246 réponses à ce sujet

[Aarkaan]

Is not that bad, it just that freaking ending... I'm about to sale my console...

[Qutayba]

The way the question is worded makes it seem like all three were bad: bad, worse, and worst. But, all three were actually quite good compared to other games out there. Of the three, I agree ME3 was the "least good" in terms of story. Some of the combat mechanics were better than ME1, though. I think ME2 comes out on top in almost every way.

[ioannisdenton]

hornedfrog87 wrote...

No. Storywise, it is the worst because it doesn't connect well with itself, cut several gems out like Ash's death question and Priority Earth scenes, and gave a plot hole filled ending, but definitely not the worst game. Saying it's the worst game simply because of the narrative shows a bias in your judgment placing story above gameplay, replayability, and other aspects which ME3 does do great with.

OFCOURSE i will place story,dialogue,replayability above mindless shooting. If i wanted combat i would play another game.
Plus gameplay is a complicated term. Having dialogue in ME is gameplay too and the one ME does best , the one Me3 forgot in favor of gamebreaking 200% reduction colldowns.
Mass Effect's core gameplay is story-choices-dialogue and then combat

Modifié par ioannisdenton, 11 décembre 2012 - 08:28 .

[LucasShark]

In my opinion: By far the worst, not only is it not as good as its predecessors, but it has actually ruined my ability to replay them without mentally censoring it from existance.

[Anacronian Stryx]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

Anacronian Stryx wrote...

Sad thing is that you don't even know if that was what was going on, It's not like Me 2 could even lower it self to offer that little explanation ..and ME 3 just doesn't care about what happened before.

Yes you do, y'know that whole bit on the suicide mission where people get liquified and shoved into a Reaper yea? You want everything in a plot to be explained in the first 10 minutes? The structure of the plot was akin to an investigative story. You're not supposed to know what they wanted with the humans until the end game, so you didn't.

Its like complaining of not knowing what Saren really wanted other than to bring the Reapers back after Tali's recording. Its a stupid complaint.

My point was that you don't know that the reapers was building the Human reaper to replace Sovereign as you stated, In fact Mark Walters went on record saying that was not what was going on.

[Rafficus III]

ioannisdenton wrote...

hornedfrog87 wrote...
No. Storywise, it is the worst because it doesn't connect well with itself, cut several gems out like Ash's death question and Priority Earth scenes, and gave a plot hole filled ending, but definitely not the worst game. Saying it's the worst game simply because of the narrative shows a bias in your judgment placing story above gameplay, replayability, and other aspects which ME3 does do great with.

OFCOURSE i will place story,dialogue,replayability above mindless shooting. If i wanted combat i would play another game.
Plus gameplay is a complicated term. Having dialogue in ME is gameplay too and the one ME does best , the one Me3 forgot in favor of gamebreaking 200% reduction colldowns.
Mass Effect's core gameplay is story-choices-dialogue and then combat

You mucked up my points. I said the game had great replayability despite the story and that ME3 did good; MP and SP alike, though SP is debatable on personal opinions. You could argue that about dialogue, but I usually go full Paragon anyways so it didn't affect me. Also, replaying ME2 right now is leading me to believe those more dialogue options we had, weren't really all they were cracked up to be. It still boils down to two general choices, with just more additional lines for clarification. ME3 probably had less because they took on more VA's and dried up in terms of resources as the number thinned out what they could impliment. I'm talking about combat which is vastly superior to that of its predecessors. 

[vX-INSANIAC-Xv]

ME3 was easily the worst of the trilogy for me, it's only redeeming feature was it's mildly improved combat. It lacked the story and dialogue options of the first two games, had almost no content for ME2 characters and had few memorable moments (only Tuchanuka really springs to mind). The ending was easily the worst, riddled with it's plot holes and complete lack of closure forcing the "Extended Cut" to be made which created even more plot holes, but the ending wasn't my main reason for disliking it.

[Cashless-Nick]

I think ME2 is the worst game because of its irrelevant story.

[The Divine Avenger]

Pyce wrote...

