310 réponses à ce sujet

[string3r]

Agreed, now it's all about Space Magic and wizz bang shooty fun.

[Blueprotoss]

string3r wrote...

Agreed, now it's all about Space Magic and wizz bang shooty fun.

There was already space magic and gun tooting before ME3 with the previous two installments.  It was to be expected in ME2 based on the upcoming war with the inclusion of the amped up weapons and powers.

[T41rdEye]

string3r wrote...

Agreed, now it's all about Space Magic and wizz bang shooty fun.

Isn't that a quick and dirty description of Mass Effect since its inception? I don't know what you think it should be... wizards and dwarfs casting vampire spells?

[Rover Captain]

According to the info we got on previous games: First attack on the Citadel to take the Governing body. Then close the Relays network for the races of that cycle, isolating them on their solar systems and cutting inter galactic communication. Use the information stored on the Citadel to KNOW where to go and attack. Overwhelm the races of the cycle and destroy/harvest them. This took centuries for the last cycle.

What we see in ME3: Due to actions on ME, the Citadel trap is not used. The Relays network is active for us (Why is it still active AFTER they took the Citadel? Wouldn't it have been easier for them to simply cut everyone from the Relays?) We have a united galaxy, something that has NEVER happened before on any other cycle. And for some reason the Reapers know exactly where all the inhabited planets are... without even accessing the Citadel records. Remember that on the last cycle they didn't invaded Ilos because Ilos was DELETED from the Citadel records.

The Reapers left the collectors behind from the Prothean's cycle.  The races of this cycle traded all sorts of things including information.  The amount of people who were indoctrinated "Saren, Grayson, The Illusive Man, Kai Leng and numerous others meant that the Reapers probably had access to a whole variety of information and found it unnecessary to take the citadel.  I mean for crying out loud, they had the whole Batarian government indoctrinated.  As for the relays, Sheperd did destroy one, and pissing him off further wouldn't be in the Reapers best interests.

[Blueprotoss]

Xeranx wrote...

Despite your "subjective opinion is subjective" comment after this post, it's funny to see that you focused on a small number of what you objected with.  Of course, I'm assuming this considering what you focused on.  Oh, and because it's a message board I have to say that this is my opinion lest you or someone else think I'm making a factual statement.

Upset that ME2 resembled Gears of War too much.  That's a legitimate observation from my point of view because I, and assume others, don't want something that was its own animal to resemble something that already works and fail to adopt it well enough to make it its own.  My brothers play shooters primarily, so when I look at CoD and Gears of War, I can pretty much tell which is which though I don't play them anywhere near as often as a casual player does.  ME2 lifts a large part of Gears of War's combat aspects and dumps it into its own system and doesn't try to rework in an effort to try and own it. 

A game that actually has elements of both Mass Effect and Gears of War is Alpha Protocol.  But the thing in Alpha Protocol is that it doesn't rely on the combat to do the job for the game and it doesn't use the dialogue wheel (it is the dialogue wheel) to such a degree that you keep thinking I'm playing a version of Mass Effect here.  In fact, it actually goes beyond what Mass Effect started and does a lot of what people expected to find in the trilogy and more than what the first Mass Effect game does in terms of consequences of actions taken.  Alpha Protocol uses aspects and tries to own it rather than let it be known that it borrowed features from other areas.  And in terms of consequences for actions, I think Obsidian generally does a better job on that front than Bioware has done.  KOTOR 2 was better than KOTOR just on that concept alone.

Being upset at body changes, I can't speak for anyone else.  I wasn't, at all, up in arms over Ashley's new bust, but if not for the depictions of Samara and Miranda (the number of focused shots on what Miranda has to offer no less), I don't think people would have made any noise over it or much noise.  Frankly I think the fact that it was said that Ashley needed sex appeal drove those who didn't like what was happening to become more vocal.  When I mentioned that it took me another run to actually appreciate Ashley, I meant it took me another run to realize just what a beautfiul and realistic woman she is.  Saying that she needs sex appeal is saying she needs a bombastic makeover because no one will ever know that she's actually a woman.  In fact, the many people that defended Bioware on this front never realized that they were completely objectifying Ashley sexually while calling those of us against the changes sexist.  It was one of the biggest shows of irony I've ever come across in my life thus far.  It's like that poster who came here trying to act like he was a woman's best friend despite the fact that everything that he wrote was chauvanistic and sexist itself.  I thought he was trying to find a date on BSN by trying to appear genuinely honest about caring about women.  It made me laugh so hard because it was just so utterly false.

