193 réponses à ce sujet

[Wayning_Star]

AlanC9 wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

the up coming drag with VG's is that they'll all be con$ole.. look for it in a story near you..

Been hearing that one for a long time now.

keywords: Microsoft  and One


mods' call it spam but here goes..

Microsoft sells over a million Xbox Ones in under 24 hours

[We'll bang okay]

Sorry to say this but know what you can hate all you like but its not really about the story for me at least but about the journey the people we meet the place we go to and the things we see sure we got a bad ending and they might be dead or the planets you like might be destroy but its not about that its about the time we had with them. Also know what a lot of games got bad endings but it did not let it ruin the series for thme so are you really going to let it ruin a great series like this one that is so unique for you I know I wouldn't but if its does ruin it for you to tell you what I fell sorry for you.

Modifié par Douglas n7, 26 novembre 2013 - 02:58 .

[Argentoid]

Mr.Racoon wrote...

1 - Poorly photoshopped stock photo of an Israeli girl
2 - Lackluster Horde Mode MP
3 - Autodialogue
4 - Various plotholes 
5 - Ending

Post your own 5 reasons below !

I get that Tali should have been given a real model face instead of a photoshopped one, but your statement sounds like you don't like that they used an Israeli girl for her.

Horde Mode MP is actually quite good.

"Various plotholes". Welp, ME2 had tons and ME1 some, nothing new here.

This guy was/is a ******. 

These are my 2 cents:

1- Cerberus
2- Original Ending
3- Collector Base doesn't matter
4- Omega DLC scam
5- Autodialogue

But if ME3 sucks? Nah, it's way better than ME2 IMO

OOH LE BLASPHEMY!!!1 HOW COULD U LIKE MOAR ME2 THAN ME3! 

Modifié par Argentoid, 26 novembre 2013 - 02:00 .

[Daemul]

What's up with all the thread necromancy? I know it's fun to look back at previous threads from back in the day, but it's getting excessive. Some things are best left forgotten.

[dorktainian]

1- Star Jar
2- The lack of a conclusion (singular)
3- Tali's Photo
4- Multiple QECs
5- it's a shadow of the excellent ME2.

[Linkenski]

Argentoid wrote...

OOH LE BLASPHEMY!!!1 HOW COULD U LIKE MOAR ME2 THAN ME3! 

Err. Isn't that what you usually say to others? Why imitate yourself? 

[Iakus]

1) Marginalizing most of the ME1 and ME2 characters who aren't named Liara or Garrus

2) Grand Theft Shepard.  My Shep ended up becoming Bioware's Shep thanks to autodialogue, forced emotion, and railroaded plot.

3) Insane Troll Logic on the part of the Reapers and their guiding intellgence. 

4) "The Shepard Incident" when apparantly it was considered "artistic" to force the player to do something awful in order to 'win" the game. 

5) Virtually everything accomplished over the entire trilogy got rendered down into an arbitrary number to indicate how much breakage the ending caused.  Yay I guess.

Did I miss anything?

[ImaginaryMatter]

1) The EMS system. It completely marginalizes the War Assets made throughout the story. Basically the only consequence from the alliances made, outside of their own brief story arcs, is a cameo. What makes it even worse is the Multiplayer tie in, like somehow holding Firebase: Red with a few N7s is more valuable than the entire contribution of the Krogan, Rachni, and Geth races. I guess the one benefit is that the fetch and N7 assignments can be skipped with no consequence, which brings me to my next point...

2) The Side Quests. So, in ME1 the side quests allowed you to explore strange new worlds in a rover, giving depth to the theme of exploration and offering cool scenery if you tilt the camera up to look at the sky. In ME2 the side quests provided some variations to combat but they also rewarded the player (or at least me) with various interesting tidbits about the galaxy, or an emotional connection to the universe (oh, how sad, that Asari is dealing with the loss of her shorter life span bond mate). In ME3 they provide credits.

3) Cerberus. To be honest these guys were my least favorite thing about ME2, which made it worse when they were suddenly HyperCharged in this game. They're everywhere, know everything, and out power everyone. TIM is uninteresting, Kai Leng is contrived, and they completely overshadow the Reapers as antagonists.

4) The dialogue. I think enough has been said on this topic. Although for me personally, the thing I miss the most are the neutral dialogue prompts.

