270 réponses à ce sujet

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

The story is quite flawed. The intro is very flawed. Arrival is not canon and has been stated as such by Bioware. If you didn't have Arrival in your save game, as I didn't, what was Shepard doing in lockup? Shepard was a Spectre working with Cerberus for the purpose of taking out the Collectors who were attacking Human Colonies in the Terminus and was doing so with the full blessing of the Citadel Council and Councilor Anderson. And not only that she turned over a state of the art Cerberus vessel to the Alliance.

At most Shepard was in Vancouver on vacation waiting for the Normandy retrofit and for her re-enlistment paperwork and security clearances to clear, not in lockup. The 103rd Marines did the deed in the Bahak System. Yet she was in lockup. Good going. Quality Bioware writing.

Then these geniuses on the Defense Committee not doing **** for three years given the intel from both Shepard and now Hackett about the Reapers, and not bothering to even send any covert operatives into Batarian space to see what the hell was going on as to why the communication buoys went down "oh ****, the reapers are here." No. Instead, they go full retard and do nothing but sit around and play cards all day, then have the audacity to wring their hands and ask Shepard, who has been locked up for no reason at all what to do.

Hello? I've got an idea. Get your pistols and charge that giant reaper that just landed and take yourselves out of the gene pool.

Vent Boy: Now this is an interesting one. Watch the opening scene. How did the kid get up on the roof to play with that airplane? I've looked around that rooftop. There are no doors. There is no way to get up there. How did they even get the plants up there? Is he the gardener's kid? Do they fly the gardener in by choppa? Was the kid a stow away?

Vent Boy in the Vent: He says stuff kids don't say. Most scared kids want their mom. They don't say **** like "Everyone's dying." "You can't help me." And he's too calm. A duct rat. A street urchin. He's too clean. So apparently he manages to jump across buildings as well.

Vent Boy dreams: focus is the kid, not the voices of the fallen. But when Shepard is sympathetic with the kid Shepard burns. When Shepard is not sympathetic Shepard does not burn. Unless Hudson tried and failed to go all Kubrick on us. I was too busy facepalming. Again more quality BW writing. Hudson's leash left during ME2 to work on Halo 4.

Okay so I'll skip to the ending. It's a cluster****. It still makes no sense. It's full of space magic. Vigil in ME1 said there was something on the Citadel controlling the reapers. The full retard duh "we forgot to record that conversation" and the full retard of the council in ME2 undoes everything. Catalyst was created by a bunch of stupid flawed arrogant cuttlefish that got too big for their britches. It saw them as the problem, and began the harvest. Now there is only the harvest. Now the Catalyst is the problem. And it gives you three equally flawed solutions.

The only real solution is for it to self-destruct because it contains an uncorrectable logic flaw. For the reapers to go dumb as varren (like the geth at Rannoch), no longer be able to indoctrinate, and for the Crucible to pinpoint the location of all the reapers in the galaxy so that the fleet can destroy all of them, leaving the galactic infrastructure intact, Shepard survives and is the hero. End of story. This is the Kirk successful refuse. This would work.

The story is ridiculous as it is. Mass Effect was originally supposed to be a Sci-Fi action RPG with a late 80s Arnold flavor to it. Nothing artsy. Nothing tragic about it. It was about throwing bad guys out windows, and giving medigel to wounded salarians workers. It was supposed to be cheesy and fun. It wasn't supposed to end like this. I don't care what Drew K had in mind for an ending. We would have told the Starkid to go **** himself anyway even if it meant possibly dooming the galaxy. But Casey's and Mac's ending is just as bad.

[shepskisaac]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

The story is ridiculous as it is. Mass Effect was originally supposed to be a Sci-Fi action RPG with a late 80s Arnold flavor to it. Nothing artsy. Nothing tragic about it. It was about throwing bad guys out windows, and giving medigel to wounded salarians workers. It was supposed to be cheesy and fun. It wasn't supposed to end like this. I don't care what Drew K had in mind for an ending. We would have told the Starkid to go **** himself anyway even if it meant possibly dooming the galaxy. But Casey's and Mac's ending is just as bad.

I don't find anything cheesy & fun in Protheans and all the other advanced races before them getting slaughtered, or picking who to kill - Ash or Kaidan which was all introduced in ME1 already with Drew. Yes, there was suppoused to be cheese and throwbacks to the camp sci-fi from the past century, but not be any comedy

[Bill Casey]

There's also an exchange where Garrus says he sees why the galaxy needs cold hearted dictators now and then, Shepard asks "They get things done?" Garrus replies, "They don't give a damn about the consequences."