As far as people complaining about ME being a shooter, I saw that, and I'm disappointed that those same people never realized that there was so much more emphasis on story than there was actual combat.  Combat was a vehicle towards getting to the next area where you delve deeper into the story because said story revolves around a marine in active service.  We spent more time talking, exploring, and deciding our actions than we ever could engaged in combat.  Skirmishes were over quickly and served to break up the monotony if people got bored with exploration.  I didn't, but I'm sure others did.  ME2 tried to strike a balance but we ended up spending too much time fighting due to the mechanics of combat gameplay.  Having to sit behind a wall because you could be killed in a few hits caused battles to drag on and we were fighting mercenaries rather than old enemies trying to keep the Reaper arc active or the Collectors who were, supposedly, the resident antagonists of this game.  ME3 combat made sense, but we ended up running into Cerberus way too often that they were like the mercenaries of the last game - cannon fodder for whatever Bioware had decided.

And yes, I know I didn't mention Jack in the second paragraph because, for me, any blatant sexual shots (and they were obvious) were overshadowed by how Jack was portrayed.  Was quite ironic that the topless character engendered more respect from me than the "ice-queen" skin suit wearing character who couldn't just accept that she was the way she was and nothing else would change that.

I would say this is mostly factual then opinionated because you nailed everything especially with Alpha Protocol and ME2.  Actually Alpha Protocol caused me to get into ME and I wish ME2 was a reflection of it while I hope Obsidian could continue the AP series based on those consequences.   Personally I really could careless about Miranda and it  would have been nice if Jack had her ME3 hairstyle in ME2, which would have been a plus for a Male Shepard walkthrough.

[Cimeas]

I just want to say I completely agree with the OP. Mass Effect was a fascinating science-fiction universe that I wanted to explore.

Not it's a generic 'Space Marine Saves The Galaxy' game. What a waste of an exceptional, deep and interesting world.

[The Heretic of Time]

Eain wrote...

If this game had been made by an underfunded studio of fans who, in the wake of a fictional Bioware bankrupcy, wanted nothing more than to give the series a conclusion, I would've given them an A for effort and then dismissed it as fan-fiction. But because Bioware made this we're supposed to take it seriously?

If this game had been made by an underfunded studio of fans it would have been a million times better than the sell-out crap we got from EA/BioWare.

[VinWizzy]

That song is very nostalgic and I've only been a fan for almost two years. The OST of Mass Effect is my favorite and the best imo.

[mxfox408]

Mass Effect 1 was an awesome game, tho it had its flaws the execution was perfect. To be honest I wasn't to impressed with the game trailers for the first mass effect. In fact I didn't even know about it till steam had a 75% off sale and I was browsing through the different games, but when I started the game up the vigil theme was awesome, but one the intro started I thought to myself this game seems bad ass. The story was awesome as I progressed, once getting to ilos I had the sad emotional feeling about the protheans fate. The thing mass effect 3 failed to accomplish what the first two games did was how brutal the reapers where. I'm not saying they weren't brutal in mass effect 3, but in mass effect 1 sovereign was over confident and overpowered the citadel fleets, he even severely hurt the alliance reinforcements, but somehow the reapers seemed hesitant in mass effect 3 when clearly at the begining of the game the races where divided and the reapers didn't exploit that. They could have med all races making it that much more difficult to unite the galaxy. The overpowered reapers didn't seem as bad ass as sovereign was. Mass effect 3 was a good game but as the last game in the trilogy it should have been epic. Then we had the original crappy ending that made no sense with the story of the previous two games. Only after fan complaints did bioware design an ending that they should included in the game to begin with. Mass effect 3 did not match with the first two games, still good but not epic as it should have been.

[3DandBeyond]

Blueprotoss wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

The fact that you can play ME3 as a standalone game and lose nothing that is of value to the ending indicates that large plotholes do exist.

ME3 is loosely based upon Mass Effect.  It carries the name, uses the characters, but like a mutt it lacks the pedigree.

The game feels very disconnected from the previous 2 because it is, in a way that even ME2 is not disconnected from ME1, given that there's a clear and present break between the two that smacks you in the face when Shepard puts on a Cerberus uniform.  ME2 is not ME1 and it doesn't try to hide it.  But ME3 should be totally connected to the other 2 because it exists to bring it all together and to lead to what is supposed to be the most intense point in any story, the ending, followed by a kind of cooldown, denouement and epilogue.  

ME3 dumps a lot of what occurred in ME1 and 2 and totally contradicts other things that are even in ME3, but also things in 1 and 2.  Anyone that says differently is being disingenuous.

 

This is a huge straw-mann and if ME3 was really like this then ME2 would be the opposite of what you described.  If you really had that disconnect in ME3 then you clearly didn't play it or you could careless about most of the Action RPGs. 

