514 réponses à ce sujet

[Maxster_]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

I don't judge ME3 because of the ending. I fully realize the ending is only a tiny part of the bullsh*t and nonsensical drivel that we got in ME3. It's not just the ending. The whole game stinks from start to finish.

[Hexley UK]

Auld Wulf wrote...

The ending of Mass Effect 3 proved it was an intelligent game, one written by a clever, progressive thinker, who clearly wanted the story to mean something. Not everyone's going to understand a story like that, but that says more about the reader than it does the story.

It was plagurised directly from Deus Ex and made no sense in the context of this game...in no way was it intelligent.

The "You don't get it" argument has been done to death and time and time again pro-enders have been proven wrong and shown that it is in fact you who don't understand why the ending is as bad as it is.

Read the sig for more info.

Modifié par Hexley UK, 03 février 2013 - 05:26 .

[o Ventus]

Nightwriter wrote...

Yeah, there is really too much good drama in ME3 for it to be remotely justifiable to call it a mindless GoW shootout. People are perfectly valid in saying that auto-dialogue rendered the game into a movie, and that this shift is extremely objectionable, but the movie was too well written in too many places for it to be reducible to a shallow shoot-em-up.

Good drama? You mean like Legion's needless (and senseless) sacrifice on Rannoch? Or being forced into losing to Kai Leng on Thessia? Or Thane going full-retard during his battle with Kai Leng? How about the little boy dying in the beginning, because "you can't help me"?

It's drama, but it certanly isn't good (or intelligent).

[ohaithere]

What does intelligent even mean to people anymore?

[someguy1231]

I learned a long time ago that the only people who pull the old "It's the journey that matters" defense are people who don't want to discuss the ending and are implicitly admitting that it's a bad ending as a result.

[Vic7im]

someguy1231 wrote...

I learned a long time ago that the only people who pull the old "It's the journey that matters" defense are people who don't want to discuss the ending and are implicitly admitting that it's a bad ending as a result.

Exactly, it's like saying "oh well it sucked, but since I've lost so much time (and money) on this I'll focus on something else, like... erm... THE JOURNEY, YES! BRILLIANT! JOURNEY TRAMPLES ENDING!!11one"

Modifié par Vic7im, 03 février 2013 - 06:12 .

[Reorte]

Hexley UK wrote...

Auld Wulf wrote...

The ending of Mass Effect 3 proved it was an intelligent game, one written by a clever, progressive thinker, who clearly wanted the story to mean something. Not everyone's going to understand a story like that, but that says more about the reader than it does the story.

It was plagurised directly from Deus Ex and made no sense in the context of this game...in no way was it intelligent.

The "You don't get it" argument has been done to death and time and time again pro-enders have been proven wrong and shown that it is in fact you who don't understand why the ending is as bad as it is.

Read the sig for more info.

I know, by now I'm really not sure whether to laugh or cry at people who think that there's anything clever about it. The only thing I don't understand is how anyone can actually think that there is anything smart.

[The Interloper]

Maxster_ wrote...
They could never finish said reaper, there is no point for Shepard to fight them other than to save some minor colonies(major like Terra Nova a protected by fleet). 

Not on their own. That's not the point. The point was that Shepard was looking for a way to stop the reapers and the collectors were the best lead (that the writers wrote into the story, anyway). It's true that ME2 mischaracterizes this quest somwhat as being all about "saving the colonies" and they should have had the crucible plans in the collector base or something to flesh it out, but from the standpoint of the core plot there's nothing wrong with Shepard pursuing the collectors.

Maxster_ wrote...
There is no Dark Energy plot.Stop presenting your headcanon as a fact.

Lead writer Drew Karpyshyn explicitly stated in an interview (at strategy informer)that while they were writing mass effect 2, they had the dark energy ending in mind and thus put in things like Haestrom and the human reaper to set it up for ME3. That's not headcannon. Sorry.

Maxster_ wrote...
Object to what, exactly? Your baseless statement that garbage writing in Tuchanka arc, which led to nonsensical exposition is insignificant?Same as is in Priority:Earth, so what's the difference? Because you like that mission, you are willing to ignore nonsense and garbage writing. 

Again, I explained in detail what the difference was. It's not a matter of exposition and detail. It's a matter of basic narrative consistancy, character-driven action and player choice. Good pacing helps. Tuchanka has these things. Priority Earth does not.

And come to think of it... I believe it was you that said that "Derperus" had no reason to interfere with the genophage mission, but as both pro-human racists and as servants of the reapers they had every reason to not want the Krogan race to be cured and to enter the war. What gives?

