231 réponses à ce sujet

[dreamgazer]

My Paragon Shepard thought it was a deeply-flawed but entertaining conclusion to the series, one that mixes interesting ideas, conflicts, and interpretations with lackluster/hurried writing and too much of a compulsion to go boom, boom, boom. A fitting-enough finale that didn't quite meet expectations, but it was thought-out and exciting to a degree that earned a hesitant thumbs up. That one sees where you're coming from, at least.

My Renegade Shepard, on the other hand, thought it was a frustrating and incongruous experience that spoke very little of their perspective. That Shepard vehemently disagrees with the assertion that it's the best of the series, let alone one of the best games period.

But I'm glad you derived such enjoyment from it.

Modifié par dreamgazer, 06 octobre 2012 - 07:00 .

[Shepard108278]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Shepard108278 wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

It's good to see that people here can discuss their differing opinions respectfully and without insults.

Anyway, I have very mixed feelings about ME3, much like I do about ME1 (but for entirely different reasons). ME2 was easily the best for me, despite (or maybe because) it being, as others in this thread have said, virtually plotless.

I don't think I'll ever get that argument. I don't see how ME2 is plotless at all. It has IMO a better plot than ME.

ME 2 introduced characters like TIM, Legion, EDI and Mordin.  Showed us how reapers are created and demonstrated how they plan  to harvest organics, gave us insight to Krogan and Quarian politics and pretty much setup the Tuchanka and Rannoch arcs, forshadowed that TIM would be an antagonist in ME 3,   Kept hinting at Cerberus's true nature etc....  You'd have to be blind to not acknowledge how crucial ME 2 was to the series.

Thank you! I'm glad I'm not the only one.

[Shepard108278]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Shepard108278 wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

The problem with ME2 is not that it didn't have a plot, but that the plot was completely static. ME2's story didn't move the overarching plot forward in any meaningful way.

You can easily skip ME2 and directly go from ME1 to ME3, you won't be missing anything important, other than the introduction to a bunch of new characters and factions.

ME2's plot can be perfectly described with 1 single TV trope: Status Quo is God.

I don't agree at all. ME 2 had a fantastic overacrching plot that tied into the central reaper plot nicely. At first it seemed like a side plot game but it revealed alot about the reapers and their invasion.

By all means, tell me what ME2 revealed that is essential to the plot and isn't already revealed ME1 or later revealed in ME3. By all means, enlighten me.

See KOTOR EFFECT3's post. He stated everything about ME 2 that is essential to the plot.

[Cashmoney007]

I have to say these hate threads and support threads for this game can be quite entertaining.

[Ghost]

Dark_Caduceus wrote...

If you think this is the best game in the series, never mind the best game you've ever played you must not understand story. Like, at all. Seriously, this had the most broken plot I've ever seen.

How anybody could call this a good game is beyond me, it's actually incomprehensible.

Cry moar.

[ConclusiveMan]

The truth is: ME2 doesn't fit into the ME story. ME2 is nice, but it doesn't really contribute to the Reaper plot and even contradicts it (Hint: Ending).

Modifié par philosopher09, 07 octobre 2012 - 12:34 .

[Seboist]

Shepard108278 wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Shepard108278 wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

The problem with ME2 is not that it didn't have a plot, but that the plot was completely static. ME2's story didn't move the overarching plot forward in any meaningful way.

You can easily skip ME2 and directly go from ME1 to ME3, you won't be missing anything important, other than the introduction to a bunch of new characters and factions.

ME2's plot can be perfectly described with 1 single TV trope: Status Quo is God.

I don't agree at all. ME 2 had a fantastic overacrching plot that tied into the central reaper plot nicely. At first it seemed like a side plot game but it revealed alot about the reapers and their invasion.

By all means, tell me what ME2 revealed that is essential to the plot and isn't already revealed ME1 or later revealed in ME3. By all means, enlighten me.

See KOTOR EFFECT3's post. He stated everything about ME 2 that is essential to the plot.

A bunch of (ultimately meaningless) exposition that could have been summed up in a few lines in ME3 does not make ME2 "essential".

ME2 is THE definition of "waste of time" and "filler" with inane daddy issue plots that have nothing to do with anything and fights against one dimensional disposable bad guys with neglible importance. The game's "story" ends where it begins with the galaxy being no better prepared for war against the Reapers and no weakness of theirs discovered.

The only sub-plots that were worth a damn where the Geth/Quarian and Genophage ones but they were rendered moot by their optional nature and like I said could have just been covered with a few lines of exposition if you jump from ME1 to 3(which is what the game actually does if you didn't do them in 2). 