Uh no.  I'll tell you a secret.  I own ME1 for PC, ME2 and 3 for PS3 and all 3 games for the xbox360.  I have played each one several times often much to my distress as it requires me to play the ending for clarity.

Explain to me where the Action is at the end of ME3, please.  Last I looked we have slow motion movement coupled with an inexplicable infinite ammo weapon brought on by a series of shoved in artificial garbage.  Harbinger stops shooting not only while the Normandy lands, but while Shepard drags 2 people (not the other injured and dying) to the Normandy and says goodbye.  Wow, the drama.

ME1 introduced the idea of the reapers and the knowledge of one person that they were on the way.  Throughout the game you fought surrogates for the reapers that were all trying to set the scene for the reapers to come and set off the signal saying it's time.

Sovereign and thus the reapers through all the events of ME1 became aware of the presence of humans and one in particular who really had hit their achilles heel.  They were intrigued.

In ME2, the collectors, more surrogates for the reapers, are sent in as vanguards and they do seem to have a purpose that fits with ME1-they are looking at humans.  They start a plague.  They attack colonies, but I always knew who was behind this.

Yes, Shepard was quick to "join" Cerberus, but Shepard had already seen some of the futility s/he faced in chasing Saren and all Shepard kept getting told was it was the geth.  Shepard was even sent out to look for pirates and geth when the Normandy was attacked by the Collectors.  The Alliance was doing nothing to help the human colonies (for political reasons) and Cerberus at least wanted to.  You play the hand that's dealt.  Harbinger was their always in spirit if not physically.  The reapers were coming.  The Arrival solidified that.

In ME2 we also were building a team and learning about Cerberus and again learning about a lot of horrible things people were doing (like overlord) in the search for synthesis.  We learned about attempts to advance people beyond their readiness.  We learned about tinkering with nature and the costs (genophage).  We learned the true nature of the geth (not rogue AIs but people and victims, maybe).  And the reapers were coming.  People were getting ready (some people) to fight and destroy the reapers.  This was the goal.

Then, ME3 comes along and no one has done anything to get ready at all.  Shepard has been locked up, Liara is looking for a pig in a poke and finds the great savior MacGuffin (Bioware devs-there will be no reaper off switch in the game) and the story flips from being about saving the galaxy to saving and taking back Earth (a very Cerberus-like perspective).  In order to accomplish this every resource in the galaxy is poured into creating the big UNKNOWN crucible.

We will never know why the collectors and thus the reapers were obsessed with humans, created the plague, sought Shepard's body.  We will never know what was important about Haestrom.  Save or destroy the collector's base and there's really no impact on the game.  This should have had a big impact-Cerberus gets the base, shouldn't Cerberus be even stronger.  Destroy the base and they should be not as strong, but TIM somehow still has the data and still has the human reaper.  Never mattered.

The Thorian never mattered.  The rachni were around when the protheans were and they have ancestral memory-no one asks them what happened back then.  No lessons learned on Ilos mattered.  Sovereign must also have been lying when he said they were basically independent nations.  He and Harbinger were also lying when they said there were going to destroy people.  The kid says people are being ascended.

The citadel is a part of the kid, so why can't the kid set off the signal in ME1 to call in the reapers?

Everything done in 3 games leads up to the conclusion of a fight with the reapers.  The reapers are getting ready and coming.  Shepard is trying to get people to listen and unite.  The only thing they eventually unite over is making the crucible.  And Shepard is sent to again unite people for the fight.  ME3 is supposed to be about racing toward that fight.  The one to take back Earth.  ME3 as the finale of the trilogy should answer questions that were asked in ME1 and 2 and 3 itself.  It should also attain the goal.  In the end the EC now only answers questions raised in the original endings (changes some things that made no sense at all before into stuff that now seems ridiculous).

Questions asked in ME1, 2, and 3 don't get answered-dialogue is forgotten, whole missions (geth/quarian) ignored at the end, and then questions that were not important in the game are answered.  It wasn't a goal to learn why the reapers were there-it was a goal to destroy them.  The cathartic fight with them never happens.  The game stops and we get to learn all about the reapers' motivations and who is controlling them.  Not a goal and not even necessary to the story.  Destroying them is all that is necessary.  Fighting them and destroying them is the goal.  That's abandoned.  Instead we can now become reaper god (not a goal of the main character's), become one with them (not a goal of the main character's), destroy them and destroy the best examples of why the kid is wrong (EDI and the geth) along with a part of the main character's heart and soul, or refuse and be told people have no chance unless they pick a garbage choice.

