514 réponses à ce sujet

[Dr_Extrem]

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.

this is the most interesting aspect.

the ending needed 3 alterations, to be passable (at best) and 2 of them are payed content.


if you have to pay extra, to get a slight clue wtf is going on, something went wrong. from ashes and leviathan should have been a part of the core game. they are too plot-relevant, to sell them as dlcs.

the ec did not change the ending - it only retconed the hell out of loved characters, added a painful and corny cliché-scene (that does not make any sense) and covered the original anti-climax with powder sugar.

Modifié par Dr_Extrem, 03 février 2013 - 11:41 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

Paulomedi wrote...
Leviathan was never in their plans. They hastly came up with it after the ending fiasco.

I just love the retroactive foreshadowing and attempted justification of the new central conflict.
"See the synthetics/organics conflict is totally legit! These really smart and at the same time really stupid cuttlefish noticed it way back when, that's enough proof right?"

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 04 février 2013 - 12:02 .

[silverexile17s]

Paulomedi wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

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).

Kai Leng is so poorly-written/implemented that it tarnishes Thessia. Very good mission with very bad ending. And not because we lost, but the way we did.

Kinda like the game itself in a way.
Good, but tarnished at the end, with the way it was done being more unplesent then the actual action itself. (Plus some screw-ups sprinkeled throughout)

[tanisha__unknown]

That's because the 1st, 2nd and 3rd game were awesome for the most of it and the ending, the great climax was just so insanely bad.

[silverexile17s]

Paulomedi wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

Paulomedi wrote...
Leviathan was never in their plans. They hastly came up with it after the ending fiasco.

I just love the retroactive foreshadowing and attempted justification of the new central conflict.
"See the synthetics/organics conflict is totally legit! These really smart and at the same time really stupid cuttlefish noticed it way back when, that's enough proof right?"

Trying to justify bad writing with bad writing.

That's bold.

The worst thing is that it actually works. BUT, not in ANY form of satisfying way. It smooths out bumps in the lore, and helps to show the Catalyst isn't lore breaking. But the path they took with the ending is...
Well, it's kinda like a concrete imprint in the ground. Like a mural in the cement. It gets these cracks everywhere, but nothing that major, but then the center get's a big gaping split (endings). And instead of repairing and filling in the cracks, they dump a layer of cement over it, making it evened out and smooth, but also making it bland and stark.
THAT'S how I see the endings. There were faults and cracks, and instead of fixing them individually and giving through explinations, they simply give a single once-over and leave nearly everything of importance to speculation, leaving the endings no longer horrible, but leaving them bland and unmemorible.
(Don't know how many get that analogy)
Leviathan tells you that the conflicts happened before, and that organic races died because of it, but because we don't actually see any examples or glimpses of this, like with the prothean Beacon, we have little to no attachment to the information or what it represents. It's not exciting. It's not a profound revelation. It's just..... there. It doesn't have the moving effect information like that SHOULD have, and something like THIS should have a reaction. That seems to indicate some form of failure in execution and/or writing.
It leaves you wanting and unsatisfied, to say the LEAST, regarding Leviathan's impact on the lore of the Reapers.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 04 février 2013 - 12:35 .

[KingZayd]

silverexile17s wrote...

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 Feros 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.

First of all: LOL. The only person here ranting is you. I feel as if you've mixed me up with someone else, as I never made most of these complaints.

The lore is damaged. The source of the damage? The Starchild. He makes the story stupid.

And yes, I'd rather they didn't make the EC. The EC was terrible, and only added more nonsense. What was before salvageable through extensive headcanon was just made even more stupid. Starchild's dialogue was made even worse, and the Crucible made even more stupid.

 The explanation for the squadmates leaving was also ridiculous. Men are dying right in front of you while heading to the beam, but one of Shepard's friends gets a little hurt, and they get an emergency evac. Shepard abandons the charge to send his buddies away, when the fate of the galaxy depends on this mission. Meanwhile the non-VIP's get slaughtered as they focus on what's truly important. Harbinger also conveniently ignores Shepard and the Normandy.

Again, why does it matter what  "Angry Joe" and "JeremyJhans" think? The best aspects of the Mass Effect series were it's  story and the universe it's set in. Both of which the ending ruined. ME2's plot was better because it didn't ruin the series, unlike ME3.