Take that as you will, but I don't see it as positive foreshadowing for Control...

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

IsaacShep wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

The story is ridiculous as it is. Mass Effect was originally supposed to be a Sci-Fi action RPG with a late 80s Arnold flavor to it. Nothing artsy. Nothing tragic about it. It was about throwing bad guys out windows, and giving medigel to wounded salarians workers. It was supposed to be cheesy and fun. It wasn't supposed to end like this. I don't care what Drew K had in mind for an ending. We would have told the Starkid to go **** himself anyway even if it meant possibly dooming the galaxy. But Casey's and Mac's ending is just as bad.

I don't find anything cheesy & fun in Protheans and all the other advanced races before them getting slaughtered, or picking who to kill - Ash or Kaidan which was all introduced in ME1 already with Drew. Yes, there was suppoused to be cheese and throwbacks to the camp sci-fi from the past century, but not be any comedy

Lighten up. The premise of the story is absolutely ridiculous. The reapers, the harvest, and the fact that Saren was trying to bring them back is ridiculous. Hey, and doing side missions for Helena Blake for cash and having her tell you that "you're a better criminal than I am"? Fun times. Blowing Wrex away on Virmire? Hey I had a headache and he was giving me **** and jeapardizing the mission. Picking who to leave behind? Contrived to give you a feeling of loss. I saved Kaiden. Dr. Heart. Armstrong nebula. Then there was Bring Down the Sky: Batarians! Balak! fun times. His partner with the snatch and grab of the slaves? Dead. (don't mess with the colonist/torfan). Oh, I sacrificed the three hostages to bring that ****er down, except I did a little enhanced interrogation before I turned him over to the Alliance. I don't know if you noticed that your hostages weren't saints either -- your contact let an innocent die rather than give herself up.

Drew was no saint. Drew needed a leash and he had one in place when they were doing ME1. I fear what would have happened had there not been one in place.

Shepard survives impossible odds. Then gets blown up and somehow manages to be resurrected in ME2 via Lazarus, and becomes the Phoenix Myth. ME2 is a series of short stories about different people interspersed between 4 main stories about defeating the Collectors. Again Shepard plays the bad ass action hero. Throws mercs out windows; beats the crap out of suspects. The story plot is ridiculous. The biotic god! "I will toss Wasea about like a rag doll!" Charge! Donovan Hock? Kasumi's mission was hilariously good fun, as was Zaeed's. Overlord was good, and even Arnold would give David to Grissom. Play as renegon, and screw over TIM every chance you get.

Then they got all dark in ME3. The leashes weren't in place anymore. Casey and Mac's leash went to work for 343 Studios on Halo 4. And thus we got the grim/dark story. Vent boy. And the craptastic ending that had no peer review before it was released. Tell me how that was supposed to end well?

[Warrior Craess]

Eterna5 wrote...

Obeded the 2nd wrote...

Look up the original ending on YouTube, EC also had dialogue and extra cinematics.

I would say levi and EC helped, but I think you wouldn't have hated the ending before.

"He likes the endigns?? Oh noes! quick look up the old ones so you hate them like us!"

Or it could be an explaination about why there was an uproar. His post pretty much validates what the upraor was about, that the original endings sucked. 

Yes, the Ending holds together much better if Levi, and EC DLC are included from the game play. But why the heck should you need extra DLC to make sense of the end of a trilogy? 

I'm happy he likes the series, as I enjoyed it immensely, until the last 20 minutes of the game. 

[eddieoctane]

Warrior Craess wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Obeded the 2nd wrote...

Look up the original ending on YouTube, EC also had dialogue and extra cinematics.

I would say levi and EC helped, but I think you wouldn't have hated the ending before.

"He likes the endigns?? Oh noes! quick look up the old ones so you hate them like us!"

Or it could be an explaination about why there was an uproar. His post pretty much validates what the upraor was about, that the original endings sucked. 

Yes, the Ending holds together much better if Levi, and EC DLC are included from the game play. But why the heck should you need extra DLC to make sense of the end of a trilogy? 

I'm happy he likes the series, as I enjoyed it immensely, until the last 20 minutes of the game. 

Because Bioware managed to get away with selling an incomplete game anyway, even though that's the primary argument against IT. If crucial mid-game details are missing, the game isn't complete. But admitting that it wasn't complete beforehand would allow for IT to remain a perfectly plausible conclusion to a game abotu which we recieved lie after lie from developers. But I digress.