I like a huge variety of games-I've been playing longer than most people on this forum have been alive.  I played sprite based and text based games and all along I have looked for what this series was.  You cannot compare other action RPGs to this series (and I'd stress less action and more RPG since that is the true nature of what ME was).  What other game series carries themes and choices over as this one does?  None.  And that is exactly what is wrong with the ending and a lot of ME3.  It has some great parts, but it ignores some very important things that were in the other two games and at the end ignores things that happened in ME3 itself.  It wasn't supposed to be some run of the mill action RPG.  It was supposed to be a story with characters and a plot that evolved based upon what happened before.  The ending came from the game Deus ex (2000) and Deus ex Human Revolution and Babylon 5 (chaos and order) and the Matrix.  It doesn't fit in with the rest of the series.  The crucible is an excuse for not writing a story and the Deus ex Machina ending is the same.  The MacGuffin and Deus ex Machina contrivances are considered lazy writing by book publishers and reasons for a lot of rejected stories.

I have played all 3 games and viewed them as they are supposed to be-RPGs and not mere action RPGs.  Even so, I'd rather the ending was more action and less nauseating garbage talk.  The game can be played as a standalone and I've done that too-some dialogue change and other minor changes that have no impact on the ending.  The "3" in the title should mean more than that.

[3DandBeyond]

Thore2k10 wrote...

i vote for just ignoring him...

let him talk bs all he wants, if no one replies to him he will become bored eventually and hopefully leave!

i dont mind a good debate, those who actually like what has been done to ME3 have the right to say that as well, but i didnt see one post from blueprotoss where he actually is talking about the game. its always how insulting etc. the other users are in his opinion...

sry for bad english...

You are correct.  People have the right to opinions.  But in a true discussion actually using facts and examples is far more constructive than, "because".  And people start reverting to characterization of the poster and the thought, rather than dealing with the acutal thought.

I didn't ignore him, but hadn't seen all these posts.  I will ignore him in future.  He isn't discussing anything.

[3DandBeyond]

Cimeas wrote...

I just want to say I completely agree with the OP. Mass Effect was a fascinating science-fiction universe that I wanted to explore.

Not it's a generic 'Space Marine Saves The Galaxy' game. What a waste of an exceptional, deep and interesting world.

Yes.  What could really have been interesting would have been if some scientists had been looking into the origins of the reapers and all that.  Some part of the star kid (not the choices) might have been acceptable, but as it is I can't unsee what I have already seen.

What could have been might have included real scenarios for using the crucible (since it's there) not as some big cannon, but maybe a jamming device that allows for some real fighting-yes fighting.  But then have the star kid or some stand in for the AI (Harbinger or a blob) be there to try and stop it, to explain they are doing what they must.  More of a protest than excuses.  The "kid" could then be there to assert that Synthesis would be a good thing to aspire to but that the fighting must stop.  If Shepard rejects it, the blob, kid, or Harbinger becomes menacing, evil.  But if Shepard falters then the fight going on might go bad and the blob might exploit the weakness further.  At some point if the battle isn't going well, Shepard might just say, "now EDI" and every fleet nearby might unload on the citadel/crucible, destroying the kid, Shepard, maybe even Earth and leaving the reapers really vulnerable.  But other possibilities present themselves as well.

I'd see both the need for battling the reapers and a desire for maybe having questions of their existence answered somewhat but in a more natural way.

[AresKeith]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Cimeas wrote...

I just want to say I completely agree with the OP. Mass Effect was a fascinating science-fiction universe that I wanted to explore.

Not it's a generic 'Space Marine Saves The Galaxy' game. What a waste of an exceptional, deep and interesting world.

Yes.  What could really have been interesting would have been if some scientists had been looking into the origins of the reapers and all that.  Some part of the star kid (not the choices) might have been acceptable, but as it is I can't unsee what I have already seen.

What could have been might have included real scenarios for using the crucible (since it's there) not as some big cannon, but maybe a jamming device that allows for some real fighting-yes fighting.  But then have the star kid or some stand in for the AI (Harbinger or a blob) be there to try and stop it, to explain they are doing what they must.  More of a protest than excuses.  The "kid" could then be there to assert that Synthesis would be a good thing to aspire to but that the fighting must stop.  If Shepard rejects it, the blob, kid, or Harbinger becomes menacing, evil.  But if Shepard falters then the fight going on might go bad and the blob might exploit the weakness further.  At some point if the battle isn't going well, Shepard might just say, "now EDI" and every fleet nearby might unload on the citadel/crucible, destroying the kid, Shepard, maybe even Earth and leaving the reapers really vulnerable.  But other possibilities present themselves as well.

