457 réponses à ce sujet

[en2ym3]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

SuperMegaWolf wrote...

Story was awesome, ability to customize, emphasis on exploration/discovery, loot, unique universe based mechanics, forced to make hard choices, hidden/integrated loading screens, random cow-alien that robs you.

The only cons were the combat and the lame sad piano music.

Don't you mean awesome sad piano music? And you mistakenly put it in the cons colums...

Also I have to say the minigames truly sucked. The ones in ME2 were better, though I feel a hacking/bypass minigame ought to be saved for special occasions.

No joke: I was totally fine with piano music, and piano music in the ME games (though I only recall one or two from ME3), even liked it some - and then I played through the ending. and this () makes me feel physically ill, now, while the thought of piano music leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth.  Not pianos, just piano music.



Anyways, I also feel like it's the best one - going back to play it for the second time, after ME3, is surprisingly comforting, some of it's flaws have even become endearing (like the enemys' taunts).  I loved the elevators on the Citadel for the conversations, and I thought the idea was clever, and I rarely got so frustrated with the Mako that I didn't enjoy it - I always loved the exploration and the ocassionally interesting little find/mission on a planet.  ME1 had more of the big universe and a solid plot that didn't feel constraining (and like it was making things up as it went along).  

The main complaints I have:
-The characters weren't quite as good as Dragon Age: Origins (though I still like them).
-I can't run faster out of combat - God, did that get frustrating sometimes.

I paused a lot and tried to be strategic, and bugs weren't usually a problem, so I actually enjoyed it more in 1 than 2.

Modifié par en2ym3, 24 juillet 2012 - 03:18 .

[De1ta G]

en2ym3 wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

SuperMegaWolf wrote...

Story was awesome, ability to customize, emphasis on exploration/discovery, loot, unique universe based mechanics, forced to make hard choices, hidden/integrated loading screens, random cow-alien that robs you.

The only cons were the combat and the lame sad piano music.

Don't you mean awesome sad piano music? And you mistakenly put it in the cons colums...

Also I have to say the minigames truly sucked. The ones in ME2 were better, though I feel a hacking/bypass minigame ought to be saved for special occasions.

No joke: I was totally fine with piano music, and piano music in the ME games (though I only recall one or two from ME3), even liked it some - and then I played through the ending. and this () makes me feel physically ill, now, while the thought of piano music leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth.  Not pianos, just piano music.



Anyways, I also feel like it's the best one - going back to play it for the second time, after ME3, is surprisingly comforting, some of it's flaws have even become endearing (like the enemys' taunts).  I loved the elevators on the Citadel for the conversations, and I thought the idea was clever, and I rarely got so frustrated with the Mako that I didn't enjoy it - I always loved the exploration and the ocassionally interesting little find/mission on a planet.  ME1 had more of the big universe and a solid plot that didn't feel constraining (and like it was making things up as it went along).  

The main complaints I have:
-The characters weren't quite as good as Dragon Age: Origins (though I still like them).
-I can't run faster out of combat - God, did that get frustrating sometimes.

I paused a lot and tried to be strategic, and bugs weren't usually a problem, so I actually enjoyed it more in 1 than 2.

Bleh to those beloved elevators. With the fast transit panels you hardly even had to use the elevators. Most of the time it was the news instead of a conversation. When a conversation did happen, they weren't even that interesting. 

[Han Shot First]

tonnactus wrote...

SuperMegaWolf wrote...


What plot hole?

Some people unable to comprehend simple storylines ask theirself why saren didnt just walk to the citadel console and let sovereign in.

Or rather, some people like yourself like to make excuses for the largest plot hole in the series out of sheer nostalgia, while simultaneously nitpicking every flaw in the plot of Mass Effect 2 or Mass effect 3.

The entire plot of Mass Effect 1 is set in motion when Saren attacks Eden Prime for the Conduit. The problem with this storyline is that Saren was a Spectre with indoctrinated commandos in tow, and did not need the Conduit to teleport Geth to the Citadel. He did not even need the Eden Pime beacon, as he already had a Prothean beacon on Virmire.

Plugging in that massive plot hole requires mental gymnastics on the part of the player and lots of head canon. Head canon however, does not mean that plot hole didn't exist.

[MassStorm]

Wow people say that they love RPGs and they at the same time state they do not like what RPGs are made from

-exploration
-loots
-level grinding
-inventory

Sounds to me that in their minds an RPG is a TPS

[Han Shot First]

MassStorm wrote...