Javik helps put much of the game in context. Leviathan "foreshadows" the Catalyst being an evil little brat. The EC adds some measure of closure. But without these DLCs, we have a game that feels like the dozen different stories it draws from were chopped up by a 4 year old and tapped together randomly. If you had these before finishing the game, you get an experience that, while not as amazingly epic as its two predecessors, is still tolerable. Without them, you feel rather ripped off.

[SeptimusMagistos]

I'm with the OP on this one.

I played the game well after the endings had become a meme and some time after the EC was completed. And compared to the sheer outrage the ending simply wasn't that bad.

[Kamfrenchie]

dreman9999 wrote...

eddieoctane wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

eddieoctane wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
The problem with you point is that those people in your example face experiances the were with in their means of stratagy and tech to handle. They never had to face an unstoppable force. There has not been one battle since WW2 that acarrier was ever engaged in heavy combat. Most commanders on ships handle a support role to the units that go in for the attack.
The same can be said for the allince fleets the support earth defence. Normal a ship commander fight conventional war on there ships. They don't normal do unconventional.
Ifthe us navy suddenly had an unstoppable force attack it, ofcourse the officers would not know what to dobecause there normal tactics would not work.

My point was that practical and relevant combat experience is required for command. You missed that. Or you chose to ignore it deliberately. Either way, the poitn still stands that admirals and generals aren't paper pushers. They know how to keep a level head. The ones in ME3 all but broke down and cried like little girls. And this was only done to elevate Shepard, because Mac can't write more than one character in a room to have any competency whatsoever.

During the First Contact War, humanity was hopelessly outmatched by the Turians. It was the intervention of the Council that prevented humanity from being massacred. So humans in the ME-era have at least some experience in dealing with an overwhelming force. It stands to reason that some of the officers from that conflict would still be around (Dr. Chakwas, for example), who could provide some insight on what to do more than "We fight or we die". Bad writing is bad.

I have come to the conclusion, however, that if the statements about actual Tier One operators acting in an advisory role in the production of Medal of Honor hold true, then EA could have provided some actual military advisers to the development team of ME2 and 3. BioWare did not want this, and we got derps everywhere as a result. Instead of having any measure of logic in things like rank structure, tactics, or operations, Mac and Casey art'ed their way through, and the consumers were disappointed.

Your missing the fact the unpractical 
combat experience  is a caseof"unstoppable force cutting through all defences" is not on the normally happens.
 Unpractical  combat experience reflext to knowing how to fight an enemy the fight indirectly. You missing the fact that these of people use to having a wall of ship as a base of their tatics. If they loos the base of tactic, there not going to know what to do next.
Would the US know what to do if they faced an enemy that cut through all their military defences?

Also, don't use the fist contact war, that last for a second and it wasonly one admeral that had any heavy unconvetional combat in that war. The rest just massed in numbers and over whilmed the turians. That's not an unconventional any were near the likes ofth reapers.

So the unconventional combat experience form the First Contact War can't be learned from or adapted to any other situation that might arise? Yeah, that's retarded. And even if that wasn't among the worst and most wrong points I ever seen, a good leader can adapt. Notice how you haven't defended the Defense Committee losing their sh*t like frightened children when the Reapers showed up. Perhaps on a subconscious level, even you recognize how terrible a characterization that was of senior military commanders.

You also misunderstood what I meant by practical. Carrier COs know how to use their fighters as sword and shield before they get that post. A general incharge of a group of combined infantry, mechanized cavalry, and artillery knows how to use those resources effecitently before getting his command. In either case, front line experience is a pre-requiset to being a flag officer.

And the US did have any emeny that cut clean through its defenses. 9/11 was the result of a well coordinated attack by a group without any traditional hard targets to fight against. A funny thing happened, though. Bin Laden was killed like the scum-sucker he was. In fact, most of al Queda's senior leadership has bitten the big one. America ultimately came out on top. We have a tendency to do that.

Your not getting that what was learned in the first contact war can be applied to this war. The first contact war was a battle of equal forces , the reaper war is not. The only admeral that fought unconvential in the war was booted out of the alliance for surendering to the turians.

The alliace is not use to fight wars were they are the vastly lesser force and have not developt tactics for it. Any unconventional tactic they learn would be based on anti terroist tactics...This would mean learning to fight an enem that does not attack directly.

A militarty with a history with a dependence of force is not going to suddenly know how to fight and stop and enemy the fights in a dramaticly stronger force. Not even the trurian could do that.