No way ME3 was an emotional roller coaster for me. I never laughed, cried, cursed, and cheered in any video game, movie, or single event before ME3. It was the best combat, graphics, emotion, the series had to offer. All were good. ME 1 had the best ending. But ME 3 had my attachments seen finalized.
I don't understand how poeple say that is was not that great unless they were just jaded by the end or just wanting to join the mob and fit in or just throwing stones to take out thier own problems on the game. 

how can you say that

1, they seemd to make the existence of the codex null & void along with the whole cause & effect aspect of mass effect

2, the whole point from the start was to stop the reaper but it turns out it's only possible to do so on the reapers turms

3, 90% of the game had auto dioluge removing you ability to chose throughout the majority of the game

4, the fact that questionable things were happening throughout the whole story not just the ending eg = the crusibles construction seemed very vularable throughout the story yet the reapers made on attempt to stop it's construction considering the catalist said they've attempted to eradicate it time & again

5, the fact that all choices made in ME 1 &2 were for nothing & was shown to be the case from the start (if you chose anderson to take the seat on the council)

6, the fact that the catalist had no apparent phisical form & yet knew to take the form of the child you watched die at the beguining of the game & the fact that dispite how much this had been bugging the hell out of Shep to the point you were dreaming about him & yet it provoken no reaction from shep whatsoever.

7, the fact that somehow the racnai ended up indoctrinated AGAIN & you had to save them AGAIN with vertually no explination at to what happened

8, the fact that TIM was an evil a** that was indoctrinated by the reapers & yet the paragon choice was to agree with him after everything that happened throughout ME2

9, The fact that from the start of the series in ME it was said by vigil & liara that the reapers/someone harversted all tech from the previous civilisations & left vertually nothing & yet somehow  managed to miss the huge archive on mars that had the plans for the crucible that again the catalist wanted to wipe out of existance

10, the fact that there was no real explanation to explain why leigion had to sacrifise himself for his people

I could go on forever to say why your comment makes no sence to me but your entitled to your opinion, as for me the only real emotion ME3 prevoked out of me was complete & utter disgust

[The Divine Avenger]

Cashless-Nick wrote...

I think ME2 is the worst game because of its irrelevant story.

it was only made irrelevant when the abandoned the dark energy storyline & that is ME3's fault

[gisle]

ME2 is my favorite, because it added depth, explore subtler details about this amazing universe. It's DLCs better, for less restraints were imposed; no big ass war to be slightly relevant to.

[Reorte]

The Divine Avenger wrote...

Cashless-Nick wrote...

I think ME2 is the worst game because of its irrelevant story.

it was only made irrelevant when the abandoned the dark energy storyline & that is ME3's fault

Even then it was only a minor side note in ME2. Taken by itself ME2 is a good experience but it's hard to deny that it was ultimately irrelevent and would've been mostly irrelevent even if they had kept the dark energy storyline.

ME1 was the discovery of the threat. ME2 should've been about finding the solution and ME3 about implementing that solution.

[Sejborg]

I would rate the games like this:
1. ME1
2. ME3
3. ME2

ME2's story just didn't work for me. The plot was stuck in the mud the entire game, while you recruit one companion after the other and do their loyalty missions. And then finally you get to the big finale, that thankfully was amazing. As a trilogy ME2's story was a bit pointless.

[tonnactus]

The Divine Avenger wrote...


it was only made irrelevant when the abandoned the dark energy storyline & that is ME3's fault

Where was no dark energy storyline at all. All the players got where some hints from Parasini(if alive) and Tali/Reegar.

[Sebby]

tonnactus wrote...

The Divine Avenger wrote...


it was only made irrelevant when the abandoned the dark energy storyline & that is ME3's fault

Where was no dark energy storyline at all. All the players got where some hints from Parasini(if alive) and Tali/Reegar.

Yeah, ME2's plot had nothing to do with dark energy.

[slimshedim]

FlamingBoy wrote...

I think so, but there is a significant number of players (at least on this forum ) who disagree

Must be the people, who didn't play the previous ME titles before, who simply have no clue about how a proper story needs to be told or they simply don't care about the plot.

ME3 is by far the biggest disappointment in the history of video games. It's beyond my comprehension how ME 3's storywriter failed to follow the lines he just wrote himself a couple of seconds ago!

This video addresses to the various plotholes and mistakes in the plot/writing/the entire ending. Highly recommended!

[Maxster_]

Fixers0 wrote...