I'd see both the need for battling the reapers and a desire for maybe having questions of their existence answered somewhat but in a more natural way.

yea, that starbrat really ruined the Reapers, what could have been a very epic ending, I still say combining the elements from ME1 ending and ME2 ending would have been much better

Modifié par AresKeith, 14 juillet 2012 - 05:22 .

[Blueprotoss]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Thore2k10 wrote...

i vote for just ignoring him...

let him talk bs all he wants, if no one replies to him he will become bored eventually and hopefully leave!

i dont mind a good debate, those who actually like what has been done to ME3 have the right to say that as well, but i didnt see one post from blueprotoss where he actually is talking about the game. its always how insulting etc. the other users are in his opinion...

sry for bad english...

You are correct.  People have the right to opinions.  But in a true discussion actually using facts and examples is far more constructive than, "because".  And people start reverting to characterization of the poster and the thought, rather than dealing with the acutal thought.

I didn't ignore him, but hadn't seen all these posts.  I will ignore him in future.  He isn't discussing anything.

Yet its bad to ignore the facts since you're being subjective instead of objective.

[txgoldrush]

Wow...another ME1 is so great and ME3 is so bad thread.

And the OP is COMPLETELY wrong. Why?

Because ME3 IS the most mature in the series.

It definitely portrays the human condition the best of the three, in which ME1 is the worst.

It has the most multifaceted characters with the best character development along with ME2, unlike ME1, who are basically all exposition except for Wrex. Because Drew sucks at character development.

ME3's romances actually mean something, unlike the fling that are in ME1.

This conversation alone makes ME3 more mature than ME1.



Its ME1 thats the tradiitional space opera....ME2 and ME3 want to be somthing more.

[saracen16]

txgoldrush wrote...

Wow...another ME1 is so great and ME3 is so bad thread.

And the OP is COMPLETELY wrong. Why?

Because ME3 IS the most mature in the series.

It definitely portrays the human condition the best of the three, in which ME1 is the worst.

It has the most multifaceted characters with the best character development along with ME2, unlike ME1, who are basically all exposition except for Wrex. Because Drew sucks at character development.

ME3's romances actually mean something, unlike the fling that are in ME1.

This conversation alone makes ME3 more mature than ME1.



Its ME1 thats the tradiitional space opera....ME2 and ME3 want to be somthing more.

I agree and disagree at the same time. Mass Effect as a whole is a mature series, moreso than anything out there including that generic space marine garbage called Halo. All 3 titles parodied the human condition differently. ME1 showed humans to be obnoxious, Macchiavellian opportunists who strike at every opportunity to seek their own self-gain at the expense of others. ME2 showed them as bigoted and self-righteous, and ME3 uncovered the darker aspects, embodied in the Illusive Man. 

And if anything, ME2's romances were mostly flings (except maybe for Jack's and Thane's). The romances are fully realized in ME3, though several of them (Tali's, Miranda's, to name a few) remain "flings".

[txgoldrush]

saracen16 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Wow...another ME1 is so great and ME3 is so bad thread.

And the OP is COMPLETELY wrong. Why?

Because ME3 IS the most mature in the series.

It definitely portrays the human condition the best of the three, in which ME1 is the worst.

It has the most multifaceted characters with the best character development along with ME2, unlike ME1, who are basically all exposition except for Wrex. Because Drew sucks at character development.

ME3's romances actually mean something, unlike the fling that are in ME1.

This conversation alone makes ME3 more mature than ME1.



Its ME1 thats the tradiitional space opera....ME2 and ME3 want to be somthing more.

I agree and disagree at the same time. Mass Effect as a whole is a mature series, moreso than anything out there including that generic space marine garbage called Halo. All 3 titles parodied the human condition differently. ME1 showed humans to be obnoxious, Macchiavellian opportunists who strike at every opportunity to seek their own self-gain at the expense of others. ME2 showed them as bigoted and self-righteous, and ME3 uncovered the darker aspects, embodied in the Illusive Man. 

And if anything, ME2's romances were mostly flings (except maybe for Jack's and Thane's). The romances are fully realized in ME3, though several of them (Tali's, Miranda's, to name a few) remain "flings".

No, Tali's and Miranda's are genuine love and fully realized. In fact, I like how Miranda mentions the chip from ME2 and how she felt like a hypocrite.

The problem with ME1 is the characters got little development, minus Wrex. It was all to busy being expository. Its sad when Diana freakin Allers gets more character development than Tali does in ME1.

And ME3 destroys ME1 when it comes to talking about death and loss. in fact, the death and loss the Reapers bring is more important than watching the Reapers be "brutal".