Also, 9/11 is an example of an indirect attack.  They cut through USdefences to do one attack. I'm taking about a force that overwhelms the US military out of sheer force, not indirect tactic. And even then the US military was spining on it's head not knowing what to do.

What kind of bs excuse is that ? we're not used to be on the weak side so we're terrified ? give me a break, any military would laugh at anyone using such excuse for their defeat and panick.

When the poles got invaded in WW2, guess what, they were fighting impossible odds, but they pulled their **** together and used tactics and strategies that worked



When the paras of Bastogne got surrounded and took heavy losses from the germans, did they cry and go derp ? No they didn't.


Since when does reaper tech self replicate ?
How does cerberus build bases so fast when in 2 and a half year the alliance can't build new frigates/cruisers ? And it takes 6 months to refit normandy ?

And no, the books are never referenced ingame. Games and books should be self sufficient, otherwise it's a customer rippoff if important plot points to the story are put in another non referenced material.

[thefallen2far]

I think that people who start to play the game now have the benefit of not having an attachment going into the game. I think everyone who loved the game played it by now and have their opinion already. Anyone who comes in and sees it and had heard the eding was horrible won't get why because there were no expectations, multiple playthroughs, investments or speculations about the release. I mean, my nephew loves the Phantom Menace, and I want to argue with him. At the same time, I don't want to argue with a 13 year old that the prequels were horrible. Their first movie wasn't the first trilogy, so of course they had no expectations, and heard about how horrible the prequels were, but when they see it, they think it was really good and that the Empire Strikes Back was the most drawn out/too long of the movies. [He thought 3 was the best. I said "nooooooooooooooooooooo" like Darth Vader and he said that was one of the best parts..... my brain almost shut down].

I guess, since then I learned to let those who enjoy it love it.... it's really for them. I kinda envy them that they enjoyed it. I on the other hand just file it away, and look forward to in depth conversations on speculating why EA must have cut their budget.

Modifié par thefallen2far, 22 septembre 2012 - 01:12 .

[MegaSovereign]

thefallen2far wrote...

I think that people who start to play the game now have the benefit of not having an attachment going into the game. I think everyone who loved the game played it by now and have their opinion already. Anyone who comes in and sees it and had heard the eding was horrible won't get why because there were no expectations, multiple playthroughs, investments or speculations about the release. I mean, my nephew loves the Phantom Menace, and I want to argue with him. At the same time, I don't want to argue with a 13 year old that the prequels were horrible. Their first movie wasn't the first trilogy, so of course they had no expectations, and heard about how horrible the prequels were, but when they see it, they think it was really good and that the Empire Strikes Back was the most drawn out/too long of the movies. [He thought 3 was the best. I said "nooooooooooooooooooooo" like Darth Vader and he said that was one of the best parts..... my brain almost shut down].

I guess, since then I learned to let those who enjoy it love it.... it's really for them. I kinda envy them that they enjoyed it. I on the other hand just file it away, and look forward to in depth conversations on speculating why EA must have cut their budget.

I don't think it has much to do with that.

It's more likely that he did not experience the original endings which meant he didn't have the same level of self-fullfilling doubt when he played through the extended cut.

[AlanC9]

thefallen2far wrote...

I on the other hand just file it away, and look forward to in depth conversations on speculating why EA must have cut their budget.

More accurately, ME3 never had the budget some fans thought it needed, and was never going to.

Modifié par AlanC9, 22 septembre 2012 - 01:40 .

[AresKeith]

AlanC9 wrote...

thefallen2far wrote...

I on the other hand just file it away, and look forward to in depth conversations on speculating why EA must have cut their budget.

More accurately, ME3 never had the budget some fans thought it needed, and was never going to.

makes you think how bigger the game could have been if they did

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

ME3 was a great place to start the series, because it saved one the emotional investment in the character (it wasn't your Shepard) and you weren't familiar with the story, and it saved you the time investment of 120+ hrs of game play in the previous two games (and probably multiple playthroughs and further attachment to the protagonist and story).

None of the choices of the other two games mattered in the end, and since you never saw them, ignorance is bliss. Less emotional investment in the character and story meant being less upset at the end, and more likely you'd probably not bother finishing it and go straight to multi-player and thus give a positive review.

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 22 septembre 2012 - 05:29 .

