246 réponses à ce sujet

[Peranor]

 



ME3 left me thinking "Oh my god why did I spend so much time playing this game just to feel so utterly disappointed". And that "I will most likely not play this game ever again"
Despite their individual shortcomings neither ME1 or ME2 made me feel that way. So yes, for me ME3 is without doubt the worst in the series. (but that doesn't mean it's the worst game I've ever played)

[3DandBeyond]

Let me say a definitive, yes and no. ME3 had some awesome parts and there is no denying that-in my opinion equal to or better than the best parts in the previous games. This is what is so disheartening so far. It does not get much better than the scene on Tuchanka where Shepard is being talked to by Wrex and says something like, "there's a reaper in my way, Wrex". Or Mordin's sacrifice or Legion's. This is a game that made me cry-not full out crying, but you get the idea. It also solidified the feelings I had for certain characters and how they felt about each other-that started way back when, but ME3 when the dialogue was good it was exceptional.

However, needless to say for me all of that was squashed by an ending that seems to forget all about what all that great stuff was about, what the tear-jerking sacrifices were for, what all that great dialogue meant. And to be honest, there's some really horrible dialogue, really repulsive parts of the game, and really demoralizing aspects to it. All of those great feelings I had, even the sad ones, were totally left out of the stuff that just stinks in the game. And yet, I love this game. I could have forgiven anything had the ending delivered on an emotional and a rational level and had it allowed Shepard, the one I played or any one any of us might play, to follow her compass, and to forge her way through it all. I hated that from the beginning they made her out to be a total moron and then at other moments the real Shepard returns.

I also think the fetch quests were far worse than the Mako quests and the planet scanning in 1 and 2. The lack of real quests really made these seem juvenile to me.

All of that being said, I would not have ever been so critical if it had ended decently. I'd have cringed in places but would have lived with it because I know nothing is ever perfect.

[V-rcingetorix]

My answer...yes. It's a very careful yes, because the only thing that made it the worst is the ending.

I disliked only 2 (two!) things about this game; the ending, and the dialogue. The ending...obvious reasons. The dialogue however was missing, especially from important characters. Jack and Miranda, two LI's were almost completely absent. Legion and Thane are acceptable, since they both die relatively soon; but the odd thing is that Mordin has more to say than Miranda and Jack...and he's not an LI.

Tali, Garrus, Ashley/Kaiden, I would have liked a bit more choosing of dialogue, but it is acceptable the way it is. Grunt, Zaeed and Kasumi...almost nothing. Understandable with Zaeed/Kasumi being DLC's, but didn't they do a suicide mission with Shepard?

ME2 and ME1 had satisfying endings. For me, that is one of the most important parts of any performance, a good start and a good finish. The middle can slop around a bit, but the end has to be good...and in this case it was not.

Plenty of good things in ME3; Thane's death was EPIC, as was Mordins' and Legions'...I like a lot of the new critters (Reapers bring a whole new level to the game), but the dialogue and the end didn't equal the previous two games.

Oh well, I'll wait and see before getting ME4. Probably do a full youtube search on all ME4 Final Scenes/Fights/Conversations.

EDIT:

I thought a bit about the conversations, and while the NUMBER of conversations is about the same, the TYPE of conversations is pretty different. I loved how the crew talked with each other more; this was a continuation from ME2 tbh (Hadley and Matthews), and it was fun. But the agree/disagree capability for most of the crew conversations disappeared.

Modifié par V-rcingetorix, 10 décembre 2012 - 12:07 .

[KotorEffect3]

No it is leagues better than ME 1. You could make an argument that ME 2 is the best overall. I personaly prefer ME 3 to ME 2 (slightly) but both are way better than the first one. And yes I still like the first one.

[CronoDragoon]

ME1 is the worst game. It's still great, but not as great as 2 and 3. Gameplay-wise ME3 is by far the best, but I prefer ME2's character-based story over 3.

[ME859]

Combat wise best game. Story wise worst game. Seeing as how Mass Effect is mostly story driven I'd say worst game in trilogy is a fair assessment.

[survivor_686]

ME3 felt a little flat when compared to ME2 and ME1.

ME1: a gorgeous salad, with a few too many nuts. Enjoyable, but you hope the main course is better

ME2: A truly delectable Medium Rib-Eye steak. Cooked to perfection, got all the right seasonings and aged just the right amount. Accompanied with some sweet potato fried which are worth the extra fee. Except one guy.

ME3: A brownie ice-cream sundae...from McDonalds while you are eating at the Savoy. You have the odd feeling that someone may have dropped it. It tastes good at some parts..but you can help but feel that they have removed some of the brownie as well. It tastes good, but you can't help but feel it could have tasted better for the amount you paid for it.