[Funkdrspot]

Lol at all this nostalgia, looking at ME1 through rose-colored glasses. It was a great game, ME 3 didn't live up to expectations but the level of hyperbole is ridiculous

[Mathias]

If you don't understand why Mass Effect 1 was an amazing experience and sets itself apart from Mass Effect 3, then you're the kind of gamer that cares only about gameplay and graphics. Nothing wrong with that btw.

Mass Effect 1 was a true artistic game. So was Mass Effect 2. 3 on the other hand became a fast paced action shooter just like every other game these days.

[txgoldrush]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

If you don't understand why Mass Effect 1 was an amazing experience and sets itself apart from Mass Effect 3, then you're the kind of gamer that cares only about gameplay and graphics. Nothing wrong with that btw.

Mass Effect 1 was a true artistic game. So was Mass Effect 2. 3 on the other hand became a fast paced action shooter just like every other game these days.

Please....

Mass Effect 3 rises above ME1, video games, and almost all space operas in showing the characters humanity and talking about sacrifice, death, and loss.

ME1 is the most like a traditional space opera....too bad.

[BatmanPWNS]

saracen16 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Wow...another ME1 is so great and ME3 is so bad thread.

And the OP is COMPLETELY wrong. Why?

Because ME3 IS the most mature in the series.

It definitely portrays the human condition the best of the three, in which ME1 is the worst.

It has the most multifaceted characters with the best character development along with ME2, unlike ME1, who are basically all exposition except for Wrex. Because Drew sucks at character development.

ME3's romances actually mean something, unlike the fling that are in ME1.

This conversation alone makes ME3 more mature than ME1.



Its ME1 thats the tradiitional space opera....ME2 and ME3 want to be somthing more.

I agree and disagree at the same time. Mass Effect as a whole is a mature series, moreso than anything out there including that generic space marine garbage called Halo. All 3 titles parodied the human condition differently. ME1 showed humans to be obnoxious, Macchiavellian opportunists who strike at every opportunity to seek their own self-gain at the expense of others. ME2 showed them as bigoted and self-righteous, and ME3 uncovered the darker aspects, embodied in the Illusive Man. 

And if anything, ME2's romances were mostly flings (except maybe for Jack's and Thane's). The romances are fully realized in ME3, though several of them (Tali's, Miranda's, to name a few) remain "flings".

Lol tell me you trolling? Halo is garbage and yet you call Mass Effect mature? *World explodes*

I like the Mass Effect series but really? Really?

[Mathias]

txgoldrush wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

If you don't understand why Mass Effect 1 was an amazing experience and sets itself apart from Mass Effect 3, then you're the kind of gamer that cares only about gameplay and graphics. Nothing wrong with that btw.

Mass Effect 1 was a true artistic game. So was Mass Effect 2. 3 on the other hand became a fast paced action shooter just like every other game these days.

Please....

Mass Effect 3 rises above ME1, video games, and almost all space operas in showing the characters humanity and talking about sacrifice, death, and loss.

ME1 is the most like a traditional space opera....too bad.

There is so much wrong within your first sentence i wouldn't know where to begin. Not so much that you said it rises above ME1, cause hey everyone has their opinion. But you go about saying it rises above video games and
"all space operas in showing the characters humanity and talking about sacrifice, death, and loss."

Cut me a break. I know you loved the game, but really? You're gonna treat ME3 like it's end all be all sci fi story? A 10 year old could explain in intricate detail, what a dumb statement you just made.

[Thore2k10]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Explain to me where
the Action is at the end of ME3, please.  Last I looked we have slow
motion movement coupled with an inexplicable infinite ammo weapon
brought on by a series of shoved in artificial garbage.  Harbinger stops
shooting not only while the Normandy lands, but while Shepard drags 2
people (not the other injured and dying) to the Normandy and says
goodbye.  Wow, the drama.

ME1 introduced the idea of the reapers
and the knowledge of one person that they were on the way.  Throughout
the game you fought surrogates for the reapers that were all trying to
set the scene for the reapers to come and set off the signal saying it's
time.

Sovereign and thus the reapers through all the events of
ME1 became aware of the presence of humans and one in particular who
really had hit their achilles heel.  They were intrigued.

In ME2,
the collectors, more surrogates for the reapers, are sent in as
vanguards and they do seem to have a purpose that fits with ME1-they are
looking at humans.  They start a plague.  They attack colonies, but I
always knew who was behind this.

Yes, Shepard was quick to "join"
Cerberus, but Shepard had already seen some of the futility s/he faced
in chasing Saren and all Shepard kept getting told was it was the geth. 
Shepard was even sent out to look for pirates and geth when the
Normandy was attacked by the Collectors.  The Alliance was doing nothing
to help the human colonies (for political reasons) and Cerberus at
least wanted to.  You play the hand that's dealt.  Harbinger was their
always in spirit if not physically.  The reapers were coming.  The
Arrival solidified that.