Maxster_ wrote...
And saying that i must also.

I think you ought to, not that you must. Please do not mischaracterize my position.

Maxster_ wrote...
His base is not council chamber.

Yeah, it basically is. He's trusted there. It's practically his home country.

Maxster_ wrote...
And one spectre is not a threat to a C-Sec. He would be killed very fast.

Lol, some street cops like Harkin and Bailey versus the most dangerous assassin in the galaxy, who can take on whole platoons of hardened combat troopers, who is legally considered to be above the law and thus C-Sec has no authority to stop him from going where he pleases anyway, and the cops think he's on their side to boot? That seems totally implausible to you? Plus he could smuggle mercs or geth onto the station to help. He's done it before. 

As for the citadel fleet, you forget that the fleet Soveriegn fought was not the normal fleet; it was a special "joint-species" fleet assembled in response to the threat of Saren. Or if that joint-species fleet was the Citadel fleet, it still needed to be assembled, and it wouldn't have been assembled if Saren hadn't telegraphed his hostile intentions months in advance.

Maxster_ wrote...
I don't enjoy garbage writing, that's for sure.

What's the deal with Saren's plan, then? You seem to have enjoyed that.

Maxster_ wrote...
ME3 fails because it's story being pure nonsense, which dumbed down characters and destroyed overarching series plot. That is of course only part of the reason, other being horrible dialogues and exposition(like intro) aka bad writing, nonsensical garbage like Citadel coup, autodialogue, fetch quests, reaper-chase minigame(lore-butchering nonsense) etc. Ending, of course, is a whole other level of garbage writing, but ME3 is already horrible written and horrible designed long before that.

Now you're just throwing out vague insults. "Pure nonsense." "Nonsensical garbage." And there's a distinction between "flawed" and "horrible." 

Maxster_ wrote...
Reapers just sat in dark space for no reason for a thousands of years of Sovereign's machinations, when they could just fly into a galaxy in 0.5-3 years losing completely nothing.

Wrong; they lose the element of surprise, and waiting for the Citadel relay to be activated gives them the ability to take control of the citadel and the relay network. Without that, the attack becomes much messier and they take much heavier casulties then they do in most cycles. Plus, the immortal machine gods are, as it turns out, fairly patient. This is all explained more than once.

I don't know how you can sit there and talk about what is and is not nonsensical in this story when, in all honesty, you keep displaying gratuitous gaps in your understanding of series lore. Or my basic argument.

Modifié par The Interloper, 03 février 2013 - 06:55 .

[silverexile17s]

KingZayd wrote...

Armass81 wrote...

Cakefirsto wrote...

Rather than trying to expand on the formula which set Mass Effect as one of those rpg-shooter hybrids which grow more frequent as the years pass by, Bioware decided to dismiss it completely in favour of Michael Bay-grade explosions and the like. Mass Effect 3 starts off almost a year after ME2 where Shepard has done nothing of note except ending up on Earth and is being on trial by the Alliance for the **** you've done. That's nice, "No where did it state how he came to quit for Cerberus" I mean, if you saved the Collector base, the Illusive man woul be quite pleased with himself.

Anyway, to start off the game: auto-dialogue sets in with little to no player input for minutes on end, probably one of their new innovations when impatient people found dialogue boring and then explosions occur and the Reapers are there. The entire galaxy acts shocked. Now, maybe I expected too much from the writers but the pacing is horrible. This isn't just for the intro--though the intro does a wonderful job of showing it--with the entire game having Shepard talking without the player's input and the game hoping to imagine you know **** when you don't before explosions happen everywhere. It almost seems like they were trying to build a blockbuster movie rather than write the end of the trilogy, Mac Walters and Casey Hudson being supervised by Michael Bay who's constantly yelling "MORE EXPLOSIONS" throughout the entire creation process.

In addition to this, importing serves little to no purpose

The consequences which were advertised for years now, since the very inception of the series, becoming meaningless and serving nothing but wasting a writer's five seconds to create a new line for the sake of importing.

I feel like I've been robbed, not simply because of my purchase of ME3 being a complete waste but the entire trilogy built up absolutely nothing

Unable to play ME1 or ME2 anymore, ME3 spoils the entire experience. If I wanted automatic dialogue "Normandy plays a big role here", crappy plot, and one-liners I would find myself playing Gears of War, least they have a slightly rewarding ending (Yes, ME3 ends on a downer note that tries to be optimistic and leaves you with hundreds of questions, none which they try to answer). Bioware has fallen hard as of yet, I don't trust they'll be able to stand anymore. Or maybe they will afterall,  if they change their whole next Mass Effect game into a CoD clone, maybe they'll become a top seller and can continue to milk for eternity on end.