Modifié par survivor_686, 10 décembre 2012 - 01:45 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Calinstel wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Calinstel wrote...

Thank you for telling me how I play.
Wait, you just insulted me.  I find that rather rude of you.
Every conversation that CAN be had, WAS had.
I found it lacking.
Now, please, find another person to insult.  You are wasting your rudeness talents on me. 

If I was looking to insult you, your response alone would be enough. As I was castigating your Shepard for not bothering to take the many opportunities there were to have conversations with his (or her) crew, and you certainly wouldn't be so presumptuous to confuse yourself with a fictious character...

If there's anything you might feel insulted about, it would be you forgetting the very things you were complaining the game lacked. But as far as perceiving insults go, that's a stretch.

Since Shepard is controlled by the player (myself in this conversation) then the fault you attribute to the character is a reflection on my playing skills.  Nice of you to couch it in soft words though.
I'm done with this issue.

Are you going to talk to the squadmates now? Since you're so clearly not trying to have the last word, I'm sure you have time to find those magical moments you missed before.

[Dean_the_Young]

dsl08002 wrote...

not the worst but least good is the right term.

it just lack those final components that is required for the first place

1. hub worlds
2 more mission
3 LI content
4. conversation instead of the auto
5. Choices does matter ( war asset)

I'll admit that I don't really get this as a list for ME3 in particular.

For hubworlds, ME3 has as much hub-space and hub-levels as either of the others. ME1 was primarily the Citadel (most of it being wasted empty space), with two story worlds in which the settlements weren't so much hubs as they were just another part of the level. ME2 was arguably the best with Omega, the Citadel, and Tuchanka... but collectively the used space was less than the Citadel of ME3. Tuchanka was roughly the size of, oh, Huerta Hospital, the smallest of the ME3 Citadel hubzones. I could see a lack of diversity as a complaint, but not a lack of hub.

ME3 doesn't exactly lack for missions either. Besides a good number of story missions in its own right, there are also no less than three semi-mandatory side missions for Rannoch and Tuchanka as well as various ME2 cameo missions (Grunt, Jacob, Samara, Jack), and that's without the N7 missions as well. While it's certainly less than the ME2 mission count of recruitment and loyalties... well, I'll just say that I find the ME3 missions far better polished than their ME2 equivalents, and far more relevant to the overall storyline.

LI content I don't really care about, since ME and Bioware in general have never exactly done much with them. As far as dating sims go the ME series has always been 'you had me at hello.' Conversations I also already talked about.

But choices and consequences... ye gods, this is the area where ME3 stands head and shoulders above the rest of the franchise. The only game in which carryover choices have consequences affecting the tone and outcomes of major arcs. An entire game mechanic in which choices big and small can get a de-facto mini-codex to show how your choices are affecting the galaxy, and in which the cumulative total can dictate the quality of the ending and available end-game choices. Actual god-damn butterfly effect consequences, in which choices you make earlier can restrict or enable choices for later, well played-out in Rannoch, Tuchanka, and even arguably the final confrontation with TIM.

[V-rcingetorix]

@Dean_the_young

There was indeed a lot to like about the consequences carryover. I didn't find it so difficult to believe how TIM made it to the Citadel, but it was a little disconcerting.

I found it interesting how the little things had different amounts of attention. For example, the Rachni. This was basically one conversation in ME2, and a sidenote in ME1 (data holder for Saren, Shep's givent he thumbs up/down decision). In ME3, the Rachni were given their own sidemission. At first, this seemed like overkill to me, but then, it made sense. This is an entire race...their whole existence as a galaxy-spanning threat would be a huge bonus...or minus...from the war with the Reapers.

I'm not too sure about Casper the Kidly Ghost. Doing a beatdown with the Reapers...maybe with some special Reserve Reapers HomeFront edition was what I had anticipated. Instead I got a story (admittedly what Mass Effect was supposed to be best at) and a triple button decision. And a 30 minute playthrough for when I wanted to see other ending types.

Ha ha, I got trolled (30 minute replays prevents players from saying things like "I just saved and changed my decision...like in the Sabacc matches in Kotor).

So yes, a lot to like. But in the spirit of the title of this thread...this latest edition had the worst ending. Therefore since it had something more negative than the other two contenders, this one is the worst. Even if it had a lot of good stuff. *apologetic shrug*

[dreamgazer]

Yes.

[Ticonderoga117]

Yup. While there are aspects of it I like (heatlh, guns, the leveling up system) it's outweighed by everything it does wrong.