5) The bookends, the missions that make up the introduction (the Prologue and Mars) and the final act (everything starting from the end of Thessia). Collectively I think these are the missions that ruined the ME3 experience for me. The story doesn't make sense, I'm not emotionally engaged to anything, and the game play isn't exciting because there's no tension.

[KotorEffect3]

How has this thread not been locked?

[Linkenski]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...
5) The bookends, the missions that make up the introduction (the Prologue and Mars) and the final act (everything starting from the end of Thessia). Collectively I think these are the missions that ruined the ME3 experience for me. The story doesn't make sense, I'm not emotionally engaged to anything, and the game play isn't exciting because there's no tension.

Minus Sanctuary I believe all the missions you mentioned as the "bookends" are written by Mac, and aside from the ending that has always been my main judgement call that he is a bad writer because they did indeed ruin the game, for me as well. To generalize a bit, all the missions Mac wrote include characters being less intelligent and he generally underestimates his audience's intelligence. On Thessia there's the Crucible curse again where suddently all characters assume it will somehow just kill all reapers even though they state multiple times they don't know what it does, and in the mission Shepard is like "Just a little further to the Prothean VI and we'll win this war!". It's too blunt and makes Shepard sound stupid.

Also as a side note, in that Bioware Pulse interview with Mac, I've always disliked how he said something like "Yeah, it's there's backstory maybe you know it, maybe you don't, and yeah, there's giant cool robots you have to kill", and I know he's trying to assume position of his audience, but it feels like he completely misunderstands what about the Reapers seem appealing to fans. Or maybe he's just appealing to newcomers who think ME3 is transformers in game-form. The whole war idea just irritates me, and that Anderson and the alliance is holding back on Earth when they basically should have no chance to even scratch a sovereign-class reaper. So much stupidity in ME3 but that also happens because the game is on a bigger and less believable scale.

Modifié par Linkenski, 26 novembre 2013 - 10:11 .

[Linkenski]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

How has this thread not been locked?

It's good guidepoints for BW when they make ME4 ^^

[Pee Jae]

'kay. I'll bite before the thread gets locked for being necro'd:

1. The trial. What trial? Exactly.
2. Tali's face. Yeah, I know, time and money constraints.. still, lazy.
3. Microtransactions. Randomly generated items at that.
4. Eavesderping side missions. Didn't like them in 2, still don't.
5. The original ending. (s)

Which is not to say I don't like Mass Effect 3. Most of it is tons of fun. But, those nitpicks... man, do they add up.

[zed888]

1- Endings. EC and original.
2- Rachni
3- Cerberus
4- Geth
5- Shepard

[KaiserShep]

iakus wrote...

1) Marginalizing most of the ME1 and ME2 characters who aren't named Liara or Garrus

What about Tali? She doesn't get marginalized. In fact she's key to getting the optimal resolution to one of the biggest arcs in the game. It's really only ME2's cast that gets the short end of the stick, and you can blame that solely on the suicide mission, because their disposability takes away from their potential impact on the next game. 

2) Grand Theft Shepard.  My Shep ended up becoming Bioware's Shep thanks to autodialogue, forced emotion, and railroaded plot.

If I cared to take the time, I would've gone through ME1's lines to see just how many options are actually false, and lead to the same dialogue. Only difference, I guess, is that ME1's Shepard rarely emotes, and ME2's Shepard can be led to come off as either a sanctimonious sap at times or a jerkwad/psycho if you go purely paragon or renegade. 

How is the plot of ME3 any more railroaded than the other games in the series? The only difference in ME1 is that the priority missions can be played in whatever order you like, but you become a Spectre, stop the geth on Feros, kill Benezia, destroy Saren's krogan breeding facility and kill Sovereign no matter what. In ME2, the plot is also railroaded. No matter what, Shepard is killed off and forced to work with Cerberus, even if by all rights, a pro-Alliance Shepard should be free to say "screw this, I'm leaving these nutjobs behind." Of course, the plot demands that there is no other option, since it seems like it's either work with Cerberus or everyone dies. Shep can complain, but that doesn't affect the plot. 

[Iakus]

KaiserShep wrote...

What about Tali? She doesn't get marginalized. In fact she's key to getting the optimal resolution to one of the biggest arcs in the game. It's really only ME2's cast that gets the short end of the stick, and you can blame that solely on the suicide mission, because their disposability takes away from their potential impact on the next game.