In ME2 we also were building a team and
learning about Cerberus and again learning about a lot of horrible
things people were doing (like overlord) in the search for synthesis. 
We learned about attempts to advance people beyond their readiness.  We
learned about tinkering with nature and the costs (genophage).  We
learned the true nature of the geth (not rogue AIs but people and
victims, maybe).  And the reapers were coming.  People were getting
ready (some people) to fight and destroy the reapers.  This was the
goal.

Then, ME3 comes along and no one has done anything to get
ready at all.  Shepard has been locked up, Liara is looking for a pig in
a poke and finds the great savior MacGuffin (Bioware devs-there will be
no reaper off switch in the game) and the story flips from being about
saving the galaxy to saving and taking back Earth (a very Cerberus-like
perspective).  In order to accomplish this every resource in the galaxy
is poured into creating the big UNKNOWN crucible.

We will never
know why the collectors and thus the reapers were obsessed with humans,
created the plague, sought Shepard's body.  We will never know what was
important about Haestrom.  Save or destroy the collector's base and
there's really no impact on the game.  This should have had a big
impact-Cerberus gets the base, shouldn't Cerberus be even stronger. 
Destroy the base and they should be not as strong, but TIM somehow still
has the data and still has the human reaper.  Never mattered.

The
Thorian never mattered.  The rachni were around when the protheans were
and they have ancestral memory-no one asks them what happened back
then.  No lessons learned on Ilos mattered.  Sovereign must also have
been lying when he said they were basically independent nations.  He and
Harbinger were also lying when they said there were going to destroy
people.  The kid says people are being ascended.

The citadel is a part of the kid, so why can't the kid set off the signal in ME1 to call in the reapers?

Everything
done in 3 games leads up to the conclusion of a fight with the
reapers.  The reapers are getting ready and coming.  Shepard is trying
to get people to listen and unite.  The only thing they eventually unite
over is making the crucible.  And Shepard is sent to again unite people
for the fight.  ME3 is supposed to be about racing toward that fight. 
The one to take back Earth.  ME3 as the finale of the trilogy should
answer questions that were asked in ME1 and 2 and 3 itself.  It should
also attain the goal.  In the end the EC now only answers questions
raised in the original endings (changes some things that made no sense
at all before into stuff that now seems ridiculous).

Questions
asked in ME1, 2, and 3 don't get answered-dialogue is forgotten, whole
missions (geth/quarian) ignored at the end, and then questions that were
not important in the game are answered.  It wasn't a goal to learn why
the reapers were there-it was a goal to destroy them.  The cathartic
fight with them never happens.  The game stops and we get to learn all
about the reapers' motivations and who is controlling them.  Not a goal
and not even necessary to the story.  Destroying them is all that is
necessary.  Fighting them and destroying them is the goal.  That's
abandoned.  Instead we can now become reaper god (not a goal of the main
character's), become one with them (not a goal of the main
character's), destroy them and destroy the best examples of why the kid
is wrong (EDI and the geth) along with a part of the main character's
heart and soul, or refuse and be told people have no chance unless they
pick a garbage choice.

I like a huge variety of games-I've been
playing longer than most people on this forum have been alive.  I played
sprite based and text based games and all along I have looked for what
this series was.  You cannot compare other action RPGs to this series
(and I'd stress less action and more RPG since that is the true nature
of what ME was).  What other game series carries themes and choices over
as this one does?  None.  And that is exactly what is wrong with the
ending and a lot of ME3.  It has some great parts, but it ignores some
very important things that were in the other two games and at the end
ignores things that happened in ME3 itself.  It wasn't supposed to be
some run of the mill action RPG.  It was supposed to be a story with
characters and a plot that evolved based upon what happened before.  The
ending came from the game Deus ex (2000) and Deus ex Human Revolution
and Babylon 5 (chaos and order) and the Matrix.  It doesn't fit in with
the rest of the series.  The crucible is an excuse for not writing a
story and the Deus ex Machina ending is the same.  The MacGuffin and
Deus ex Machina contrivances are considered lazy writing by book
publishers and reasons for a lot of rejected stories.