What is good about the gamedoes not outweigh the damage done to the lore, so yes I'd rather ME3 was not written and that I didn't buy it. But I would have been happy if the game had ended at some point before the elevator leading to the Starchild (without the EC)

[silverexile17s]

Paulomedi wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

Paulomedi wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

Paulomedi wrote...
Leviathan was never in their plans. They hastly came up with it after the ending fiasco.

I just love the retroactive foreshadowing and attempted justification of the new central conflict.
"See the synthetics/organics conflict is totally legit! These really smart and at the same time really stupid cuttlefish noticed it way back when, that's enough proof right?"

Trying to justify bad writing with bad writing.

That's bold.

The worst thing is that it actually works. BUT, not in ANY form of satisfying way. It smooths out bumps in the lore, and helps to show the Catalyst isn't lore breaking. But the path they took with the ending is...
Well, it's kinda like a concrete imprint in the ground. Like a mural in the cement. It gets these cracks everywhere, but nothing that major, but then the center get's a big gaping split (endings). And instead of repairing and filling in the cracks, they dump a layer of cement over it, making it evened out and smooth, but also making it bland and stark.
THAT'S how I see the endings. There were faults and cracks, and instead of fixing them individually and giving through explinations, they simply give a single once-over and leave nearly everything of importance to speculation, leaving the endings no longer horrible, but leaving them bland and unmemorible.
(Don't know how many get that analogy)
Leviathan tells you that the conflicts happened before, and that organic races died because of it, but because we don't actually see any examples or glimpses of this, like with the prothean Beacon, we have little to no attachment to the information or what it represents. It's not exciting. It's not a profound revelation. It's just..... there. It doesn't have the moving effect information like that SHOULD have, and something like THIS should have a reaction. That seems to indicate some form of failure in execution and/or writing.
It leaves you wanting and unsatisfied, to say the LEAST, regarding Leviathan's impact on the lore of the Reapers.

If you cover bad food with ketchup and moustard, it is still bad food.

Kinda what I said. Leviathan is the condiments, but they add no new ingrediants to the meal.

[silverexile17s]

KingZayd wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

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 Feros 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.

First of all: LOL. The only person here ranting is you. I feel as if you've mixed me up with someone else, as I never made most of these complaints.

The lore is damaged. The source of the damage? The Starchild. He makes the story stupid.

And yes, I'd rather they didn't make the EC. The EC was terrible, and only added more nonsense. What was before salvageable through extensive headcanon was just made even more stupid. Starchild's dialogue was made even worse, and the Crucible made even more stupid.

 The explanation for the squadmates leaving was also ridiculous. Men are dying right in front of you while heading to the beam, but one of Shepard's friends gets a little hurt, and they get an emergency evac. Shepard abandons the charge to send his buddies away, when the fate of the galaxy depends on this mission. Meanwhile the non-VIP's get slaughtered as they focus on what's truly important. Harbinger also conveniently ignores Shepard and the Normandy.

Again, why does it matter what  "Angry Joe" and "JeremyJhans" think? The best aspects of the Mass Effect series were it's  story and the universe it's set in. Both of which the ending ruined. ME2's plot was better because it didn't ruin the series, unlike ME3.

What is good about the gamedoes not outweigh the damage done to the lore, so yes I'd rather ME3 was not written and that I didn't buy it. But I would have been happy if the game had ended at some point before the elevator leading to the Starchild (without the EC)

First, didn't mean to talk to you, @KingZayd. It was ment for @Cakefirsto.

Second, the Starchild doesn't contridict the Lore at all with his presance. His lack of appearance in ME1 can be explained by him either being inactive from the prothean sabotage, or being Shackled and unable to directly minipulate the Citadel without outside infulence from his Reapers. Which would explain why the Reapers had to keep leaving vanguards to signal the Catalyst itself: So that the Shackles could be bypasses and it could open the gate for the Reapers.
He's not a GOOD stroy element in how he was handled or written, but he doesn't break the lore by existing.

Third, what were you smoking? The EC removed many complaints. Talk to anyone, and they'll tell you that the EC was a vast improvement from the original. It (a) fixes the teleporting squadmate problem with a soultion that's at least PLAUSIBLE, ( It gives exposition to the Catalyst so that you understand the thing more, © gives you epolouges that give closure to all the races and squadmates you meet, (d) You see the Normandy survive, and (e) you see the endings DO have seperate impacts.
It fixed ALOT, and DIDN'T create any new plotholes. You are either misunderstanding, or nitpicking something. If anything, it's in a BETTER state to expand upon.