The other two games, while having their faults, like "why aren't these people wearing armor in this inhospitable environment" or "why does this combat suck", they never feel like a pile of crap.

ME1 and ME2 feel like diamonds in the rough marred by poo.
ME3 feels like poo with some diamonds in it.

[frostajulie]

God Yes. ME1 and 2 are still magical and I play them and get lost in the universe.

ME3 has many flaws worst of which is the ending. I played it twice and now I can't stand being in the game for longer than 3 minutes. A games quality is measured by the joy you get from it. ME3 produced negative joy.

[FaWa]

ME1 > ME2 > ME3

gg

[His Name was HYR!!]

 IMO, no.

Best story goes to ME1. But looking at the games as the sum of all parts, ME3 is the best overall game.

ME2 is where I started. It felt awesome, but the more I played it, the more I noticed it was "all sizzle, no steak."

[KingZayd]

Yes.

Shame, because I remember between Tuchanka and Rannoch thinking that Bioware had finally succeeded in combining RPG elements with good combat, and that the game was amazing.

Then I got to the ending... Worst ending out of all the games I've played.

Modifié par KingZayd, 10 décembre 2012 - 03:37 .

[Lyrandori]

Well ME3's pros are Rannoch, Tuchanka and the combat system, and it has good multi-player (not perfect, needs balance fixes, there's glitches and exploits, like any other MP games out there, but it's good nonetheless). But the rest... can't, I just can't play it anymore. But anyway, there's worst games out there but as far as the Mass Effect franchise is concerned (well, the games anyway) yeah I'd say that ME3 is the worst of the three. The story/narrative was at its best in ME1, character-related development at its best in ME2 (albeit maybe too many characters overall), and the combat system at its best in ME3.

All three have their pros and cons, but ME3's cons are just flooding the rest that I can manage to enjoy.

[Darkly Tranquil]

For mine, ME2 was the pinnacle of the series. it had the best combination of smooth action combat and resource management, and the coolest characters (Jack, Thane, etc.). ME3 had the best combat, but pretty much ditched the resource game, which turned it into a straight FPS, which was a shame.

Although ME1 was important and had a good story, the gameplay was so dated and clunky that I had to force myself through it once just to see the storyline. I very nearly gave up several times, but dragged myself through it.

[blueumi]

yes by far

[StarcloudSWG]

It's not the worst *game* in the trilogy.

It has the ugliest ending, with almost amateurish storywriting at the ending, and the most fourth-wall breaking narrative seen in storytelling in a few years that pretty much ejects the player abruptly out of the story, and very little replayability because of it.

But it doesn't have the worst *gameplay* by any means.

[themark443]

It's bad but not as bad as ME2. I recently played ME1 again (got it on PS3...finally) and it seems like a breath of fresh air. For me, a game that can make you feel as though you just played it for the first time is a truly great game...hell to this day I still play the first Metal Gear Solid. Its just that good.
The only complaints I see regarding ME1 are all combat based. Frankly, I prefer it because it feels like a different game while 2 and 3 feel like I'm playing Gears of War or Call of Duty. And judging by the story lines and gameplay of 2 and 3, it looks like they were going for that.
The characters in 2, even though I like them, already have designations...for example, Zaeed is the badass merc and will always be that. There's no room for growth or development, he'll just always be that. In ME1, you just got to know everyone and your character's could influence them. Like Ashley's anti-alien sentiments...if you went renegade and agreed with her, those beliefs would harden. If you played paragon, she would begin to change her mind. 
3's ending was sort of the icing on the cake; a disconnect that would make casual players go: 'Oh my guy's dead...oh well, I'll get another one'. Kind of like CoD MW2.

After playing ME1 again, 2 and 3 just seem so inferior.

Modifié par themark443, 10 décembre 2012 - 05:09 .

[DubVee12]

No, in my opinion. Each game has its own pros and cons, and I like each of them equally.

[Armass81]

Eahc of the games felt unbalanced, where ME1 had great story and atmosphere, but crap combat, the others pretty much were vice versa. Too bad we didnt really get a game with ME1 story strenght and ME3 combat.

Many things hindered the series, it had the too many cooks problem. And the fact that they had no real planning at any point they just made it up as they went and writers kept changing and changing. Plus EA and SWtor probably hindered alot.

Modifié par Armass81, 10 décembre 2012 - 05:28 .

[FlamingBoy]

DubVee12 wrote...

No, in my opinion. Each game has its own pros and cons, and I like each of them equally.

could you be any more diplomatic :P:P

pick an extreme, come to the dark side!!!