 Generally speaking: yes, Mass Effect 3 was indeed in the worst game in the trilogy and for the following reasons:
(1.0) Butchered dialogue wheel.
(2.0) Uninteresting, meaningless side quests.
(3.0) Little to no attention to detail by the desingers.
(4.0) Sloppy, clutterd journal.
(5.0) A poor, underdevelopd war managing system.
(6.0) No lasting appeal, plot development feels to linear.
(7.0) Atrocious handling of lore, logic and reason from time to time.
(8.0) Antagonists were extremly uneffective and contrived. 
(9.0) Techincally unimpressive, If not downright insulting.
(1.0) the plot is driven by an unknown, yet contrived device.

Good list

[Maxster_]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

fchopin wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

I'd rather take ME2's story instead of ME3's any day, every day.

You can take ME2 if you like but you will need a magnifying glass to find a story in the game.

Reapers are rounding up humans to create a new Reaper to replace the one that was destroyed in ME1. Theres your plot, simplified.

Of course it would've been nice if it did make sense, but nothing BioWare has done recently makes sense.

Especially funny knowing that overwhelming majority of human population is on Earth, and lone collector ship will be instantly destroyed by just a frigate pack, not even a fleet.
Meaning Harbringer is retarded. Or really deluded.
And in ME3, it became even more funny - why they even bothered with making a new reaper, when they could just fly into a galaxy?

[Sebby]

Actually, nowhere in ME2 is it said that space terminator is a replacement for Sovereign.

[FrayedThread]

There were numerous occasions where I was annoyed by ME3.Were it to do with dialogue, character death, character coherence, graphics, animations or cut-scenes, I found myself almost loathing the game on a few occasions.
All of the games have their faults, for example I found the first ME to be really tedious at times and the number of reused maps/area layouts didn't help.ME2 - though it's my favourite - didn't really seem to do much for the plot, I wouldn't say it would be stupid to call it filler. 

I can't say it's the worst, each ME game has its pro's and con's.

Modifié par FrayedThread, 13 décembre 2012 - 11:57 .

[shodiswe]

It certainly had it's good moments, otherwise I wouldn't be here at all.

The ending/endmission as a story was a let down imo. The EC improved the conversation slightly but the larger picture of the ending and the mission leading to it started to feel lacking after the Cronos station mission. That's where "more" would have been appreciated. I'm sure there could have been several different way to improve it.
And way to make it worse, I guess. But I really think it was lacking in war asset representation, storytelling, drama, and "player agency".
It would work for Quake or Halo but it feelt too simple to push that endign down the throat of every Shepard out there.
On a grand scale I can see why it woudl be similar on several levels, but people, war assets and choices should have more meaning during the end game and while preparing for it.
Standign there getting your options by the Catalyst, the enemy of all life in the galaxy, feelt a little cheap. It's not very interesting even if **** can happen in real life, it doesn't make a good story.
Having the alternatives given in a different manner and unlocked in a different manner would probably have made it a lot better.
Having com chatter about war assets assisting eachother during the end mission and actualy helping eachother out, knowign that you might have helped them by bringing them together, even if it's going badly. Some light in the darkness due to what the player did, adding player agency.
The player recruited the Geth, so a squad got recued and evacuated by their "drop troopers making an atmospheric drop"
Yuo recruited the Krogan, they help some other people.
You might get a chance to lend a hand at soem point that makes it feel like you made a difference.
The turret defence at the FoB didn't seem like it made a difference... was it even possible to fail it? was there a point to it? Why couldn't the soldier standing there, man the turret?
I can see why one would want to add some action into all that "talking" but it feelt a little forced, a better story to it woudl have made it better.... Maybe the soldier was killed so you had to jump in and hold it till they could relive you, or maybe the trashed transport had a survivor(possibly with intel on Reaper positions) Keep the survivor alive and you help the teams avoid an ambush and save the person that survived the destruction of that transport... It suddenly feels a little meaningful.
It's a massve effort and operation so it might not be world changing but it still made a difference for several people, which makes it meaningful and adds player agency. Being able to fail or get a partial fail also adds to the experience and makes it feel more alive and interactive.
It would be like those small details about Jokers sister and the PTS Asari commando in the hospital. It adds atmosphere.
That's my biggest grief with ME3, it's a great game but the ending and end gameplay feelt less fulfilling than I think it should.

Modifié par shodiswe, 14 décembre 2012 - 12:17 .

[o Ventus]

Seboist wrote...

Actually, nowhere in ME2 is it said that space terminator is a replacement for Sovereign.

Probably because it wasn't.