Fourth,  they were COVERED IN BLOOD AND BURNS, AND COULD BARELY STAND. Not to disimalar to Shepard's state a few moments later. THAT'S NOT "a little hurt." That's dying, if they don't get aid. And the other squad-mate doesn't get it much better either.
And Harbinger doesn't see the point in shooting now. The Normandy is so close to the ground at this point that firing would be more likely to hit Shepard then Harbinger, especally with the Conduit screwing with targeting. The Thanix would light Shepard like a candle that close to the ground, and the Javlians would likely miss thanks to the interfearance from that Conduit. Therefore, they can't hurt Harbinger, so Harbinger regards them as an annoyance, not worth the effort of swatting away. He thinks that he'll be able to hunt them down anytime.
And everyone has faults. If you saw the person you loved dying, YOU would leave them?

Fifth, ME2 was where it STARTED. The plot was nonsensicle. Shepard is revived from death by a Private Black-Ops supremist group to fight a race of 50,000 year-old husks that are growing Reapers from Liquid DNA.
WHAT part of that was an idea that made a lick of sens compaired to what we'd seen before, or even was related to the plot of fighting the Reapers?
ME2 was a giant side-quest. ME3 at LEAST got back to the POINT of the tale that COULD have been expanded on by ME2. ME2 is where the problems in the narritive started. It was too self contained. If things for ME3 like the Crucible had been introduced in ME2, you wouldn't be ranting right now.
My point is that those two usually hyperanalyze games and so-forth. They do this kind of thing so that people can get objective reviews from sources that aren't monopoliezed, like IGN. The opinion of the avarage person. And their opinion is that it's a great game (Awsome even, in Angry Joe's opinion), despite the flaws, and the trip/fall flat at the fininsh line part. And many seem to agree with them. They simply say it like it is.

Sixth, NONE OF THE LORE WAS BROKEN BY ME3. That's just headcannon. As I've said before, the ONLY lore-breaking thing in the series was in ME2 with the Lazarus Project, as there is no refrence to anything like what Cerberus did being posible beforehand.
NOTHING in ME3 regarding the Catalyst or Crucible breaks the lore. Not Vigil (programed after Ilos was cut off  from the galaxy, and any pre-exixting memory corrupted, so NO information about war or Crucible), not ME1 (Catalyst is likely a shackled system that can't infulence the Citadel without outside help, hence why it always need an outside signal to trigger the Citadel Relay. Or, it's rendered dormant by the prothean Sabotage).
NOTHING conrtidicts them.

[Wompoo]

Ok for me ME3 has some of the best moments of the series, they are excellent, no doubt about it. However the game just feels rushed in areas and some poorly integrated aspects such as the Citadel ease dropping grind, Galactic readiness felt shallow and a pointless element (so much could of been done with this)...from Tim's love shack onwards it spirals into total collapse for me. The retake Earth is just a short rectangle straight line attack that feels like a poor fps map. The ending the first time was like being whacked by a cold fish several hundred times (so much so I actually thought I had done something seriously wrong to reach that point... I hadn't, BW had).

Yes the game does answers many quests and closes quite a few other story threads, but they just don't seem to flow well for me story wise (more like stamp collecting). It is closure that it lacks in spades (be that heart rending or flowers and rainbows) and no the redone ending, the free dlc does not give closure, does not do justice to the game in any shape or form imo.The inclusion of star brat is just way to grating and totally absurd... so much so I just cannot help but feel that Leviathan dlc was nothing but a knee jerk dlc to try and validate this poor component of the ending.

I enjoyed many moments in this game, but endings are so important in any entertainment endeavour (and no I did not watch Lost, thought that was utter crap from day one), if this was a stage play or movie it would of been caned by reviewers (the lack of critical reviews by the industry highlights some serious failings and possible self motivated interests). imo I think the ending hurt total sales of this game, which is a crying shame.

Two nephews and a brother in law, all three warned about the ending, all three very very casual gamers, all three shelved the game after the ending... they were bitterly disappointed or just went wtf and have never restarted it, I dare say never will (and I doubt very much that they are alone).