Tali does play an important part in the final Rannoch choice (potentially)  But as a swuadmate, you get her very late in the game, and have few conversations with her

If I cared to take the time, I would've gone through ME1's lines to see just how many options are actually false, and lead to the same dialogue. Only difference, I guess, is that ME1's Shepard rarely emotes, and ME2's Shepard can be led to come off as either a sanctimonious sap at times or a jerkwad/psycho if you go purely paragon or renegade. 

And given how many conversation options lead to such binary chcoies, there's little you can do to avoid that.

How is the plot of ME3 any more railroaded than the other games in the series? The only difference in ME1 is that the priority missions can be played in whatever order you like, but you become a Spectre, stop the geth on Feros, kill Benezia, destroy Saren's krogan breeding facility and kill Sovereign no matter what. In ME2, the plot is also railroaded. No matter what, Shepard is killed off and forced to work with Cerberus, even if by all rights, a pro-Alliance Shepard should be free to say "screw this, I'm leaving these nutjobs behind." Of course, the plot demands that there is no other option, since it seems like it's either work with Cerberus or everyone dies. Shep can complain, but that doesn't affect the plot. 

I can't argue with ME2, at least, because I agree.  But ME1 at least allowed for a range of possible reasons why SHepard goes along with becoming a Spectre.  Justice, revenge, glory, etc.

In ME3, The player's not even in control of much of the conversation, let alone given the option to supply a motivation.  Take Thessia.  Shepard has no say in how he/she feels about what happened there.  It's forced, railroaded emotion, Even DA2 at least gave us three chocies.

[KENNY4753]

Do I only get to choose 5?

1. The Bratalyst
2. The Crucible/The Reaper Off-Swith
3. The Ending "choices", with or without the Extended Butt dlc
4. Laziness- ranging from stock photos to autodialogue to magic Avengers
5. EMS- Everything just becoming worth a number.

[KaiserShep]

iakus wrote...

I can't argue with ME2, at least, because I agree.  But ME1 at least allowed for a range of possible reasons why SHepard goes along with becoming a Spectre.  Justice, revenge, glory, etc.

If I remember correctly, Shepard is only asked why he/she joins the Alliance, not the Spectres. Shepard's induction into the Spectres is entirely because Shepard was already being considered since the beginning, the Council needed a single agent that can hunt him down, and as a gesture to the humans, who were also the likeliest candidates to gain a seat on the Council. Shepard him/herself never actually expresses interest in becoming part of this group. Anderson and Nihilus basically push this idea forward.

In ME3, The player's not even in control of much of the conversation, let alone given the option to supply a motivation.  Take Thessia.  Shepard has no say in how he/she feels about what happened there.  It's forced, railroaded emotion, Even DA2 at least gave us three chocies.

I'm not sure I follow you on the point of motivation. Can you give a specific example in which Shepard should have provided motivation for a certain action in the game? From what I remember, Shepard is seldom asked for any reasons (example: Eve/Bakara asking why you're helping on Sur'kesh, which has two distinct responses), and much of this is overshadowed by Shepard's primary objective, which is to simply to rally enough forces to destroy the reapers.

I'll give you Thessia, though I think the most reasonable extent to which this should vary is simply being sympathetic to the asari's plight, or being angry with them and expressing that their leadership is entirely to blame for this. I know some people want to agree with Joker's quip, and I was among them, but thinking about it more, I found the idea rather silly, because life in the galaxy is on the brink of extinction, the bad guy got away with the extremely crucial data. The days of ME2's psychoShep are pretty much over. Fun as it was, it's totally incongruous to the setting.

[Eryri]

1. The assertion by Star Jar / the writers that "Conflict is inevitable". Cynical, misanthropic, and contradicted by the game's own narrative - particularly Rannoch if you do it right.

2. The green ending. Ridiculous space magic that doesn't even have the decency to be played for laughs. Instead it asks to be taken deadly seriously with it's melancholy, sepia-toned flashbacks and sad piano music while it plasters circuitry on leaves.

3. The other 2 coloured endings. Everything relating to the Crucible in fact.

4. The requirement for the Reapers to be lazy and / or incompetent to allow us to win. Harbinger, I'm looking at you. Did you have to nip home to check if you'd left the gas on or something?