Wow people say that they love RPGs and they at the same time state they do not like what RPGs are made from

-exploration
-loots
-level grinding
-inventory

Sounds to me that in their minds an RPG is a TPS

The flaws of Mass Effect 1 wasn't that it had exploration, loot, and an inventory system: The problem was that none of those were well executed.

[SuperMegaWolf]

Han Shot First wrote...

MassStorm wrote...

Wow people say that they love RPGs and they at the same time state they do not like what RPGs are made from

-exploration
-loots
-level grinding
-inventory

Sounds to me that in their minds an RPG is a TPS

The flaws of Mass Effect 1 wasn't that it had exploration, loot, and an inventory system: The problem was that none of those were well executed.

So obviously the best course of action was to cut them out and make a 3rd person shooter out of it. And everyone prefers it that way.

[Han Shot First]

Neither ME2 or ME3 is a third person shooter.

[legion999]

Han Shot First wrote..

Or rather, some people like yourself like to make excuses for the largest plot hole in the series out of sheer nostalgia, while simultaneously nitpicking every flaw in the plot of Mass Effect 2 or Mass effect 3.

The entire plot of Mass Effect 1 is set in motion when Saren attacks Eden Prime for the Conduit. The problem with this storyline is that Saren was a Spectre with indoctrinated commandos in tow, and did not need the Conduit to teleport Geth to the Citadel. He did not even need the Eden Pime beacon, as he already had a Prothean beacon on Virmire.

Plugging in that massive plot hole requires mental gymnastics on the part of the player and lots of head canon. Head canon however, does not mean that plot hole didn't exist.

No. 

Being a Spectre does not equal being able to just show up with a bunch of Geth in tow and expect no one to question him. Also Sovereign didn't know what went wrong with the Keepers so he needed Saren to get to find out. They learned of the Conduit and used it to sneak attack everyone. And he needed more than one beacon to actually get complete information as they were damaged.

[MassStorm]

Han Shot First wrote...

MassStorm wrote...

Wow people say that they love RPGs and they at the same time state they do not like what RPGs are made from

-exploration
-loots
-level grinding
-inventory

Sounds to me that in their minds an RPG is a TPS

The flaws of Mass Effect 1 wasn't that it had exploration, loot, and an inventory system: The problem was that none of those were well executed.

Yes i can relate with this idea but that was not a good reason for removing these features altogether. In ME3 you have barely any viable dialogue decision, no exploration at all, no vehicle....nothing..just shooting...and cinematic clips

[SuperMegaWolf]

Han Shot First wrote...

Neither ME2 or ME3 is a third person shooter.

It's not an rpg either

[Haiyato]

De1ta G wrote...

en2ym3 wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

SuperMegaWolf wrote...

Story was awesome, ability to customize, emphasis on exploration/discovery, loot, unique universe based mechanics, forced to make hard choices, hidden/integrated loading screens, random cow-alien that robs you.

The only cons were the combat and the lame sad piano music.

Don't you mean awesome sad piano music? And you mistakenly put it in the cons colums...

Also I have to say the minigames truly sucked. The ones in ME2 were better, though I feel a hacking/bypass minigame ought to be saved for special occasions.

No joke: I was totally fine with piano music, and piano music in the ME games (though I only recall one or two from ME3), even liked it some - and then I played through the ending. and this () makes me feel physically ill, now, while the thought of piano music leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth.  Not pianos, just piano music.



Anyways, I also feel like it's the best one - going back to play it for the second time, after ME3, is surprisingly comforting, some of it's flaws have even become endearing (like the enemys' taunts).  I loved the elevators on the Citadel for the conversations, and I thought the idea was clever, and I rarely got so frustrated with the Mako that I didn't enjoy it - I always loved the exploration and the ocassionally interesting little find/mission on a planet.  ME1 had more of the big universe and a solid plot that didn't feel constraining (and like it was making things up as it went along).  

The main complaints I have:
-The characters weren't quite as good as Dragon Age: Origins (though I still like them).
-I can't run faster out of combat - God, did that get frustrating sometimes.

I paused a lot and tried to be strategic, and bugs weren't usually a problem, so I actually enjoyed it more in 1 than 2.

Bleh to those beloved elevators. With the fast transit panels you hardly even had to use the elevators. Most of the time it was the news instead of a conversation. When a conversation did happen, they weren't even that interesting. 

I break it down to immersion with the elevator scenes. Honestly, it was a clever way to retain immersion in teh game. Nothing breaks immersion to see some ridicilous load screen/transit panel. But hey, thats just me

[De1ta G]

MassStorm wrote...

