181 réponses à ce sujet

[JimTasty]

 

Modifié par JimTasty, 22 juillet 2012 - 11:55 .

[Adugan]

Oh I thought you were talking about making the hot sex

[garrusfan1]

What is it

[zippythecellist]

Same here. The first game was great, the 2nd game was even better, and the 3rd game...was totally mediocre at best. What a shame. The ending of the 3rd was bad, but it was the lack of REAL side quests and any kind of RPG system that really ruined it for me.

[blueumi]

for me the first game was the best second was decent and the third is no where near as good as the first two games

[shepdog77]

blueumi wrote...

for me the first game was the best second was decent and the third is no where near as good as the first two games

Reverse that and you have my opinion.

[blueumi]

shepdog77 wrote...

blueumi wrote...

for me the first game was the best second was decent and the third is no where near as good as the first two games

Reverse that and you have my opinion.

thats cool everything seems better then 3 i'm even starting to think hey dragon age 2s ending makes sense it's not so bad after all lol

[-Skorpious-]

The first Mass Effect was a masterpiece. The gameplay wasn't the best, but the atmosphere and setting immersed me so deeply in the lore that I was willing to overlook such inconveniences.

[BatmanPWNS]

Personally, when I first saw ME1 trailers, I thought they were pretty wierd and awkward.

[zippythecellist]

There is no way the 3rd game is better than the 1st and 2nd, unless you are talking about combat and having less retarded squad mates. Because I will agree ME3 had the best combat mechanics. But everything else, HELL NO. For some rEAson, bioware decided to turn what should have been a great RPG with a fantastic story that very well could have been this generation's star wars, into a mediocre TPS with even more mediocre multiplayer and a VERY sub par story compared to the last 2 games.

[zippythecellist]

-Skorpious- wrote...

The first Mass Effect was a masterpiece. The gameplay wasn't the best, but the atmosphere and setting immersed me so deeply in the lore that I was willing to overlook such inconveniences.

Same here...and honestly, after my 3rd or 4th playthough the glitches actually amused me. Especially the one with the biotic moon base side mission where you can pick the paragon option, but get the xp for both options by shooting someone after making your choice.

[De1ta G]

zippythecellist wrote...

Same here. The first game was great, the 2nd game was even better, and the 3rd game...was totally mediocre at best. What a shame. The ending of the 3rd was bad, but it was the lack of REAL side quests and any kind of RPG system that really ruined it for me.

It's a shame you feel that way about Mass Effect 3. Missions like Grissom Academy or any other mission that didn't have 'Priority' in front of it seemed like REAL side quests to me and good ones too. And I thought 3 had a better rpg system than 2, other than the auto-dialog. I preferred auto-dialog to the game having to pause every 10 seconds so that I can push my analog stick up or down and hit A. Mass Effect 3 cinematics flow a lot better and the voice acting is a lot better than the previous games. And then add in the "emotional rollercoaster" element it had in it and I believe it's the overall best game of the series and deserved the perfect scores it got, regardless of how the endings turned out.

[blueumi]

BatmanPWNS wrote...

Personally, when I first saw ME1 trailers, I thought they were pretty wierd and awkward.

you don't have to like mass effect 1 but you should respect it because there would not be the other two games with out the first

[blueumi]

De1ta G wrote...

zippythecellist wrote...

Same here. The first game was great, the 2nd game was even better, and the 3rd game...was totally mediocre at best. What a shame. The ending of the 3rd was bad, but it was the lack of REAL side quests and any kind of RPG system that really ruined it for me.

It's a shame you feel that way about Mass Effect 3. Missions like Grissom Academy or any other mission that didn't have 'Priority' in front of it seemed like REAL side quests to me and good ones too. And I thought 3 had a better rpg system than 2, other than the auto-dialog. I preferred auto-dialog to the game having to pause every 10 seconds so that I can push my analog stick up or down and hit A. Mass Effect 3 cinematics flow a lot better and the voice acting is a lot better than the previous games. And then add in the "emotional rollercoaster" element it had in it and I believe it's the overall best game of the series and deserved the perfect scores it got, regardless of how the endings turned out.

no i'm sorry when you can ****** off almost every fan old and new then no it is not perfect

there are dull missions like the geth consensis also it's linier
has stupid moments with enimes jumping out of the floor
has one of the worst endings to a game ever
it's not perfect far from it

[zippythecellist]

De1ta G wrote...

zippythecellist wrote...

Same here. The first game was great, the 2nd game was even better, and the 3rd game...was totally mediocre at best. What a shame. The ending of the 3rd was bad, but it was the lack of REAL side quests and any kind of RPG system that really ruined it for me.

It's a shame you feel that way about Mass Effect 3. Missions like Grissom Academy or any other mission that didn't have 'Priority' in front of it seemed like REAL side quests to me and good ones too. And I thought 3 had a better rpg system than 2, other than the auto-dialog. I preferred auto-dialog to the game having to pause every 10 seconds so that I can push my analog stick up or down and hit A. Mass Effect 3 cinematics flow a lot better and the voice acting is a lot better than the previous games. And then add in the "emotional rollercoaster" element it had in it and I believe it's the overall best game of the series and deserved the perfect scores it got, regardless of how the endings turned out.