[KingZayd]

2) Yes, he does break the lore. How were the Protheans able to sneak onto the Citadel, and hack into the Starchild and sabotage him
a) without him noticing?
and without having any foreknowledge of the Starchild.

3) I'm not smoking anything. I'm fully aware that a lot of people liked the EC.
a) it fixed the unexplained "teleporting squadmates" problem by adding nonsense. Not an improvement.
It made the Starchild make even less sense
c) Epilogues aren't important when the story remains in tatters
d) Saw the Normandy survive pre-EC. That said unimportant.
e) Fixed nothing important, while adding extra nonsense.

4) Only one of them looked seriously injured. And even then, there were others on the battlefield in worse condition who got no medevac. Secondly the priority should be getting to the Citadel. The lives of everyone in the galaxy depend on it. Those squadmates will die anyway if the Reapers aren't stopped.
As for your excuse for Harbinger: ridiculous. Blowing up the Normandy would not only destroy the ship but kill Shepard and anyone else too close to the explosion.

5) The husks themselves are not 50,000 years old. They are clones. They are not "growing" Reapers, but manufacturing them and storing the genetic matter within. It made sense within the context of the series, although not with real world science. I agree there were problems with the setting of ME2, but they still managed to make an excellent game from it without ruining the series.

As for those reviewers, they have their opinions, but they are their opinions and are in no way factual. They are not the opinion of "the average person" but of 2 average people.

6) The lore was broken by ME3, It's not at all headcanon. The Starchild destroys the lore. The Lazarus Project while being quite stupid, does not contradict the lore of the series, and also does not effect anything else significantly. All it does is have the galaxy waste 3 years without getting much more prepared against the Reapers, and have Shepad's crew spread across the galaxy again (due to his death). The Starchild on the other hand, ruins the Reapers and therefore due to their extensive history, basically the entire history of the Mass Effect Universe.

The outside signal does not trigger the Citadel Relay. It is sent to the Citadel, which then sends a signal to the Keepers (as they only respond to the Citadel) to then activate the Relay. If the Starchild was shackled, how did it create the Keepers and the Reapers in the first place? If it had the Keepers, why was it not able to unshackle itself? And I've covered the issues with the "Prothean sabotage" excuse already earlier in this post.

Modifié par KingZayd, 04 février 2013 - 01:51 .

[High Kicks]

do you not?
i think its natural that most people judge the game this way
the ending caused the most controversy so its the most memorable

Modifié par High Kicks, 04 février 2013 - 03:08 .

[bazzag]

I think its a shame that because of 5 mins at the end the ENTIRE game is treated as a plague. I love ME3 and although i wasnt a fan of the initial ending, and couldnt let that fault a game that i enjoyed and loved to play, and got engrossed in.

Modifié par bazzag, 04 février 2013 - 03:11 .

[silverexile17s]

KingZayd wrote...

2) Yes, he does break the lore. How were the Protheans able to sneak onto the Citadel, and hack into the Starchild and sabotage him
a) without him noticing?
and without having any foreknowledge of the Starchild.

3) I'm not smoking anything. I'm fully aware that a lot of people liked the EC.
a) it fixed the unexplained "teleporting squadmates" problem by adding nonsense. Not an improvement.
It made the Starchild make even less sense
c) Epilogues aren't important when the story remains in tatters
d) Saw the Normandy survive pre-EC. That said unimportant.
e) Fixed nothing important, while adding extra nonsense.

4) Only one of them looked seriously injured. And even then, there were others on the battlefield in worse condition who got no medevac. Secondly the priority should be getting to the Citadel. The lives of everyone in the galaxy depend on it. Those squadmates will die anyway if the Reapers aren't stopped.
As for your excuse for Harbinger: ridiculous. Blowing up the Normandy would not only destroy the ship but kill Shepard and anyone else too close to the explosion.

5) The husks themselves are not 50,000 years old. They are clones. They are not "growing" Reapers, but manufacturing them and storing the genetic matter within. It made sense within the context of the series, although not with real world science. I agree there were problems with the setting of ME2, but they still managed to make an excellent game from it without ruining the series.

As for those reviewers, they have their opinions, but they are their opinions and are in no way factual. They are not the opinion of "the average person" but of 2 average people.