5. Bugs - spinning heads / eyeballs, weapon sound effects that don't shut off, and the sticky floor panel of death behind Joker's chair.

Modifié par Eryri, 27 novembre 2013 - 10:37 .

[shodiswe]

1. Destroy Ending
2. Ending buildup
3. Zombie shooting priority earth, no feeling of teamplay, assisting and getting assisted.
4. Catalyst encounter.... Seriosuly, one who's busy bleading to death and the other is a hologram or some kind of mental projection... Also, where is the drama in that.
5. Priority earth, lacking alternative objectives or actual choices, or a feeling of teamplay and accomplishment. Minimal feeling of supporting and being supported by a team.

EDIT: I guess it could have been worse though, but I was expecting something better, I was kind of getting bored during priority Earth.
Truth be told, the Mutiplayer rounds are more varried and requier more accomplishments, like recovery, assasination, sabotage, supportign allied efforts, and accomplishing goals than Priority earth.
Stabilising allies before they go critical and die on you.

Modifié par shodiswe, 27 novembre 2013 - 10:48 .

[KaiserShep]

Eryri wrote...

5. Bugs - spinning heads / eyeballs, weapon sound effects that don't shut off, and the sticky floor panel of death behind Joker's chair.

I suspect that it's some kind of tradition that this Shepard demon's trap exist in every single game somewhere in the galaxy.

[SNascimento]

I don't believe ME3 sucks, but I'll just leave my 5 main issues with it:

1) Complet disregard with ME2 squadmates.

2) The overall dialogue. There are some good moments, but overall I though it was the worse in the trilogy. Autodialogue is not bad by definition, but it was badly implemented, also, having only two choices instead of three for answer futher damaged it. Not to mention a lot of conversations were just too short, and I felt Shepard should have said much more.

3) Interrupts. They were outstanding in ME2, especially the renegades. Yet in ME3 they were mostly terrible. The one with the Dalatrass, Wrex and others were shameful.

4) Too much focus on Cerberus and not nearly enough on the Reapers.

5) No Harbinger.

[LegioDamnatus]

While I think that ME3 is at least decent, there are some things that just rubbed me the wrong way. These are, als follows:

- Limiting dialogue choice - Not just autodialogue, but also the removal of neutral options, which I found especially lacking during the Rannoch arc.

- Disc-locked content - Whoever came up with this ought to receive a spanking. If it's on the disc, I should be able to access it without editing the coalesced.

- Squadmates of ME2 - Why for the love of god can't I take at least some of them back onto the Normandy? Like Zaeed, Kasumi, Miranda or Jacob.

- Cerberus - FAR too much focus is given to the second coming of the Sith Empire. So they have a huge army. Alright. Where did the huge fleet come from? And don't even get me started on that ridiculous armor the troopers wear...

-The Crucible - So we have this poorly introduced giant space ****** which will defeat the Reapers... how, exactly? And yet everyone latches onto it as if it's the galaxy's salvation.

I'll add more later.

Modifié par LegioDamnatus, 27 novembre 2013 - 12:38 .

[HarbingerCollector]

t_skwerl wrote...
2. Tali's face. Yeah, I know, time and money constraints.. still, lazy.

time constraints not so much the Tali's Face 'reveal'  was announced already in July 2011.
money i would say no(jessica chobot\\diana allers), i think that they just didn't care about.

KaiserShep wrote...

iakus wrote...

1) Marginalizing most of the ME1 and ME2 characters who aren't named Liara or Garrus

What about Tali? She doesn't get marginalized. In fact she's key to getting the optimal resolution to one of the biggest arcs in the game. It's really only ME2's cast that gets the short end of the stick, and you can blame that solely on the suicide mission, because their disposability takes away from their potential impact on the next game. 

2) Grand Theft Shepard.  My Shep ended up becoming Bioware's Shep thanks to autodialogue, forced emotion, and railroaded plot.

If I cared to take the time, I would've gone through ME1's lines to see just how many options are actually false, and lead to the same dialogue. Only difference, I guess, is that ME1's Shepard rarely emotes, and ME2's Shepard can be led to come off as either a sanctimonious sap at times or a jerkwad/psycho if you go purely paragon or renegade. 