[Degs29]

I have to agree with the OP; ME3 is one of the two best gaming experiences I've had (the other being Ocarina of Time).  And if I was playing both for the first time, I imagine ME3 would blow Ocarina of Time out of the water.  Even though ME3 doesn't end on the note I want it to, the game is just so epic in every other way.

[Neizd]

Teddie Sage wrote...

Neizd wrote...

I disagree with OP because ME3 as an RPG is one of the worst games. As an FPS? *snip*

Stopped reading there.

It's quite amusing seeing that I stole topic discussion because of mistake during writting in a rush xD Of course I meant Third not first person shooter. Thanks for getting my attention to this.

Modifié par Neizd, 07 octobre 2012 - 09:04 .

[Snypy]

Neizd wrote...

Teddie Sage wrote...

Neizd wrote...

I disagree with OP because ME3 as an RPG is one of the worst games. As an FPS? *snip*

Stopped reading there.

It's quite amusing seeing that I stole topic discussion because of mistake during writting in a rush xD Of course I meant Third not first person shooter. Thanks for getting my attention to this.

Yes, there is so much nitpicking here on BSN. Despite your mistake in writing, it's fair to say they knew that you meant the shooting/combat side of ME3.

[The Heretic of Time]

Shepard108278 wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Shepard108278 wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

The problem with ME2 is not that it didn't have a plot, but that the plot was completely static. ME2's story didn't move the overarching plot forward in any meaningful way.

You can easily skip ME2 and directly go from ME1 to ME3, you won't be missing anything important, other than the introduction to a bunch of new characters and factions.

ME2's plot can be perfectly described with 1 single TV trope: Status Quo is God.

I don't agree at all. ME 2 had a fantastic overacrching plot that tied into the central reaper plot nicely. At first it seemed like a side plot game but it revealed alot about the reapers and their invasion.

By all means, tell me what ME2 revealed that is essential to the plot and isn't already revealed ME1 or later revealed in ME3. By all means, enlighten me.

See KOTOR EFFECT3's post. He stated everything about ME 2 that is essential to the plot.

Kotor's post is completely missing the point and doesn't disprove the fact that ME2's plot is a complete waste of time and doesn't move the Mass Effect story forward one single bit.

A good plot must have plot progression first and foremost. The state of the world/galaxy must be different at the end of the plot in comparison to at the beginning of the plot. If that doesn't happen, then the world is in a status quo and we get to the trope Status Quo is God, which is exactly what's the matter with ME2's plot.

ME2 is a complete waste of time and plot-space. Mass Effect would have been better if ME2 didn't exist, then ME3 would be the second act of the Mass Effect trilogy and then we could have an actual proper third act with a proper ending to the Mass Effect trilogy.

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 07 octobre 2012 - 02:14 .

[kogunenjou]

Dark_Caduceus wrote...

If you think this is the best game in the series, never mind the best game you've ever played you must not understand story. Like, at all. Seriously, this had the most broken plot I've ever seen.

How anybody could call this a good game is beyond me, it's actually incomprehensible.

It's statements like this that tell me you don't know anything about story or gaming in general.

[The Heretic of Time]

kogunenjou wrote...

Dark_Caduceus wrote...

If you think this is the best game in the series, never mind the best game you've ever played you must not understand story. Like, at all. Seriously, this had the most broken plot I've ever seen.

How anybody could call this a good game is beyond me, it's actually incomprehensible.

It's statements like this that tell me you don't know anything about story or gaming in general.

How does he not know anything about story or gaming in general? What he says is actually quite true. Both ME2's plot and ME3's plot are broken. ME2's plot is broken because it doesn't move the trilogy forwards, ME3's plot is broken because it totally defies the basic principles of writing, with a silly McGuffin, Deus Ex Machina, a rushed ending and tons of plotholes and retcons.

[iloveexplosives]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

kogunenjou wrote...

Dark_Caduceus wrote...

If you think this is the best game in the series, never mind the best game you've ever played you must not understand story. Like, at all. Seriously, this had the most broken plot I've ever seen.

How anybody could call this a good game is beyond me, it's actually incomprehensible.

It's statements like this that tell me you don't know anything about story or gaming in general.

How does he not know anything about story or gaming in general? What he says is actually quite true. Both ME2's plot and ME3's plot are broken. ME2's plot is broken because it doesn't move the trilogy forwards, ME3's plot is broken because it totally defies the basic principles of writing, with a silly McGuffin, Deus Ex Machina, a rushed ending and tons of plotholes and retcons.

considering that this whole argument is based on opinions its clear that you all dont know what that means

[The Heretic of Time]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You'd have to be blind to not acknowledge how crucial ME 2 was to the series.