Back to the  player choices. The choices in the game are gathered from ME1 and ME2 to culminate and finally reveal what consequences these choices will have in the final battle against reapers. They however have proceeded to royally screw that up by ignoring almost all of the choices in ME1 and ME2. Rachni exterminated? Doesn't matter theres some behind the orange juice in the great big galaxy fridge. Destroyed or kept the collector base? Bah who cares that wasn't important infact it was so unimportant we won't even talk about it at all. 

I mean to invent something stupid like the galaxy readiness was horrible. Some of your important choices, such as the collector base deal, will give you some extra points in this depending on what you did. To quote Ted Mosby from How I met your mother "Cmon?"

I understand people that answer posts similar to mine, just give up dude, it doesn't matter. Cause in truth, that's exactly right. But other people that keep on going on how it was a good ending, and no one understood it, and how it was a good game overall.

HOW, are you just ignoring all the facts layed out on your table or are you so used to todays generations of games thay are poorly made cause they know they can make a big profit out of it anyway? 

A lot of features and jaw dropping stuff was missing, I mean, you are suppose to be make a really spectacular game, not dumb down for example *cough* *cough* the citadel, big pile of **** right there.  I can mention tons of stuff but let's just make it short with that. We all knew this was the last game for Shepard, or so you Bioware have said. That SHOULD mean we are gonna get this really awesome game with a possibly even better plot and locations and features then the previous games! But, we just couldn't get that no. 

And I simply don't understand why they are so afraid to introduce female aliens. We literally went visiting a salarian homeworld, and as I have came to understand from reading out of the codex: The  Salarian females tend to stay at home cause they make up 10% of their population. They play roles in politic and what not, so maybe a diplomat of the sort, a female salarian would have tended to you when you landed?

Well, that wasn't the stuff I expected to be honest, it's just icing on the cake. But there is still tons of stuff that should have been in the game for a FINAL end to a trilogy. 

And correct me if I am wrong, but I only found one place to dance, and that dance last for what 2 seconds at most? They dumbed down all those small interactive stuff (dancing was an example), which creates a good atmoshpere for a game, especially a RPG.

And for every DLC released I facepalm. There was, ONE chance to save the game "They have gone beyond that now" and that was the indoc theory. 


I am not some hardcore indoc theory guy, I'm just simply saying that would have been a lot better then the **** we got, and could have saved what could've been one of the best RPG's. They would have had plenty of time to fix such a free fix DLC instead of the extended cut that did  nothing. People were happy with it for some reason, even though it like I said, did nothing. Your so called "big" choices that were suppose to have different kind of impacts still makes squat ****, maybe that's your cup of tea? If someone here is yet to play a Mass Effect game, start with Mass Effect 3, cause the other games doesn't matter if you go after Biowares books.

One last thing I wanna bring up. We spend 2 games finding squadmates, that's not something you should be doing for a final, and even you include it, they should be found rather quickly. What they should focus on is not fetching squadmates, it's saving the galaxy afterall. 

People that is "for" the game, seem to always make threads or state that people just disliked the ending, it's not a bad game...

They couldn't be more wrong. These are people that are so CLOSED in their minds they cannot see the facts layed out everywhere and the immense faults, plot holes and I can go onto mention **** forever. IT WAS NOT JUST THE ENDING. It was the WHOLE game. 

So yeah, that's all I got to say. Now I am gonna go look for all the harbringer content that got lost in my installation of Mass Effect 3, may space magic lead the way 

O Drew Karpyshyn, Where Art Thou?

If it was the whole game you so seethingly seem to loathe, how could IT simply fix it for you? Just asking.

Probably because it keeps the lore established In ME1 and ME2 untarnished.

But the lore IS NEVER DAMAGED. Just left unexplained. NOTHING from ME1 & ME2 contrdicts ME3 at ALL.
There are some points I agree on you with, and some that I do not. From the beginning:

First of, if the Collector Base is saved, Shepard makes it clear that the Illusive Man BETTER not screw everyone over and go power mad with what he's been given (which he does), or else Shepard will be coming for him. THAT seems like a threat, and also seems like a resegnation, hense James' comment on Mars: "didn't you basically tell Cerberus to screw off after you iradiated that Collector Base they were after?" Shepard says: "More or less."
The Illusive Man just takes it better, because he and Shepard are on better terms if the base is spared.