Wow people say that they love RPGs and they at the same time state they do not like what RPGs are made from

-exploration
-loots
-level grinding
-inventory

Sounds to me that in their minds an RPG is a TPS

RPG stands for Role-Playing Game. Not Exploration, Loots, Level Grinding, Inventory. That would be ELLGIG.

[De1ta G]

Haiyato wrote...

De1ta G wrote...

en2ym3 wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

SuperMegaWolf wrote...

Story was awesome, ability to customize, emphasis on exploration/discovery, loot, unique universe based mechanics, forced to make hard choices, hidden/integrated loading screens, random cow-alien that robs you.

The only cons were the combat and the lame sad piano music.

Don't you mean awesome sad piano music? And you mistakenly put it in the cons colums...

Also I have to say the minigames truly sucked. The ones in ME2 were better, though I feel a hacking/bypass minigame ought to be saved for special occasions.

No joke: I was totally fine with piano music, and piano music in the ME games (though I only recall one or two from ME3), even liked it some - and then I played through the ending. and this () makes me feel physically ill, now, while the thought of piano music leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth.  Not pianos, just piano music.



Anyways, I also feel like it's the best one - going back to play it for the second time, after ME3, is surprisingly comforting, some of it's flaws have even become endearing (like the enemys' taunts).  I loved the elevators on the Citadel for the conversations, and I thought the idea was clever, and I rarely got so frustrated with the Mako that I didn't enjoy it - I always loved the exploration and the ocassionally interesting little find/mission on a planet.  ME1 had more of the big universe and a solid plot that didn't feel constraining (and like it was making things up as it went along).  

The main complaints I have:
-The characters weren't quite as good as Dragon Age: Origins (though I still like them).
-I can't run faster out of combat - God, did that get frustrating sometimes.

I paused a lot and tried to be strategic, and bugs weren't usually a problem, so I actually enjoyed it more in 1 than 2.

Bleh to those beloved elevators. With the fast transit panels you hardly even had to use the elevators. Most of the time it was the news instead of a conversation. When a conversation did happen, they weren't even that interesting. 

I break it down to immersion with the elevator scenes. Honestly, it was a clever way to retain immersion in teh game. Nothing breaks immersion to see some ridicilous load screen/transit panel. But hey, thats just me

The inventory system broke immersion for me in ME 1.

[Han Shot First]

legion999 wrote...

Han Shot First wrote..

Or rather, some people like yourself like to make excuses for the largest plot hole in the series out of sheer nostalgia, while simultaneously nitpicking every flaw in the plot of Mass Effect 2 or Mass effect 3.

The entire plot of Mass Effect 1 is set in motion when Saren attacks Eden Prime for the Conduit. The problem with this storyline is that Saren was a Spectre with indoctrinated commandos in tow, and did not need the Conduit to teleport Geth to the Citadel. He did not even need the Eden Pime beacon, as he already had a Prothean beacon on Virmire.

Plugging in that massive plot hole requires mental gymnastics on the part of the player and lots of head canon. Head canon however, does not mean that plot hole didn't exist.

No. 

Being a Spectre does not equal being able to just show up with a bunch of Geth in tow and expect no one to question him. Also Sovereign didn't know what went wrong with the Keepers so he needed Saren to get to find out. They learned of the Conduit and used it to sneak attack everyone. And he needed more than one beacon to actually get complete information as they were damaged.

Yes.

Being a Spectre with indoctrinated commandos who also have access to the Citadel, means you don't need something to teleport yourself and Geth to the Citadel. Saren also already had a Prothean beacon on Virmire.

The Keepers argument also doesn't work. The job of the Keepers was to open up the Citadel relay so the Reapers could jump through. In ME1 however Sovereign has completely abandoned the Keeper plan when they failed to respond. Saren didn't jump through the Conduit to fix the Keepers, he jumped through to open up the Citadel so that Sovereign could assume control and open the Citadel master relay manually.

The Keeper problem could have easily been resolved after the Reapers had annihilated the current cycle.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 24 juillet 2012 - 03:35 .

[SuperMegaWolf]

De1ta G wrote...

MassStorm wrote...

Wow people say that they love RPGs and they at the same time state they do not like what RPGs are made from

-exploration
-loots
-level grinding
-inventory

Sounds to me that in their minds an RPG is a TPS

RPG stands for Role-Playing Game. Not Exploration, Loots, Level Grinding, Inventory. That would be ELLGIG.

I see that you understand the words in the acronym but you don't understand what their combination entails.

[De1ta G]

MassStorm wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

MassStorm wrote...