6) The lore was broken by ME3, It's not at all headcanon. The Starchild destroys the lore. The Lazarus Project while being quite stupid, does not contradict the lore of the series, and also does not effect anything else significantly. All it does is have the galaxy waste 3 years without getting much more prepared against the Reapers, and have Shepad's crew spread across the galaxy again (due to his death). The Starchild on the other hand, ruins the Reapers and therefore due to their extensive history, basically the entire history of the Mass Effect Universe.

The outside signal does not trigger the Citadel Relay. It is sent to the Citadel, which then sends a signal to the Keepers (as they only respond to the Citadel) to then activate the Relay. If the Starchild was shackled, how did it create the Keepers and the Reapers in the first place? If it had the Keepers, why was it not able to unshackle itself? And I've covered the issues with the "Prothean sabotage" excuse already earlier in this post.

(2)...Did you NOT talk to Vigil? The protheans got onto the Citadel via the Conduit. He tells you this right up front.
And who says he didn't notice? You assume that he was unaware of it, when he may have simply been unable to stop it. And this all happened after the Reapers left for Dark Space again, so no back-up.
And they may have stumbled onto him. Or he was something discovered as they studied the signal over the decades of study they did on it after waking back up. We never DO learn what it was the protheans discovered that severed the Keepers from the signal.

(3) Not how you acted. And the Majority believed it was better then the original
(a) WHAT about the Normandy arriving is implausible? And is it any more so then hot-dropping the Mako into such a small area on Ilos? Or fighting the Human-Reaper on FOOT? It can be chalked up as a veriaty of things, from dumb luck to concidence to pilot skill. It's NOT implausible, so therefore, NOT GARBAGE OR NONSENSE. Not EVERYTHING has to be absolutly perfect in a game. Just LOOK at the Lazarus Project.
It least the Normandy's sudden arrival CAN be explained away, in many ways no less, compaired to the teleporting squadmates, which DOESN'T have a reasonable explination. A VAST improvement compaired to before, and ANYONE that examines it will tell you the same.
( The hell are you talking about? He had a reason now. Something that we could at least relate to. It's not that different then that V.I.K.I  computer in the "I,Robot" movie. Save life by taking over it's management. It's not original. It's not mindboggling. But it's something we've SEEN before, and makes more sense then BEFORE.
Nothing YOU'RE saying is making any sense. Everything your fussing about are things that EVERYONE consideres IMPROVED from the original. These are all things that are FIXED. And also, just saying "it's not good" then failing to point out spicific examples of it being not good, is just an asspull. Find a real point that supports your claim.
© The damn story ISN'T IN TATTERS till Priority: Earth. Even then, there isn't anything contridictory. Just a major lack of content. Lack of content doesn't equal broken lore. It's just an unanswered question. And the slides FIX most of the problems regarding the abrubt ending, by showing the fate of everyone else. It's not perfect, but I'd HARDLY call it "in tatters."
(d)Stranded and with no indication of whether or not they get off that world or not. Guess what happens to the crew doesn't matter to you, but the same can't be said for the rest of the BSN.
Now we can see their reactions to Shepard's death, and them actually leaving, with the Normandy surviving in working order if EMS is high. In the old one, the ship was fired to hell with little chance of it getting fixed.
(e) Teleporting squadmates: FIXED with plausible explination
No idea of what happens to the crew: FIXED with memorial scene and Normandy leaving
No idea of what happens to the races and galaxy: FIXED with slides showing them repairing
Catalyst haveing more believeable reasons: FIXED with a plot that while unoriginal, is still believable for a computer to think is right.
Endings have no variation: FIXED with slides that show the galaxy HAS changed based on the choice.

WHAT PART FAILED? You are the one that has failed to post anything that directly proves your point. You are just using asspulls, when any real fan of the game would tell you that the EC is a major improvement over what was there before.