And the Reapers hitting Earth was foreshadowed back on the Collector Ship, when your crew comments that the only way the Collectors could possibly fill all the pods was if they hit Earth. And AGAIN when it was revealed that humans were the race selected to create the next Sovergien-class Reaper from.
Now I DO agree with you that the pacing of the story was bad, feeling rushed. We didn't even get time to see Earth pre-invasion before the Reapers tore it up. Still, that they are surprised is EXPECTED. They spent three years denying the Reapers existed, and now they have no choice but to accept they were wrong.

And you are wrong about imports not mattering. Without improts, Wrex, Samara, Jack, Grunt, and (I think) Jacob are automatically considered dead, Kasumi and Zaeed are considered never recruted, and therefore die in their respective camios, and It's impossible to save Miranda from death in the game without a loyalty import. Kirrahe is also treated as dead. Also, peace between the geth and quarians is impossible because you are not counted for Legion and Tali's loyalty missions, so you'd have no choice to kill one race or the other, possibly adding Tali to the death toll. The rachni are automatically always evil and saving them will damage you, and the Feros colinests are considered dead, as is the Council. Alliance forces take a big hit as one of there divisions was wiped out stopping Kenson in Arrival, if you didn't do the DLC. Liara fails to save Feron if you don't help her with the Shadow Broker. David and Gavin Archer both are absent, and dead in this playthrough.

So in short, if you don't import, you are screwed, because most of your old squadmates either are dead, or will die.

So don't rant about no consiquences. There are several, but none are really as big as how you can fail to stop the quarian/geth war peacefully.
No one should feel robbed like that. It's not Horrible like you rant it is.

And you are being far to pessimestic. ME3 doesn't ruin the other to games. In fact, they play through the other games instead of ME3. ME3 doens't spoil the ENTIRE EXPERANCE. That's only if you are fanatically dovout in the game. If anything, the only pain is the ending. The rest is good. And I doub't they are going to do an GoW clone. Their specalities are RPG's, as as shown by Dragon Age III, not a formula they plan to stray from.

And the outcome of both Rannoch and Tuchanka are DEPENDANT on your past imports, as well as the fates of 80% of your old crew. Player imports are CRUCIAL to enjoying the game PERIOD. I garuntee you would have a FAR WORSE TIME playing without imports.

EMS was the ONLY WAY  to measure all the variables in the game. 1,000+ variables, plus 500+ more from how you affect those choices in ME3? Not possible with any other system. Far too complex to do in an efficant and clean manor. It would be expensive to code, and likely cost and be as difficult to actualize as an entire segmant of the gameplay itself.
So no, I'm not upset about the EMS.

And YOU are acting NO DIFFERENT if YOU ignore all that WAS right with the game. Your as bad as the people you blame if you do that. The game was good overall, in spite of the bad ending. Even independant internet Reviewers that actually keep it all in perspective, like "Angry Joe" and "JeremyJhans" will tell you that flaws and all, it's still worth the price.

And WHAT THE HELL were you talking about? The Citadel felt more like it's ME1 rendition then ME2. The game's plot wasn't horrible - it didn't surpass ME1. But it surpassed ME2's plot, as THAT was just a giant side-quest game.

And that was a MILITARY BASE on Sur'Kesh that you saw. You really thought that a diplomat would be on a military base? They'd be in a palace or something, not a military base. Female salarians weren't expected to be that dfferent. Krogan females don't look that different, just more petiete then the avarage krogan. We got a female turian in ME3: Omega.

And it's DANCING. There is a war in the game across the galaxy and you are critizising the DANCING?

And would you have rather they NOT made the EC? The ONLY problem with the ME3 DLC was PRICING. The content is good, especally Leviathan. Omega is the bland one in the trio of DLC's currently released, but there's another one coming out, so I reserve judgement till they all are out.
And I doubt Indoctrination would BE any better then what we got.

EC fixed teleporting squadmates by giving a plausible reason for them to leave. Gave background to the Catalyst and the cycles, and the endings. We see the Normandy and the Crew survive. We see the galaxy rebuild.
Is it a perfect ending? No. But the EC made it make SENSE now, which is more then the original cut. ANd the epolouges actually show THERE IS A DIFFERENCE between the endings. NO ONE can say they are carbon copies anymore.

Also, you aren't activally looking for your squaddies in ME3. You stumble onto them. They are concidental discoveries.