I have
played all 3 games and viewed them as they are supposed to be-RPGs and
not mere action RPGs.  Even so, I'd rather the ending was more action
and less nauseating garbage talk.  The game can be played as a
standalone and I've done that too-some dialogue change and other minor
changes that have no impact on the ending.  The "3" in the title should
mean more than that.

abso****inglutely this! srsly, once i start reading these walls of text of yours i cant stop anymore!

i like many parts of the third game! for me it still feels like mass effect. it is just like that in the end it was all for nothing.

we have our goal, namely to destroy the reapers, build up over the course of over a hundred hours of playing all three games. in the end it turns out to be just a red hering, i should have been invested in ending a nonexistend war between synthetics and organics. that plotline was already dealt with by appeasing geth and quarians. suddenly its the crux of the whole story...

ive recently played me1 again and even though the graphics are not that good anymore, its still feels more "realistic". its like with max payne "ah look, theres some cover, in a few seconds there will be some enemys popping up". it turned from  "realistic" surroundings to a chest high cover shooter. sure in me 2 and 3 there are good levels as well, like the collector ship and base. i personally liked that atmosphere very much. in the third game i was impressed with these huge reapers "stomping" through the cities, it was great. still, a lot of atmosphere was lost by making this generic human chest high architecture/cover everywhere.

the dialogue was also better than in the third game, you had more options to choose and less auto dialogue.

as for music, i liked all three games. i love the music when they meet vigil. i love the music when shepard and anderson have "best seats in the house" (i admit i almost cried there).

and now the story... it could have been simple for bioware. ME1 had it all. intro, intermediate section (hope thats the right term) and epilogue. it crafted a beautiful, interesting and exciting galaxy and a intimidating and mysterious main villain. in fact thats still the best villain ive ever fought against in a video game. so superior and non caring about the heroes efforts. it was good for the villain to be unfathomable, made him even more intimidating. you had a real feeling of triumph and success when he exploded.

when i first heard about the crucible i already got a bad feeling. i was thinking "but they said there wouldnt be a giant reaper off switch" (well in german ^^). and what do you know, nothing like triumph after the third game, i didnt feel anything. i was not sure what happened. i reloaded and tried again, this time i picked another color. then i came to the internet to find out what i did wrong to lose this game. how can i skip this starchild? but nooo, it was biowares artistic vision, which turned this intimidating villains into kids toys and stole all mystery from them. MrBtongue made a wonderful youtube movie regarding the ending, which explained to me why that ending is "broken".

answer all the questions, except what, where and who are the reapers are and let us rescue the universe, that was the goal for bioware! or rather that should have been the goal! just gather your strength, solve some conflicts and then kick ass. tough moral choices are in the game, not at the end of it. at the end you want to see what consequences your choices had, especially for all the characters, since its characters are really well designed and a central part of it!

furthermore, its annoying that your choices doesnt matter. save the council or not, blow up the collector base or not, save the rachni (really dissapointed there, especially after the announcement from the asari in the second game) or not and so on... it had potential to be legendary stuff, a true trilogy, not just by name and characters. the interactive star wars of our generation! now all that will be remembered is how legendary the ending is broken and how it took it all that away.

i wouldnt mind if you started mass effect 3 from scratch and just took over some of the missions like tuchanka and rannoch. (yes i know, impossible to happen)

thats my wall of text, sry for bad english! :innocent:

Modifié par Thore2k10, 14 juillet 2012 - 06:41 .

[txgoldrush]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

If you don't understand why Mass Effect 1 was an amazing experience and sets itself apart from Mass Effect 3, then you're the kind of gamer that cares only about gameplay and graphics. Nothing wrong with that btw.

Mass Effect 1 was a true artistic game. So was Mass Effect 2. 3 on the other hand became a fast paced action shooter just like every other game these days.

Please....

Mass Effect 3 rises above ME1, video games, and almost all space operas in showing the characters humanity and talking about sacrifice, death, and loss.

ME1 is the most like a traditional space opera....too bad.

There is so much wrong within your first sentence i wouldn't know where to begin. Not so much that you said it rises above ME1, cause hey everyone has their opinion. But you go about saying it rises above video games and
"all space operas in showing the characters humanity and talking about sacrifice, death, and loss."

Cut me a break. I know you loved the game, but really? You're gonna treat ME3 like it's end all be all sci fi story? A 10 year old could explain in intricate detail, what a dumb statement you just made.

Name one scifi space saga that portrays the humanity of the characters better than ME3?

That is ME3's STRENGTH.

ME1 doesn't have this.

[Rhz]

SergeantSnookie wrote...

Yep.

www.youtube.com/watch

This track basically epitomizes what I wish Mass Effect still was. I don't hate the newer entries by any means, but they didn't leave the same impression ME1 did.

I think they music is even better when you enter the ruins on illos with the mako, the music is very simple but so damn effective

Modifié par Rhz, 14 juillet 2012 - 07:02 .