How is the plot of ME3 any more railroaded than the other games in the series? The only difference in ME1 is that the priority missions can be played in whatever order you like, but you become a Spectre, stop the geth on Feros, kill Benezia, destroy Saren's krogan breeding facility and kill Sovereign no matter what. In ME2, the plot is also railroaded. No matter what, Shepard is killed off and forced to work with Cerberus, even if by all rights, a pro-Alliance Shepard should be free to say "screw this, I'm leaving these nutjobs behind." Of course, the plot demands that there is no other option, since it seems like it's either work with Cerberus or everyone dies. Shep can complain, but that doesn't affect the plot. 

Tali is important for the Quarian\\Geth Peace,but we know what happens at the end that invalidates our efforts if we want to do what's right, the 'true' dialogue for Tali (a non-zaeed like conversation) after she joins full time is 1 istance only.aside from the 'romance scene' ,after that instance turns into the classic Zaeed clone n°7 until the endgame,i liked her dialogue\\romance (aside from the lack of a 3d model and the 'wonderful photo),but I  would have wanted to ask questions,choose my response,i don't want dialogue being chosen by the game bioware.
take in consideration that Casey Hudson and Mac Walters wanted to remove Tali as a full squadmate and ruin her like what happened to Miranda\\Jack\\Mordin\\Thane\\Legion,but Garrus not,even if him appeared for 2 games just like Tali.
Liara Got even a pandering DLC to rekindle the romance that modifies one of the key parts of the game(the shadow broker being a single beast),Ashley gets a brief horizon dissapointed hug,and in ME3 'Sex Doll' version of Ashley is here.and after the citadel coup the zaeed clone n°4 is aboard.
i agree with you that ME2 pretty screwed many story parts that were present,but at least it didn't ruin the reapers
ME2 canonized the fact that only liara cared about my Shepard,when in reality all my companions cared and would have killed to have my Shepard back
Bioware in Me3 'canonized'  that you're a paragonish hero,no matter who you were before,that your only must be friends\\romance to liara garrus,otherwise is a 'non-canon\\invalid\\never happened' romance\\friendship,that you must care about the child on earth more than the squadmates you fought side by side with,that Edi's body was necessary for her character,when for example,my shepard's best friend was Wrex and Mordin\\Thane being immediately after and Tali my LI,hate on me,but i didn't like Garrus.
ME3 was more railroded as variables played a minor role,and ME3 sequences were scripted,and cannot vary in any way,like Thessia outcome or Thane vs Kai Leng\\Earth Battle.Legion's Death
ME1 was the first of the series,and these new ideas weren't used until ME2.and at least it used some things like letting the council die.
ME3 makes your spectre decision in ME2 useless,as you're reinstated anyway

[dreamgazer]

My top issues with a heavily-flawed but still enjoyable ME3:

1. Chobot / Reporter Situation
2. From Ashes Day-One DLC
3. War Assets Poorly Implemented in Priority: Earth
4. Rachni Choice Results
5. Slim ME2 Character Integration

Bonus: Lack of Neutral Options for Dialogue / Conflict Resolutions

[FeliciaM]

I liked Mass Effect 3 just fine AFTER the EC, and once all the DLC was released. Though I still have a few qualms about certain things that some people have already listed here. But I didn't read the entire thread because I'm in one of my lazy moods.

1. Synthesis Ending, I'll never choose it. It makes no sense, why bother?
2. I miss the N7 missions, I know we had a few of those in me3, but they all dealt with Cerberus :/
3. No vehicle exploration, I'm one of the VERY few people that actually like the Hammerhead side quests. And while I like the exploration factor in me1, I hated the Mako. But there wasn't anything for me to hate OR love in me3.
4. War assets. I know I'm not the only one that wanted to see the rachni kicking ass and taking names! Or to see the Geth dropping in on Earth and wiping out Reaper troops.
5. Closure, while I enjoyed the game. And I prefer the high EMS destroy ending, the breath scene is not enough closure for me. Does Shepard die, does Shepard live?! I know people hand canon it, but it still drives me nuts. Why do you give me this character (and a bunch of others) to care about, and not give me enough closure about them! I didn't even see what Garrus did in the slide show at the end.

It seemed I got some closure for more minor characters. But not the ones that I truly cared about! I like Major Coats, but I don't care if he's helping rebuild. I'm sure everyone is. /endrant