The only people that are closed-minded are the people that BLATENTLY IGNORE ALL THE GAMES PROS. People like YOU are ABSOULTLY NO BETTER, if YOU refuse to see the Pros. You can't accuse someone of something, then do it yourself. It makes you a bloody hypocrite. You can't point out the faults, and then IGNORE the games strong points as well. Everyone I've seen hase still rated the game in 7s and 8s, even the normally pickey independant reviewers, so the game is CLEARLY not as bad as you butthurt whine it is.

And just a tip for you: Drew Karpyshyn INVENTED THE CRUCIBLE. It was part of his concept for the plan or the Dark Energy plot since mid-ME2. HE created it, NOT Walters and Hudson.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 13 mars 2013 - 03:55 .

[silverexile17s]

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

[quote]The Interloper wrote...

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...
Like C-Sec would allow Saren to operate citadel control. Or Citadel fleet would allow a suspicious alien ship to dock.[/quote]

Saren, one of the council's most trusted (and feared) agents, couldn't have pulled rank and bluffed his way into the control room of his own base? Also, you forget that the fleet that Sovy fought in ME1 had largely been assembled in response to the threat of Saren in the first place.
[/quote]
His base is not council chamber.
And one spectre is not a threat to a C-Sec. He would be killed very fast.
And council fleet existed always, at least from time of rachni war and krogan rebellion. C-Sec even had some space forces, as is council task force led by Destiny Ascension.
As for Shepard's warnings, council fleet and additional forces were spread across several relays.
[quote]
[quote]Maxster_ wrote...
Entire premise of ME2 makes absolutely no sense. They wanted to create a reaper from humans, and humans only, and majority of human population is on Earth, protected by almost entire Systems Alliance fleet.
And you saying, that a lone transport, who run away from one defence turret, and easily destroyed by a frigate, is a threat to an entire Systems Alliance fleet?
This excuse of a plot not only completely idiotic, it also displays Harbringer as a moron.
[/quote]

The implication is that the collectors did not intend to hit earth until the Reapers actually arrived and were around to help. They were just getting a head start on the HR by hitting small targets they could handle without backup. And the Dark Energy ending at least gave a reason as to why the collectors couldn't just wait a few years to start. I agree that Harbinger makes questionable strategetic decisions at points but that's a lesser issue.
[/quote]
This doesn't make any sense.
This means that entire ME2 story is meaningless.
They could never finish said reaper, there is no point for Shepard to fight them other than to save some minor colonies(major like Terra Nova a protected by fleet).
This only possible because Systems Alliance went full retard for no reason. Collectors were never a threat to SA, there is no reason ME2 even existing.

And there is no Dark Energy plot. None.
[quote]
[quote]Maxster_ wrote...
No. Dark energy was completely dropped in ME2.
And ME2 is just meaningless.
[/quote]

With all due respect, what the heck are you talking about? Dark energy clearly was set up, at least in part, in ME2, with the human reaper and Haestrom. Then it was dropped in ME3, which switched over to the synthetic nonsense. That rendered ME2 meaningless. Like I said, the fault lies with ME3.
[/quote]
There is no Dark Energy plot.
Stop presenting your headcanon as a fact.
ME2 story makes no sense even without ME3, so failure of ME2 story is ME2 fail, not ME3.
[quote]
[quote]Maxster_ wrote...Sure, if you like nonsensical drama. I bet your favorite mission is a Priority:Earth
[/quote]

I understand if you want to disagree, but your attempts at condescention and belittlement are only hurting yourself. I dislike Priority Earth very much and explained, in detail, why it is clearly distinct from all other instances of weak writing in the series, and why I forgive those but not Priority Earth. You have done almost nothing to address that other then vaguely stating "You're wrong" and your insinuation that I like Priority Earth strongly implies that you completely missed my point.
[/quote]
Lol.
Object to what, exactly? Your baseless statement that garbage writing in Tuchanka arc, which led to nonsensical exposition is insignificant?
Same as is in Priority:Earth, so what's the difference? Because you like that mission, you are willing to ignore nonsense and garbage writing.
And saying that i must also.
No.
[quote]
Also if a few vague or questionable details about the context of a situation render the whole thing absolutely, completely, 100 percent "nonsensical" and "idiotic" then you must not enjoy many stories (including ME1). ME3 fails because it doesn't properly display the effects of player choice, because it abandons it's emphasis on character at the most important moment, and because it completely changes the main conflict in the last five minutes. It does not fail because every little detail and logistic isn't entirely explained or made perfect strategetic sense. It would be nice if that were so, sure, but you have to know what battles you can win and the rigors of game development means that sometimes the story is going bend, and you just have to accept that. But there is a line somewhere,and it was at priority Earth that crossed that line, for me and for many others. Again, I already explained why.
[/quote]
I don't enjoy garbage writing, that's for sure.
ME3 fails because it's story being pure nonsense, which dumbed down characters and destroyed overarching series plot.
That is of course only part of the reason, other being horrible dialogues and exposition(like intro) aka bad writing, nonsensical garbage like Citadel coup, autodialogue, fetch quests, reaper-chase minigame(lore-butchering nonsense) etc.
Ending, of course, is a whole other level of garbage writing, but ME3 is already horrible written and horrible designed long before that.
[quote]
[quote]Maxster_ wrote...
reapers arrival nullifies overarching series plot
[/quote]