Wow people say that they love RPGs and they at the same time state they do not like what RPGs are made from

-exploration
-loots
-level grinding
-inventory

Sounds to me that in their minds an RPG is a TPS

The flaws of Mass Effect 1 wasn't that it had exploration, loot, and an inventory system: The problem was that none of those were well executed.

Yes i can relate with this idea but that was not a good reason for removing these features altogether. In ME3 you have barely any viable dialogue decision, no exploration at all, no vehicle....nothing..just shooting...and cinematic clips

Every dialog decision in ME 3 was viable. There was less of it bc before it was a lot of dialog choices that weren't viable or said the exact same thing as another choice did. Conversations flowed a lot better in ME 3 without all the pauses.

[SuperMegaWolf]

De1ta G wrote...

MassStorm wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

MassStorm wrote...

Wow people say that they love RPGs and they at the same time state they do not like what RPGs are made from

-exploration
-loots
-level grinding
-inventory

Sounds to me that in their minds an RPG is a TPS

The flaws of Mass Effect 1 wasn't that it had exploration, loot, and an inventory system: The problem was that none of those were well executed.

Yes i can relate with this idea but that was not a good reason for removing these features altogether. In ME3 you have barely any viable dialogue decision, no exploration at all, no vehicle....nothing..just shooting...and cinematic clips

Every dialog decision in ME 3 was viable. There was less of it bc before it was a lot of dialog choices that weren't viable or said the exact same thing as another choice did. Conversations flowed a lot better in ME 3 without all the pauses.

If you want seamless immersion when you "role play" you should play the first person bioshock

[De1ta G]

SuperMegaWolf wrote...

De1ta G wrote...

MassStorm wrote...

Wow people say that they love RPGs and they at the same time state they do not like what RPGs are made from

-exploration
-loots
-level grinding
-inventory

Sounds to me that in their minds an RPG is a TPS

RPG stands for Role-Playing Game. Not Exploration, Loots, Level Grinding, Inventory. That would be ELLGIG.

I see that you understand the words in the acronym but you don't understand what their combination entails.

As long as you get to make your own character, customize that character, choose a personality and background, make choices that effect the game, and choose what you want to level up then it's an RPG. You don't need loads of exploration, you definitely don't need an inventory, and you don't have to level grind for role playing.

[Haiyato]

De1ta G wrote...

Haiyato wrote...

De1ta G wrote...

en2ym3 wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

SuperMegaWolf wrote...

Story was awesome, ability to customize, emphasis on exploration/discovery, loot, unique universe based mechanics, forced to make hard choices, hidden/integrated loading screens, random cow-alien that robs you.

The only cons were the combat and the lame sad piano music.

Don't you mean awesome sad piano music? And you mistakenly put it in the cons colums...

Also I have to say the minigames truly sucked. The ones in ME2 were better, though I feel a hacking/bypass minigame ought to be saved for special occasions.

No joke: I was totally fine with piano music, and piano music in the ME games (though I only recall one or two from ME3), even liked it some - and then I played through the ending. and this () makes me feel physically ill, now, while the thought of piano music leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth.  Not pianos, just piano music.



Anyways, I also feel like it's the best one - going back to play it for the second time, after ME3, is surprisingly comforting, some of it's flaws have even become endearing (like the enemys' taunts).  I loved the elevators on the Citadel for the conversations, and I thought the idea was clever, and I rarely got so frustrated with the Mako that I didn't enjoy it - I always loved the exploration and the ocassionally interesting little find/mission on a planet.  ME1 had more of the big universe and a solid plot that didn't feel constraining (and like it was making things up as it went along).  

The main complaints I have:
-The characters weren't quite as good as Dragon Age: Origins (though I still like them).
-I can't run faster out of combat - God, did that get frustrating sometimes.

I paused a lot and tried to be strategic, and bugs weren't usually a problem, so I actually enjoyed it more in 1 than 2.

Bleh to those beloved elevators. With the fast transit panels you hardly even had to use the elevators. Most of the time it was the news instead of a conversation. When a conversation did happen, they weren't even that interesting. 

I break it down to immersion with the elevator scenes. Honestly, it was a clever way to retain immersion in teh game. Nothing breaks immersion to see some ridicilous load screen/transit panel. But hey, thats just me

The inventory system broke immersion for me in ME 1.

Inventory management was a huge mess in ME1. Could have been so much better.

[Mysten]

Eh, not really. Mass Effect 3 is by far the better game and my overall favourite. I'm replaying Mass Effect right now for a new character and I'm not finding it particularly fun or epic in the way it was five years ago.

