270 réponses à ce sujet

[Kel Riever]

Bah, again, you know, to me there's a difference in hating the ending or ME3 or BioWare and then hating posters. JMO, I guess. But when I say the ending(s) suck, that doesn't mean a person who likes the ending sucks. It means I think the ending(s) suck, just like I said. I also think you are out of your mind if you want to say something like ME3 is universally good...because if it was, it wouldn't be so widely despised. But again, that doesn't mean the person making the statement is despised, or isn't entitled to their point of view.

Will say this...nothing really beats the experience of ME1 at the time of its release. ME3 certainly has great game play, and good stories inside of it. But its that last 5 ish minutes, that I just have to shake my head at the people who made this game. And for their repeated desire to not fix it, that isn't a fanboi problem. That's a knuckle-headed game company problem.

[David7204]

Fallout 3 was great. Skyrim...not anywhere close to as good as I expected.

[Yate]

Domecoming wrote...

Seeing these images bring back some good memories.

Mass Effect 3 definitely lacked exploration, and it shows:

This is really dumb.

First off, the 'multiplayer quests' are N7 quests, they weren't any smaller or weaker than most of the N7 quests in ME2. They had characters, plot, unique dialogue, a lot more than most of the ME2 ones which were basically just "shoot mercs".

Secondly, the hubquests in ME3 were WAY larger than in ME1/ME2. You're counting Grunt's ME3 mission (one of the best parts of the whole trilogy for many) with flipping the water switches in Feros.

Finally, I'm trying to think about how you have only 5 fetch quests for ME1. There's that couple on the Citadel, the two consort missions, Samesh, two Chorban quests, Conrad, Schells, Opald, the Citadel AI... all missions with no combat or anything, just running around talking to people.

This is a biased piece of crap.

[Yate]

Arcian wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Yeah, I would scrap them. Mass Effect is not a Bethesda game. It can't be, and it would never be as good.

>Bethesda
>Good
Choose one.

THE ELDER SCROLLS IS AWESOME

[rdnanez]

hahah what a pansy

[megamacka]

ME3 ruined my urge for RPGs.
I have not been able to finish another RPG post ME3.... I have no idea why.

[clarkusdarkus]

megamacka wrote...

ME3 ruined my urge for RPGs.
I have not been able to finish another RPG post ME3.... I have no idea why.

i was similar until i bought dragons dogma and man did that game cure the dissapointment of ME3....

i also agree OP with how you feel, it's why i have said for the last 8 months that ME1 made the series and ME3 f*****d it up.....but i still lurk here now and again through force of habit, and hoping for a glimmer of hope so i can do a 2nd playthrough.

[The Spamming Troll]

jancz89 wrote...

if it wasn't for ME1 I'd have left the forum long ago, I wouldn't even participate in the forum, not even bought ME3, but ME1 got me, I fell in love with this universe and even if they keep f*cking the universe up with ME2 and mostly with ME3
I still feel I can't leave for the sake of ME1

exactly this.

small, small bits of hope for the franchise still remain.

and so shall i.

[megamacka]

jancz89 wrote...

if it wasn't for ME1 I'd have left the forum long ago, I wouldn't even participate in the forum, not even bought ME3, but ME1 got me, I fell in love with this universe and even if they keep f*cking the universe up with ME2 and mostly with ME3
I still feel I can't leave for the sake of ME1

Modifié par megamacka, 23 novembre 2012 - 06:30 .

[AlanC9]

Yate wrote...

Domecoming wrote...

Seeing these images bring back some good memories.

Mass Effect 3 definitely lacked exploration, and it shows:

This is really dumb.

First off, the 'multiplayer quests' are N7 quests, they weren't any smaller or weaker than most of the N7 quests in ME2. They had characters, plot, unique dialogue, a lot more than most of the ME2 ones which were basically just "shoot mercs".

Secondly, the hubquests in ME3 were WAY larger than in ME1/ME2. You're counting Grunt's ME3 mission (one of the best parts of the whole trilogy for many) with flipping the water switches in Feros.

Finally, I'm trying to think about how you have only 5 fetch quests for ME1. There's that couple on the Citadel, the two consort missions, Samesh, two Chorban quests, Conrad, Schells, Opald, the Citadel AI... all missions with no combat or anything, just running around talking to people.

This is a biased piece of crap.

Blame the guy who made up the graphic. All the poster did was search for something that confirmed his own opinion.

[AlanC9]

Yate wrote...

THE ELDER SCROLLS IS AWESOME

I liked Morrowind OK, though it's better at being a lore delivery device and a hiking simulator than being an RPG. Haven't gotten into Bethesda stuff since then.

[Han Shot First]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Hater's gonna hate.

Was ME3 the incrediballs finale to Shepard's story we all hoped it would be? No. Did it have numberous flaws? Yes. Did I feel let down when I first played it? Yes.

But ME3 is still a great game, with much that is amazing and enjoyable. Trying to pretend there isn't is simply selective blindness.

I like this human, he understands!