How so?
[/quote]
Reapers just sat in dark space for no reason for a thousands of years of Sovereign's machinations, when they could just fly into a galaxy in 0.5-3 years losing completely nothing.
There is no reason for ME1 to happen because of that, other than reaper deliberately allowed that to happen.
Even without the Catalyst.

[/quote]
1. For once, we agree. Saren had no real choice but to use the Conduit. Moct other plans where too risky. Besides, I'm sure indoctrination addled his mind a bit.

2. NOW your getting it. ME2's quest was basically a side mission. The point was that they were getting a head-start on the Huma Reaper for the arrival, and would have finished it in time had Shepard not killed it.
Also, the Alliance was having major problems in expansion and rebuilding. They were still struggling ro recover from the Battle of the Citadel (either trying to cement their athouraty if the Council was killed, or trying to rebuild their fleet if the Council was saved). So the last thing they needed was colonies pititioning to break away, like Horizon and Freedom's Progress. And the more lost, the more money down the drain. Money they can't waste.

And the Dark Energy plot was inrtoduced through hints regarding Haestrom's sun being destablized by Dark Energy, and Gianna Parasini on Ilium said her bosses wanted her to look into Dark Energy, as it was "suddenly an interest to a lot of people."
This was never developed on though.

3. Haestrom, and Tali's mission comments that Dark Enegry may be destablizing solar material.
Also, the Crucible itself was PART of that, as it itself is a Dark Energy weapon. Shepard calls it such when talking to Conrad Verner in ME3.
The Dark Energy plot EXISTED, but was cut when Drew left. Instead of making new elements, Walter and Hudson recycled the Crucible from Dark Energy plot to Deus Ex Machina Machine. THAT'S why it felt like an asspull to so many: They had no clue what to DO with it now that Drew was gone, so they winged it.
Surely you could tell by the drop in story execution quality?

4.Tuchanka was the BEST part of the game. All the story elements(Wrex on Virmire, Kirrahe survival camio, Maleon's data in the Mordin Loyalty mission,) All relevent elements come together for this. It was perfect in execution.
Earth, by stark contrast, feels like a demo placeholder, with the real level left missing. A straight corridor of a level in the last place we expected it.

5. Fly in over three years = unexpected losses, and the pain of fighting everyone at once, unable to pick them off one by one because no relay network access. And unable to take the Citadel because - Arms close at a moments notcie.
Citadel Trap = instint win, relay network controled, races segregated, picked off at leasure.

It in NO WAY nulifies the plot. It stalled the Reapers and made their job harder. Had they used the Citadel, the races would have fallen before ever using the Crucible.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 03 février 2013 - 09:23 .

[Argentoid]

I don't give a single frack about everyone's opinion about how ME3 is the black sheep of the franchise. I thought the trilogy was awesome. The ending was not, regardless.


Apart from the said ending, every single game has flaws here and there, in case anyone thinks ME3 should have been any short of perfect.

[VintageUtti]

Robhuzz wrote...

The ending is what's going to stick the most when you think back about the game, making it the most important part of the story. When you mess that up so badly the players will start looking at the game more negatively, more easily picking up other flaws that would otherwise be ignored or brushed aside.

I'll admit I have a wide taste when it comes to games and I wasn't bothered by the crappy main plot at first because I was looking forward towards seeing the final conclusion. If that had been decent at least, most of ME3's (imo) bigger mess ups (auto dialogue, forced emotion, boring fetch quests) would've been forgiven. The ending was just so ridiculously bad I started reflecting on the rest of ME3 and realized it really wasn't that great a game after all.

I feel exactly the same way. By the time I finished the Citadel Coup and had all the personal moments with the squadmates, I thought the game was amazing. Then I finished and couldn't help thinking about the ending and how bad it was, and then I went back and played the game on Insanity. That's when I started to notice things, like how woefully abrupt the introduction is, how the VS being a Spectre was almost pointless, how Thane's death was ridiculous, and how every ME2 squadmate got the shaft, etc. That's when the awfulness of the ending lessened, but the flaws of the rest of the game increased.

