be like having a road trip movie.  The people are lost, can't get home, and they go to a store and buy a map that shows the road to get home.  A DeM would be if the lost people are driving along, are lost, and out of nowhere an alien in a space ship drops down, lifts up their car, and drops them at home.  An extreme example, but it is contrived, does not fit what's been happening, and comes out of nowhere with no explanation to solve the problem.

The conduit on the other hand was explained, perhaps not well but it was.  And it does not solve the main problem.  It's a miniature mass relay on Ilos that connects with the relay monument on the Citadel.  By contrast there is no way to fully explain, nor do the game even try the existence of the 3 choice consoles on the citadel in ME3-they apparently are suddenly there because Shepard made it to the citadel and they coordinate the actions that the crucible only powers (the crucible being merely like a big battery).

The other reason people do continually say it's a DeM ending is because the choices are drawn from the Deus ex (2000) game.  Control, merge, destroy.

The Conduit was explained just before you use it to get into an otherwise impregnable Citadel.  Yeah, no DeM there, eh?  So you're saying that, even w/out the Conduit, you could have somehow found a way into the Citadel to open the arms so the Fleet could attack Sovereign?  A fight which, btw you have no direct influence on until Sovereign assumes control of Saren's husk, other than to either wait for the arms and focus on Sovereign, or save the Council.  Other than that, it's all movies.  Sorry, but your assessment does not stand up to scrutiny.  Unless you can tell me where, early in the game, you learn exactly what the Conduit is, and what it does, because frankly, I didn't learn that until Ilos.

it didnt solve the problem of sovereign and the geth.

but most important it was nothing we hadnt seen before. it was a mass relay, nothing more nothing less and established in the games lore. not some "i merge all organic and synthetic life by a human jumping into a beam of light" machine.

Are you a gymnast, because it's amazing how far you can bend over backwards to avoid the point.

Which is, in the final conflict with Sovereign and the Geth, you are a spectator, because you're on foot, opening the arms that nobody else could open because you've just ridden a DeM to get inside the closed arms of the Citadel.  If you hadn't done so, then when the arms opened, the combined fleets would have had a really big surprise when a fleet of Reapers came out instead, all while you're busy playing around with the Geth, the ultimate Reaper cannon fodder.

So where does "It doesn't do anything to alleviate the end conflict" come from, because w/out it, you're going to miss the destruction of everything at the Citadel, while being safely tucked away at Ilos.

The Conduit actaully creates a problem in the first place. Without the Conduit, Saren would not have been able to get into the Citadel and close the arms around Soveriegn in the first place. Hell, the only reason you're looking for the Conduit in the first place is because Saren is.
So no, the Conduit is not a DEM because:
1. It actually helps the bad guys and
2. Because it doesn't actually solve the problem of stopping the Reapers, which is the overall conflict of the story. Realistically, you could have used the Conduit and make it on to the Citadel, but still fail to stop the Reapers.

The Conduit is actually closer to a MacGuffin.

tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MacGuffin

Modifié par TheIdiocyWizard2.0, 15 juillet 2012 - 08:56 .

[robertthebard]

TheIdiocyWizard2.0 wrote...

The Conduit actaully creates a problem in the first place. Without the Conduit, Saren would not have been able to get into the Citadel and close the arms around Soveriegn in the first place. Hell, the only reason you're looking for the Conduit in the first place is because Saren is.
So no, the Conduit is not a DEM because:
1. It actually helps the bad guys and
2. Because it doesn't actually solve the problem of stopping the Reapers, which is the overall conflict of the story. Realistically, you could have used the Conduit and make it on to the Citadel, but still fail to stop the Reapers.

The Conduit is actually closer to a MacGuffin.

tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MacGuffin

Quit trying to destroy my carefully formulated arguements with logic.

[LaughingDragon]

XqctaX wrote...

LaughingDragon wrote...

Eloise K wrote...

I didn't read the previous 22 pages, but I hope that at some point BW will read the whole thread and then realizes what make ME3 average at best and take notes for the next installments.
I don't want to repeat what others have already said, but IMHO what's made ME3 a bad game is not just the ending - which still lacks in execution but its implications were quite interesting (no, not that darn Deus ex Machina that tells my Shep what to do and solves everything we didn't even forecast during the previous games...) - but the unbalanced elements of a RPG and a TPS gaming, the facts that the gamer is alienated from its Shepard (auto-dialogues...), the lack of exploration, the lack of interaction between the characters. Yes, you've already said it all.
Is it clear to me that the future of ME will just bring more casualization to appeal every kind of gamer out there, and if so this will also be the end of BioWare.

BioWare won't listen to anything said here because:

1. their success has gone to their head and their ego's are inflated to the max

2. they think the thoughts expressed on BSN represent a tiny minority of fans

too bad for them that there success was built on Drew K's brilliance. 
and now when hes gone everything they do is just horrible bad

Lol right? BioWare is now that band who lost their lead singer and everything they put out is trash. They need an injection of writing talent soo bad.

[Kamfrenchie]

robertthebard wrote...

Kamfrenchie wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

All well and good, if Liara didn't tell the Council, at the beginning of the game, that all the Protheans were missing to complete the weapon was the Catalyst, and nobody knows what it is.  Of course, since we know that Crucible has to be joined with the Citadel to work anyway, even w/out SC, the Protheans were doomed, since the Citadel fell first, unless the information we gleaned from Vigil, in ME 1, is invalid?  So you spend the entire game garnering resources to build and defend Crucible, and trying to figure out what the Catalyst is, but it's a DEM because you don't figure it out until the end of the game?  I'm sorry, but by that very definition, and the way it's explained in your post, that is exactly what the Conduit is.  After all, you spend all of ME 1 trying to figure it out, and you don't until the end of the game.  Not liking a plot device =/= DEM.

but the conduit is explained when it's introduced, and it isn't a big reaper of/galactic change button. Plus we were searching for the conduit for the whole game, while we had the crucible plans for the whole game. The conduit doesn't solve an impossible probelm either.

The crucibl is much more contrieved

What?  We had no idea what the Conduit was, other than it existed, until after we talk to Vigil.  Which is when?  Right at the end of the game.  The Conduit does indeed solve one problem, it gets you into the Citadel, in the Mako, instead of requiring you to back track all the way back to somewhere the Normandy can pick you up.  Without it, you're stuck on Ilos while the events on the Citadel transpire, and without the code from Vigil, you can't do anything anyway, but watch as Sovereign summons the Reapers.  So no, if Crucible is a DEM, so is the Conduit, since they are similar in how you learn about them, and the fact that they do solve an insurmountable problem, which in the case of the Conduit is regaining control of the Citadel.

I meant when we get to use itmeet vigil . And besides, without the conduit, nothing wil happen in the citadel, s the conduit helps Saren much more than it helps us. without the cnduit, Sovereign is screwed, then it couldbe a diabolus ex machina. But it's a devic that works or anybody.

Stop ignoring facts of the story.