[thefallen2far]

I know of 5 people that sold back their copies in the first 3 weeks [I don't know anyone that still has their copy at this point]. Plus you add the Amazon fiasco where everyone kept trying to rfeturn it within 30 days... you end up with a lot of used copies that go for cheap. Add to that the loss of DLC content you had to give away to appease disgruntled fans, 3 months on turd polish.... It lowered the prices fast. Whatever the budget, restrictions, I don't think it was worth it.

[Jadebaby]

Baa Baa wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

Ruined the Franchise wrote...

At least you admit they're terrible. 

I like your user name

LOL

This is why you need to stay away from the BSN after you have surgery. I just laughed at this and now my stomach is KILLING me!

[Hrothdane]

Kamfrenchie wrote...
What kind of bs excuse is that ? we're not used to be on the weak side so we're terrified ? give me a break, any military would laugh at anyone using such excuse for their defeat and panick.

When the poles got invaded in WW2, guess what, they were fighting impossible odds, but they pulled their **** together and used tactics and strategies that worked



When the paras of Bastogne got surrounded and took heavy losses from the germans, did they cry and go derp ? No they didn't.


Since when does reaper tech self replicate ?
How does cerberus build bases so fast when in 2 and a half year the alliance can't build new frigates/cruisers ? And it takes 6 months to refit normandy ?

And no, the books are never referenced ingame. Games and books should be self sufficient, otherwise it's a customer rippoff if important plot points to the story are put in another non referenced material.

I already agree with you on everything here, but then you linked Sabaton and you became awesome.

[hpjay]

munkyboy04 wrote...

 What I liked about the endings ( ending I've only played synthesis so far)?

the wow bit was as some one else said when sat there with Anderson 'best seats in the house' on top of that I really enjoyed how the game came to a natural conclusion of My game. Synthesis was the only option I could hav logically taken. As I'd saved the geth and somehow managed to kill off the Quarians (lol I had no help) was gutted when tail topped herself. I can't wait now to replay it with my renegade fem shep and take one of the othe endings. 

I just feel it stayed true to the type of game that it is, and allowed me to role play. And yeah there's plot holes but there was between me1 and 2 and 2 to 3. I liked the way it felt and I'm not going to over analyse I'm just gonna replay it and see what else I can do.

That is the crux of the matter I think.   But its not that the game stayed true to the type of game that it is.  Its that from your point of view or frame of reference, the game stayed true to itself.  Each of us brings a different perspective, a different set of experiences, a different set of biases to the game. You were fortunate enough to find a resonant thread that pulled the game together for you (thats a good thing, there were many great things about the game and it diserves to have people who like it).  For many of us though, the star child sequence took the game off the rails.  The game we had been playing up until that point was kidnapped and a changling was left in its place.   Its like Mac and Casey had their own Shepard and tailored the game to thier own unique game play experience instead of remembering that it was a shared experience and had to accomodate many play styles and interpretations.

So for many of us, part of the problem was that Mac and Casey failed to effectrively communicate thier "artistic intent". Other than "the game is about synthetics vs organics" we don't really know what they were trying to do.  The other part of the problem was that Mac and Casey felt the need to make a statement.  If they want to go off to the woods and write a manifesto about the tech singularity and transhuman evolution, more power to them.  But please don't put such a thing into the end of your video game.  Its pretentious.  At the end of the day I only needed Shepard to chew bubblegum and kick ass...  with lots of opportunities to run out of bubblegum.

[Ruined the Franchise]

Bill Casey wrote...

There's also an exchange where Garrus says he sees why the galaxy needs cold hearted dictators now and then, Shepard asks "They get things done?" Garrus replies, "They don't give a damn about the consequences."

Take that as you will, but I don't see it as positive foreshadowing for Control...

It foreshadows Synthesis more.
Shepard is a dictator figure and he just f**ked people over by picking Synthesis.

[jkflipflopDAO]

Only people that didn't pay any attention at all (or are too inept to comprehend) the story could possibly like the ending of the trilogy. It completely breaks the entire story of the first game. Starbrat living on the Citadel pretty much erases Sovereign's entire reason for existence.

Modifié par jkflipflopDAO, 22 septembre 2012 - 09:10 .

[Reorte]

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

Only people that didn't pay any attention at all (or are too inept to comprehend) the story could possibly like the ending of the trilogy. It completely breaks the entire story of the first game. Starbrat living on the Citadel pretty much erases Sovereign's entire reason for existence.

I think that it's possible to like the EC, at least, if:
You couldn't care less about Shepard and his friends.
You avoid thinking beyond what's superficially presented.
You're happy with style over substance.

Occasionally all of that is fun (although usually in comedies rather than something that's trying to take itself seriously).