If this were any other game series, I would have been fine with the game as is. Not wonderful but pretty good. But I expected so much more from Bioware and it still aggravates me that so much potential went to waste.

[Armass81]

Whenever a new ending hate thread pops up, this comes to my mind.

Modifié par Armass81, 03 février 2013 - 09:30 .

[3DandBeyond]

ohaithere wrote...

What does intelligent even mean to people anymore?

To me it is something that is unpretentious and that stands on its own merit.  If someone has to say something is intelligent for it to be thought so, or looked at as if it is, then very likely it is not.  Intelligent is something that is self-explanatory.  It's like the straight line idea.  If you have to assume too many things are true to get from point A to point B, then intelligence is not in use.  And in some stories, intelligence at the end is obvious when the reader/viewer/player has a real "aha!" moment and things they thought might be true are revealed as true.

It's fine to have a story that is somewhat convoluted, but the end should reflect the beginning.  It should bring you back home.  So, regarding a story, intelligent is that the story never forgets what is being told nor how it's being told, nor does it forget its own internal promise.  Emotional content must always be there if the story appealed to the emotions.  A character-driven story must remember that it is one.  In effect, you must be consistent in remembering who is important, what is important, and why things are being done.  Ending a simple story simply is intelligent.  Ending a simple story in some twisted way, often is not.

If the tale is a simple boy meets girl and they keep trying to find their way back to each other to get married, then it's intelligent if the story remembers that.  If instead a writer decides that suddenly at the end an alien must drop in and force the two to get together, well no matter how well it's written it's not intelligent.   Same thing if you create a hardcore SF tale about the race to find some God gene that could be used to better the life of all and that others want to use to control the galaxy-it would not be intelligent at the end to suddenly make that story about a scientist just wanting to impress girls.

[3DandBeyond]

Argentoid wrote...

I don't give a single frack about everyone's opinion about how ME3 is the black sheep of the franchise. I thought the trilogy was awesome. The ending was not, regardless.


Apart from the said ending, every single game has flaws here and there, in case anyone thinks ME3 should have been any short of perfect.

"Every game features a lot of suckage" is no excuse.  The other games showed that ME3 could be better than it was and that it should have been better.  It's like saying all kids are bad so it's ok if yours is.  I don't think all games are bad nor are all game endings.  In fact, I've played a heck of a lot of really good games, even from small devs who amazingly enough began to gain a following of ever increasing numbers of fans because of the word of mouth about how good a game was.

[ohaithere]

The first part of your answer is what I was looking for, specifically "unpretentious". I don't understand when people always say something is smart of intelligent or clever or witty, it should speak for itself.

[BirdsallSa]

Mass Effect 3 is a great game with a satisfying ending. Nothing else needs to be said. Anyone who disagrees would complain about anything.

[The Night Mammoth]

BirdsallSa wrote...

Mass Effect 3 is a great game with a satisfying ending. Nothing else needs to be said. Anyone who disagrees would complain about anything.

Mass Effect 3 is a mediocre game with a terrible ending. Nothing else needs to be said. Anyone who disagrees would get suckered by any mildly emotional character stories put in front of them. 

See, I can troll too. 

[BirdsallSa]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

BirdsallSa wrote...

Mass Effect 3 is a great game with a satisfying ending. Nothing else needs to be said. Anyone who disagrees would complain about anything.

Mass Effect 3 is a mediocre game with a terrible ending. Nothing else needs to be said. Anyone who disagrees would get suckered by any mildly emotional character stories put in front of them. 

See, I can troll too. 

The critics and amount of heat Mass Effect 3 has generated agree with me though. Even the self entitled whiners are on here discussing the game 1 year later. It takes a masterpiece to inspire that sort of reaction.

[silverexile17s]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

BirdsallSa wrote...

Mass Effect 3 is a great game with a satisfying ending. Nothing else needs to be said. Anyone who disagrees would complain about anything.

Mass Effect 3 is a mediocre game with a terrible ending. Nothing else needs to be said. Anyone who disagrees would get suckered by any mildly emotional character stories put in front of them. 

See, I can troll too. 

I don't nessessarly agree with it being "mediocre."  But I agree that the original ending was horrible, and the Post-EC still leaves much to be desired, and It avarages out as generally a lesser quality in plot execution and continuitiy production then ME1 and ME2 to me.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 03 février 2013 - 11:01 .

[silverexile17s]

BirdsallSa wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

BirdsallSa wrote...