Dude, please tell me you are trolling right now. There were TWO real side missions, (the academy and ardat-yakshi monestary) and there was no trace of an RPG game left in ME3. Both of the previous games easily had 10-15 hours alone in real side missions, and had more actual role playing. Of course game mechanics are going to be better in the latest game of a series though...which sadly, is the only positive thing I can say about ME3.

[Ozida]

zippythecellist wrote...

Same here. The first game was great, the 2nd game was even better, and the 3rd game...was totally mediocre at best. What a shame. The ending of the 3rd was bad, but it was the lack of REAL side quests and any kind of RPG system that really ruined it for me.

Yep, I agree.

[Blue Gloves]

blueumi wrote...


thats cool everything seems better then 3 i'm even starting to think hey dragon age 2s ending makes sense it's not so bad after all lol

Heehee- I did the same thing.  I thought at the time that I HATED DA2's ending (along w/ a bunch of other things that don't bear rehashing) but after ME3, I suddenly felt a lot more charitable towards the cookie cutter-ness that was DA2.  Plus, I really liked Markof the Assassin and that helped the after effects.  Overall, I left DA2 dissatisfied, but not depressed and angry.  As for how I left ME3- well, you know... we all felt it:(*


*we really need a weeping quick smiley to accurately express this I think

[blueumi]

zippythecellist wrote...

De1ta G wrote...

zippythecellist wrote...

Same here. The first game was great, the 2nd game was even better, and the 3rd game...was totally mediocre at best. What a shame. The ending of the 3rd was bad, but it was the lack of REAL side quests and any kind of RPG system that really ruined it for me.

It's a shame you feel that way about Mass Effect 3. Missions like Grissom Academy or any other mission that didn't have 'Priority' in front of it seemed like REAL side quests to me and good ones too. And I thought 3 had a better rpg system than 2, other than the auto-dialog. I preferred auto-dialog to the game having to pause every 10 seconds so that I can push my analog stick up or down and hit A. Mass Effect 3 cinematics flow a lot better and the voice acting is a lot better than the previous games. And then add in the "emotional rollercoaster" element it had in it and I believe it's the overall best game of the series and deserved the perfect scores it got, regardless of how the endings turned out.

Dude, please tell me you are trolling right now. There were TWO real side missions, (the academy and ardat-yakshi monestary) and there was no trace of an RPG game left in ME3. Both of the previous games easily had 10-15 hours alone in real side missions, and had more actual role playing. Of course game mechanics are going to be better in the latest game of a series though...which sadly, is the only positive thing I can say about ME3.

so true

[blueumi]

Blue Gloves wrote...

blueumi wrote...


thats cool everything seems better then 3 i'm even starting to think hey dragon age 2s ending makes sense it's not so bad after all lol

Heehee- I did the same thing.  I thought at the time that I HATED DA2's ending (along w/ a bunch of other things that don't bear rehashing) but after ME3, I suddenly felt a lot more charitable towards the cookie cutter-ness that was DA2.  Plus, I really liked Markof the Assassin and that helped the after effects.  Overall, I left DA2 dissatisfied, but not depressed and angry.  As for how I left ME3- well, you know... we all felt it:(*


*we really need a weeping quick smiley to accurately express this I think

we really do

[De1ta G]

blueumi wrote...

De1ta G wrote...

zippythecellist wrote...

Same here. The first game was great, the 2nd game was even better, and the 3rd game...was totally mediocre at best. What a shame. The ending of the 3rd was bad, but it was the lack of REAL side quests and any kind of RPG system that really ruined it for me.

It's a shame you feel that way about Mass Effect 3. Missions like Grissom Academy or any other mission that didn't have 'Priority' in front of it seemed like REAL side quests to me and good ones too. And I thought 3 had a better rpg system than 2, other than the auto-dialog. I preferred auto-dialog to the game having to pause every 10 seconds so that I can push my analog stick up or down and hit A. Mass Effect 3 cinematics flow a lot better and the voice acting is a lot better than the previous games. And then add in the "emotional rollercoaster" element it had in it and I believe it's the overall best game of the series and deserved the perfect scores it got, regardless of how the endings turned out.

no i'm sorry when you can ****** off almost every fan old and new then no it is not perfect

there are dull missions like the geth consensis also it's linier
has stupid moments with enimes jumping out of the floor
has one of the worst endings to a game ever
it's not perfect far from it

The geth consensis mission was put in there to help justify picking the geth over the quarians if you have to choose between them. There's no fighting but it's not like it takes a long time to do and  there is some interesting stuff you learn when you play it the first time, not dull at all.

I've never seen enemies jump out of floor so I don't know about that

Worst endings to a game ever is a bit of an exaggeration, it could of been a lot better but it's tolerable.

And nothings perfect

[TookYoCookies]

Adugan wrote...