Oh really? Lets see about hat crucial ME2 really is to the series. Lets take a look at your arguments and see if they either PASS ad valid argument of FAIL as invalid argument.

ME 2 introduced characters like TIM, Legion, EDI and Mordin.

None of them are crucial except for TIM, who is also re-introduced in ME3. The other characters you named can all die in ME2 yet it doesn't harm the plot of ME3 at all. So, FAIL!

Showed us how reapers are created and demonstrated how they plan  to harvest organics,

This was already hinted at in ME1 and ME3 confirms this. We did not need ME2 to figure this out. FAIL!

gave us insight to Krogan and Quarian politics and pretty much setup the Tuchanka and Rannoch arcs,

All ME2 offered on this is some extra exposition on the matter. Nothing of it is crucial. You can easily just play ME1 and go right to ME3 and you would still perfectly understand what is going on. So even though ME2 does give us some nice extra exposition on this matter, nothing of it is crucial in any way. So again, FAIL!

forshadowed that TIM would be an antagonist in ME 3,  Kept hinting at Cerberus's true nature etc....

ME1 already showed us Cerberus' true nature. In ME1, Cerberus are evil terrorit bastards. ME2 in fact tried to turn things around and tried to convince us that Cerberus isn't that bad at all. In ME3 Cerberus are evil terrorist bastards again.

So it basically goes like this: ME1: evil bastards -> ME2: not so bad at all -> ME3: evil bastards again.

This does not only show how pointless ME2 is, it also shows the series would be better WITHOUT ME2. Doesn't it make much more sense like this?

ME1: evil bastards -> ME3: evil bastards


Again, we see how totally and utterly pointless ME2 was. So once again, you FAIL!

[Seboist]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

ME1 already showed us Cerberus' true nature. In ME1, Cerberus are evil terrorit bastards. ME2 in fact tried to turn things around and tried to convince us that Cerberus isn't that bad at all. In ME3 Cerberus are evil terrorist bastards again.

So it basically goes like this: ME1: evil bastards -> ME2: not so bad at all -> ME3: evil bastards again.

This does not only show how pointless ME2 is, it also shows the series would be better WITHOUT ME2. Doesn't it make much more sense like this?

ME1: evil bastards -> ME3: evil bastards


Again, we see how totally and utterly pointless ME2 was. So once again, you FAIL!

The same holds true for the Geth.

ME1: Organic hating Reaper Worshippers ->  ME2: Harmless isolationists with some bad relatives (Heretics) -> ME3: Back to all Serving the Reapers and wanting to kill organics

[Seboist]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

But the geth are only trying to wipe out all organic life in "self-defense"! They're totally innocent good guys!

And the Reapers they're working for are trying to save organics from their synthetic creations!

[angol fear]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

How does he not know anything about story or gaming in general? What he says is actually quite true. Both ME2's plot and ME3's plot are broken. ME2's plot is broken because it doesn't move the trilogy forwards, ME3's plot is broken because it totally defies the basic principles of writing, with a silly McGuffin, Deus Ex Machina, a rushed ending and tons of plotholes and retcons.

It sure defies the basic principles of writing but only in video games. Because writing has no basic principles! Mass Effect 3 is one of the most coherent and amibitious game that was made. The writing is unusual, that's only because players doesn't want a good written story but a video game like another. I repeat, there is no basic principles in writing. Then how could you explain litterature's masterpieces. It's only relation between la forme et le fond that explains the narrative structure. Mass Effect 3 has no problem with that relation.

[iloveexplosives]

iloveexplosives wrote...


considering that this whole argument is based on opinions its clear that you all dont know what that means

i refer you all to my last statment until a expriment can be made that can scientificly prove this it is all opinion a group of people with this opinion does not make it fact no matter the size or passion of the arguments

Modifié par iloveexplosives, 07 octobre 2012 - 04:33 .

[Baldsake]

u either like the game or not.. personally i think it's a POS but if people think it's the best game in the history of gaming then that's their business.

[Seival]

I love the entire Trilogy. I can't consider it as three separate games...

...But ME3 has the best production quality of course.

[xrudix]

played borderlands 2, found how much of exploration mass effect 3 lacks...

[mauro2222]

Played through ME3 again. Still the best... of dissapointments. If I can play it of course, I can't touch that game.

Modifié par mauro2222, 07 octobre 2012 - 06:05 .