Mass Effect 3 is a great game with a satisfying ending. Nothing else needs to be said. Anyone who disagrees would complain about anything.

Mass Effect 3 is a mediocre game with a terrible ending. Nothing else needs to be said. Anyone who disagrees would get suckered by any mildly emotional character stories put in front of them. 

See, I can troll too. 

The critics and amount of heat Mass Effect 3 has generated agree with me though. Even the self entitled whiners are on here discussing the game 1 year later. It takes a masterpiece to inspire that sort of reaction.

Like Mindjack? THAT got alot of flack.
And Fallout 3 had a horrible ending. THEY weren't above altering the ending for fans. Another example that the Golden Age of Bethesda isn't over: ALL Fan Feedback is actually taken in stride.
Garbage work can get just as bad a reaction as exelant work. Look at Twilight.

And the general reaction is that the game is good in spite of "And ending that falls flat with a resounding thud" (PC Gamer).
So NO, the critics DON'T valadate your claim of the ENDINGS being any good. Nor do any REAL fans of the series. There is NO WAY for anyone to say the endings are THAT good.

[The Night Mammoth]

BirdsallSa wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

BirdsallSa wrote...

Mass Effect 3 is a great game with a satisfying ending. Nothing else needs to be said. Anyone who disagrees would complain about anything.

Mass Effect 3 is a mediocre game with a terrible ending. Nothing else needs to be said. Anyone who disagrees would get suckered by any mildly emotional character stories put in front of them. 

See, I can troll too. 

The critics and amount of heat Mass Effect 3 has generated agree with me though. Even the self entitled whiners are on here discussing the game 1 year later.

Is your name Marty McFly? Because you're talking about this like you've traveled here from the past, about eight months ago more specifically, from a time where people still thought the opinions of gaming journalists and the word 'entitled' still meant something. 

It takes a masterpiece to inspire that sort of reaction.

That's a little bit of a contradictory statement, don't you think? The people you're talking about aren't saying much good about ME3. 

[silverexile17s]

Paulomedi wrote...

I judge ME3 for its overall quality.

Tuchanka: stellar

Rannoch: good

All the rest: varies from good to mediocre.

endings (original): terrible

endings (extended cut + From Ashes + Leviathan): mediocre at best.




edit: expanding further, it's funny to see that half of the original writing team had left when ME3 was released. It's just not ME anymore. It's something related, similar, but not the same. Don't you people get this feeling of oddness while playing the game? I got it, and I think it was the writing shift that did it.

Funnier yet, Drew never played ME3.

I don't know if E'Toile played it, but it wuld be rather interesting if two of the best writers of the ME series haven't played the third installment of their own creationn.

I doubt that anyone could MISS the differences in the style. It wasn't BAD, but your also right: it didn't feel like the ME that we remembered anymore.
Alot of Drew's old plan was recycled. The Crucible was part of his Dark Energy plot, and was recycled by Walters and Hudson insetad of coming up with a new one. That seems a bit lazy in writing terms.

And I agree with you on your discripstions fo ME3's segments, although I personally count Thessia as among the better points (save the automatic Kai Leng loss. That was botched potental).

[3DandBeyond]

Reorte wrote...

Hexley UK wrote...

Auld Wulf wrote...

The ending of Mass Effect 3 proved it was an intelligent game, one written by a clever, progressive thinker, who clearly wanted the story to mean something. Not everyone's going to understand a story like that, but that says more about the reader than it does the story.

It was plagurised directly from Deus Ex and made no sense in the context of this game...in no way was it intelligent.

The "You don't get it" argument has been done to death and time and time again pro-enders have been proven wrong and shown that it is in fact you who don't understand why the ending is as bad as it is.

Read the sig for more info.

I know, by now I'm really not sure whether to laugh or cry at people who think that there's anything clever about it. The only thing I don't understand is how anyone can actually think that there is anything smart.

Yes, people who think it's intelligent are being snowed.  It's like the Emperor's New Clothes.  People are supposed to think it's really smart and original and cannot see that there's very little substance there.  And what is of some substance is stuff that wasn't just derived from other sources and then altered to fit ME-it was stuff that was just plopped into the game and not substantially altered to fit.  The choices are from Deus ex.  How Synthesis is shown is from a cartoon's ending, right down to the green and the beam.  Chaos and order is from Babylon 5. The thing is, each of these things fit the other stories they were in and do not fit in ME3.  It isn't that these sources were used for inspiration so someone decided to use similar ideas and reworked them to use ME3's themes.  ME3's themes are abandoned and these ones put in place.