[Dr_Extrem]

the journey was great.

mass effect 3 is not the best game of the series and the last 10 minutes are really bad writing. but ...the other two games are unchanged and mass effect 3 is playable. 

it has plotholes and shady stuff: like the mars archives - they turned "a small data cache." (me1) into a big archive with data of colossial magnitudes - not bad for a small observation post.

thanks to the work of the community and mrfob, i can replay the series, without suffering. the me3-plot is not the best but the logical conclusion, if you make the enemy too strong.

hate is a strong feeling ... i suggest you take a look at mrfobs mods (he made 2) and give them a try. it helped a lot of people to reanimate their love for the series (wich is great). the last part is not perfect but playable (with the band aid).


about the missions: 

me2 had 25 n7 missions in the core game - all featuring a unique map and a short story. 
me3 on the other hand, had only 6 n7 missions of that type.

i dont count "scanquests" as actual missions. its just flying to the planet and drop a probe and. missions like "grissom acadamy" are more like the loyalty missions from me2 - i count them as plot missions.

Modifié par Dr_Extrem, 23 novembre 2012 - 07:04 .

[Neizd]

Sad to see another person go away

One thing is true. Even if some people liked the ending, the gameplay etc. There still are a lot of flaws in the game. You did a great list that actually sums it up Oransel, and I don't believe that any normal fan (who isn't a bio-drone) would overlooka ALL of those flaws.

[Raging_Pulse]

Yate wrote...

Domecoming wrote...

Seeing these images bring back some good memories.

Mass Effect 3 definitely lacked exploration, and it shows:

This is really dumb.

First off, the 'multiplayer quests' are N7 quests, they weren't any smaller or weaker than most of the N7 quests in ME2. They had characters, plot, unique dialogue, a lot more than most of the ME2 ones which were basically just "shoot mercs".

Secondly, the hubquests in ME3 were WAY larger than in ME1/ME2. You're counting Grunt's ME3 mission (one of the best parts of the whole trilogy for many) with flipping the water switches in Feros.

Finally, I'm trying to think about how you have only 5 fetch quests for ME1. There's that couple on the Citadel, the two consort missions, Samesh, two Chorban quests, Conrad, Schells, Opald, the Citadel AI... all missions with no combat or anything, just running around talking to people.

This is a biased piece of crap.

*facepalm*

The chart, even if it's not 100% accurate, perfectly illustrates the lack of exploration in ME3, which is one of the issues OP mentions. Exploration, as in, scanning the systems, finding stuff and landing on actual planets to do side missions, is almost nonexistent in ME3.

Conrad, Schells, Opold and others aren't counted as fetch quests, they're already counted among "Hub World" quests, marked red on the chart.

[Dean_the_Young]

Domecoming wrote...

Yate wrote...

Domecoming wrote...

Seeing these images bring back some good memories.

Mass Effect 3 definitely lacked exploration, and it shows:

This is really dumb.

First off, the 'multiplayer quests' are N7 quests, they weren't any smaller or weaker than most of the N7 quests in ME2. They had characters, plot, unique dialogue, a lot more than most of the ME2 ones which were basically just "shoot mercs".

Secondly, the hubquests in ME3 were WAY larger than in ME1/ME2. You're counting Grunt's ME3 mission (one of the best parts of the whole trilogy for many) with flipping the water switches in Feros.

Finally, I'm trying to think about how you have only 5 fetch quests for ME1. There's that couple on the Citadel, the two consort missions, Samesh, two Chorban quests, Conrad, Schells, Opald, the Citadel AI... all missions with no combat or anything, just running around talking to people.

This is a biased piece of crap.

*facepalm*

The chart, even if it's not 100% accurate, perfectly illustrates the lack of exploration in ME3, which is one of the issues OP mentions. Exploration, as in, scanning the systems, finding stuff and landing on actual planets to do side missions, is almost nonexistent in ME3.

Conrad, Schells, Opold and others aren't counted as fetch quests, they're already counted among "Hub World" quests, marked red on the chart.

This chart, as not-accurate as it is, is an arbitrary presentation created further to support the creator's pre-established opinion. The only thing it perfectly illustrates is the tendency for confirmation bias in the people who try and bandy it about.

Just look at your own description of what entails exploration: scanning systems? Scanning planets? Landing on them? There's hardly an absence of planet scanning with the war asset system, and quite a few missions to land on planets you have to trek to. If you want to make an argument that ME3 failed at exploration, at least establish a criteria it doesn't already pass.

[Seival]

I think, that I should reply to OP in my favorite "mirror style".

Don't let the door hit you on the way out. There are a lot of people who actually like ME3 and the ending, and don't like haters whining. The less haters we have - the better.

...What?... I don't have to show much toleration to the ones who show little toleration to me.

[Fiery Phoenix]

megamacka wrote...

jancz89 wrote...

if it wasn't for ME1 I'd have left the forum long ago, I wouldn't even participate in the forum, not even bought ME3, but ME1 got me, I fell in love with this universe and even if they keep f*cking the universe up with ME2 and mostly with ME3
I still feel I can't leave for the sake of ME1

[AlanC9]

Domecoming wrote...
The chart, even if it's not 100% accurate, perfectly illustrates the lack of exploration in ME3, which is one of the issues OP mentions. Exploration, as in, scanning the systems, finding stuff and landing on actual planets to do side missions, is almost nonexistent in ME3.

The problem isn't that it doesn't illustrate the OP's point. The problem is that it does that without being intellectually honest about its methods.

[Grubas]

the chart only confirms what people knew all along. the n7 missions in me2 were short but original, n7 missions in me3 only railroad us into multiplayer. and so does priority earth.