The only thing that has stood up to the test of time is Saren who is still a fairly decent villain, everything else about the game has been done far better in the sequels. Judged in their entirety, I'd place Mass Effect on the same level as Mass Effect 2 (as each game trades pros and cons with the other) but below Mass Effect 3 which stands head and shoulders above the rest of the series.

[wright1978]

De1ta G wrote...

Every dialog decision in ME 3 was viable. There was less of it bc before it was a lot of dialog choices that weren't viable or said the exact same thing as another choice did. Conversations flowed a lot better in ME 3 without all the pauses.

Really couldn't care about dialogue flow if it destroys my character. I care about dialogue choice and that was butchered in ME3. There's no neutral dialogue, tonnes of characterising auto-dialogue that completely conflicts with previous dialogue choices in previous games. If Bioware doesn't dial back the auto-dialogue and return the sense of player characterisation over the protaganist that existed in ME1 and Me2 and their other games they'll lose my custom.

[SuperMegaWolf]

De1ta G wrote...

SuperMegaWolf wrote...

De1ta G wrote...

MassStorm wrote...

Wow people say that they love RPGs and they at the same time state they do not like what RPGs are made from

-exploration
-loots
-level grinding
-inventory

Sounds to me that in their minds an RPG is a TPS

RPG stands for Role-Playing Game. Not Exploration, Loots, Level Grinding, Inventory. That would be ELLGIG.

I see that you understand the words in the acronym but you don't understand what their combination entails.

As long as you get to make your own character, customize that character, choose a personality and background, make choices that effect the game, and choose what you want to level up then it's an RPG. You don't need loads of exploration, you definitely don't need an inventory, and you don't have to level grind for role playing.

Ah. I see. So you get to decide what's role playing and whats not. The words themselves simply mean that you are playing a role (not stat's, exploratios, so on...). By your previous definition, just about every video game involves playing a role. Whether you make choices or not, you are still playing a role. In every FPS, Platformer, and Action game you assume the role of the character you are controlling.
 

[ZLurps]

De1ta G wrote...

SuperMegaWolf wrote...

De1ta G wrote...

MassStorm wrote...

Wow people say that they love RPGs and they at the same time state they do not like what RPGs are made from

-exploration
-loots
-level grinding
-inventory

Sounds to me that in their minds an RPG is a TPS

RPG stands for Role-Playing Game. Not Exploration, Loots, Level Grinding, Inventory. That would be ELLGIG.

I see that you understand the words in the acronym but you don't understand what their combination entails.

As long as you get to make your own character, customize that character, choose a personality and background, make choices that effect the game, and choose what you want to level up then it's an RPG. You don't need loads of exploration, you definitely don't need an inventory, and you don't have to level grind for role playing.

BioWare was very known for it's RPG'b Baldur's Gate series and IIRC at the time ME1 was released every major game house tried to sell their stuff as RPG.

As someone who played some "table top" games way back, I think RPG was just something to make ME easier to market, especially because that's where BW's roots were and they were kinda popular at the time.

In traditional sense, ME is some sort of hybrid. It takes elements from adventure, actions and shooter genres and has some RPG elements as well.

Modifié par ZLurps, 24 juillet 2012 - 03:51 .

[De1ta G]

wright1978 wrote...

De1ta G wrote...

Every dialog decision in ME 3 was viable. There was less of it bc before it was a lot of dialog choices that weren't viable or said the exact same thing as another choice did. Conversations flowed a lot better in ME 3 without all the pauses.

Really couldn't care about dialogue flow if it destroys my character. I care about dialogue choice and that was butchered in ME3. There's no neutral dialogue, tonnes of characterising auto-dialogue that completely conflicts with previous dialogue choices in previous games. If Bioware doesn't dial back the auto-dialogue and return the sense of player characterisation over the protaganist that existed in ME1 and Me2 and their other games they'll lose my custom.

Yeah right, as if you used neutral dialog. You chose the paragon or renegade choice by whichever kind of character you were playing so that you could as much pargon/renegade points as possible. You didn't even read what the choices actually said once you figured out what kind of character you were going to play. You just hit up or down. That's why there is no neutral dialog. And there's alot of auto-dialog to replace the unnecessary dialog choices.

[Tealjaker94]

ME1 was the worst in my opinion. The gameplay was absolutely awful. The characters weren't anywhere near as developed as the second two games. The story was good, but all 3 games had good plots(discounting ME3's ending). The only areas I'd give ME1 an advantage over ME3 is the ending not sucking and nostalgia. ME2 was superior in every area.