Oh I thought you were talking about making the hot sex

In soviet russia, sex makes you!

[Soultaker08]

zippythecellist wrote...

De1ta G wrote...

zippythecellist wrote...

Same here. The first game was great, the 2nd game was even better, and the 3rd game...was totally mediocre at best. What a shame. The ending of the 3rd was bad, but it was the lack of REAL side quests and any kind of RPG system that really ruined it for me.

It's a shame you feel that way about Mass Effect 3. Missions like Grissom Academy or any other mission that didn't have 'Priority' in front of it seemed like REAL side quests to me and good ones too. And I thought 3 had a better rpg system than 2, other than the auto-dialog. I preferred auto-dialog to the game having to pause every 10 seconds so that I can push my analog stick up or down and hit A. Mass Effect 3 cinematics flow a lot better and the voice acting is a lot better than the previous games. And then add in the "emotional rollercoaster" element it had in it and I believe it's the overall best game of the series and deserved the perfect scores it got, regardless of how the endings turned out.

Dude, please tell me you are trolling right now. There were TWO real side missions, (the academy and ardat-yakshi monestary) and there was no trace of an RPG game left in ME3. Both of the previous games easily had 10-15 hours alone in real side missions, and had more actual role playing. Of course game mechanics are going to be better in the latest game of a series though...which sadly, is the only positive thing I can say about ME3.

the side missions in ME1 all felt really horible, please tell me you are trolling right now

[De1ta G]

zippythecellist wrote...

De1ta G wrote...

zippythecellist wrote...

Same here. The first game was great, the 2nd game was even better, and the 3rd game...was totally mediocre at best. What a shame. The ending of the 3rd was bad, but it was the lack of REAL side quests and any kind of RPG system that really ruined it for me.

It's a shame you feel that way about Mass Effect 3. Missions like Grissom Academy or any other mission that didn't have 'Priority' in front of it seemed like REAL side quests to me and good ones too. And I thought 3 had a better rpg system than 2, other than the auto-dialog. I preferred auto-dialog to the game having to pause every 10 seconds so that I can push my analog stick up or down and hit A. Mass Effect 3 cinematics flow a lot better and the voice acting is a lot better than the previous games. And then add in the "emotional rollercoaster" element it had in it and I believe it's the overall best game of the series and deserved the perfect scores it got, regardless of how the endings turned out.

Dude, please tell me you are trolling right now. There were TWO real side missions, (the academy and ardat-yakshi monestary) and there was no trace of an RPG game left in ME3. Both of the previous games easily had 10-15 hours alone in real side missions, and had more actual role playing. Of course game mechanics are going to be better in the latest game of a series though...which sadly, is the only positive thing I can say about ME3.

You don't have to do all the missions on Tuckanka or Rannoch, so those are side mission. Saving the Cerberus Scientists is also a side mission. RPG stands for role playing game. You do indeed choose what kind of role your going to play in ME3. Also it has a whole lot more customization than ME2 does. And I'm guessing you consider Loyalty missions side missions, which I don't. Because without them, the game is terribly short. And the only reason Mass Effect 1 has that much time in side missions is because of 1. How few main missions there were and 2. Having to travel around the freakin Mako. 

[TookYoCookies]

Soultaker08 wrote...

zippythecellist wrote...

De1ta G wrote...

zippythecellist wrote...

Same here. The first game was great, the 2nd game was even better, and the 3rd game...was totally mediocre at best. What a shame. The ending of the 3rd was bad, but it was the lack of REAL side quests and any kind of RPG system that really ruined it for me.

It's a shame you feel that way about Mass Effect 3. Missions like Grissom Academy or any other mission that didn't have 'Priority' in front of it seemed like REAL side quests to me and good ones too. And I thought 3 had a better rpg system than 2, other than the auto-dialog. I preferred auto-dialog to the game having to pause every 10 seconds so that I can push my analog stick up or down and hit A. Mass Effect 3 cinematics flow a lot better and the voice acting is a lot better than the previous games. And then add in the "emotional rollercoaster" element it had in it and I believe it's the overall best game of the series and deserved the perfect scores it got, regardless of how the endings turned out.

Dude, please tell me you are trolling right now. There were TWO real side missions, (the academy and ardat-yakshi monestary) and there was no trace of an RPG game left in ME3. Both of the previous games easily had 10-15 hours alone in real side missions, and had more actual role playing. Of course game mechanics are going to be better in the latest game of a series though...which sadly, is the only positive thing I can say about ME3.

the side missions in ME1 all felt really horible, please tell me you are trolling right now

Side missions in ME1 were fine. A holographic child ended mass effect 3. A HOLOGRAPHIC CHILD. Mass effect 1 wins.

[shepdog77]

@zippythecellist and TookYoCookies.   I'd rather have fewer side missions with much more substance and flavor, as opposed to "Land on random planet, enter copy/paste building or cave, do pointless objective, rinse & repeat." Quality over Quantity

Modifié par shepdog77, 23 juillet 2012 - 02:08 .