(4)Don't you think Shepard would be tired of losing people. The Commander already has nightmares about everyone he failed to save: Mordin, Legion, Thane, the Virmire casualty. All these voices whisper in his/her dreams. It's human nature to not want to lose anyone else. Something the character template lacked before. These are Shepard's family, and no one would leave them behind if given the choice. If it was made a branch choice, I doubt ANYONE would elect to leave them.
Shepard's been in situations like that before. Look at all the people that died because you broke Jack out?
Look at Virmire. If what you said was true, Shepard wouldn't even bother trying to get to the AA tower to help the other squad-mate. They'd stay with bomb and that's that. Shepard has a bond with the Crew, and would naturally save them first over a faceless stranger. After all, if you had a choice between someone that close to you, and several namless strangers around you, who would you save?
And again, Harbinger is arrogant. It's a cliche'. You SEE this behaveior all the time: The villian considers himself as the winner prematurally, so he sees no need to dispose of the followers, since without their leader, it's just an amusing struggle. He probably  found it amusing that Shepard would save them when Harbinger thought that he'd already won. So he toys with them. He lets them go, thinking he'll have all the time in the universe to hunt them down at his convience.

(5) LOOK at the Human Reaper. It's made with injections of liquid DNA. They aren't BUILT. They're GROWN.
Prothean husks? Liquid DNA-grown Reapers? Shepard reveived from death? The main plot was a giant side-mission, and was completely detached from the main series.
And LOOK at how heavily the likes outweigh the dislikes on their respictive videos. I'd say that makes you dead wrong, AND in the minority.
And from the opinions on THIS PAGE ALONE, the EC is considered better then the original.

(6) Again, you are throwing out this and that with NO corroberating evidence. Just saying something without any proof doesn't make it true.
WHAT is your proof of the Crucible breaking the lore? Vigil? DOESN'T COUNT. He was programed AFTER Ilos went dark (he says he was spicifically programed to monitor the stasis pods), so NO INFORMAION ABOUT THE CRUCIBLE OR WAR. And any pre-programed information is long gone due to corruption in the memory banks.
WHAT is your proof of the Catalyst breaking the lore? ME1? DOESN'T DO SQUAT. The prothean sabotage could have rendered it inactive. Or, it's a shackled system that can't interact with any of the Citadel systems without outside interaction, explaining the signal sent out by the vanguards.
The Reapers are trying to preserve all life by a form of "transhuminasim": changing the physical body to the point that it no longer resembles the original orginisim from the exterior, and controled by the intelligence of a machine. It's harvest actually makes a grim sense. It didn't want the extinctions of the Leviathan Age's races repeating, so it harvests and preserves them before they can ever hit that point again. So NO, It DOESN'T kill the universe.

And how do you know that the Keepers weren't there from the beginning? Perhaps the signal goes through the Citadel to the Keepers directly, and therefore, the Catalyst is basically shackled and completely isolated after all. Unable to affect the Citadel systems. Perhaps the Keepers are automatic caretakers, like cells in a body, working autonomous.
And I countered your claims above in 3^

[silverexile17s]

bazzag wrote...

I think its a shame that because of 5 mins at the end the ENTIRE game is treated as a plague. I love ME3 and although i wasnt a fan of the initial ending, and couldnt let that fault a game that i enjoyed and loved to play, and got engrossed in.

Exactally. SOMEONE should tell that to @KingZayd.

[Nightwriter]

o Ventus wrote...

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).

Like making the player decide whether to place hope in the krogan and sacrifice Mordin, or embrace cynicism and sacrifice Wrex.

Like a batarian and a human bonding over war trauma over the course of ambient dialogue.

Like Joker losing his sister, and you finding out only later that the traumatized asari in the hospital is talking about how his sister died.

Like having to leave Earth behind while it was pretty much getting raped by Reapers.

Like Jack finding an endearing and in-character niche for herself, protecting her students.

Like Garrus talking about the ruthless calculus of war.

Like pretty much everything having to do with Eve.

Like the way Victus Jr. died.

Like EDI's ascent into personhood.

Like the way Udina tenses and looks away when the asari Councilor admits that humanity is now serving the sacrificial lamb role that Ashley prophesized two games ago. 

Like that Blue Rose of Illium krogan and his poem to his wife, about their child.

Like Anderson's entire death scene.

In fact, there are so many good dramatic moments in this game that I'm frankly dumbfounded that anyone could claim they don't exist. It's like saying Azula was a poorly written villain or Professor Umbridge failed to create feelings of dislike in the reader. The overwhelming response is "did you even read/watch/play this thing?"

Perhaps you think that any admittance that there was good writing in ME3 is somehow a threat to the assertion that the game royally f*cked up.

Well, allow me to reassure you: it isn't a threat to that. Not even remotely. You needn't feel insecure. The real truth is that the game did have dramatic worth, but the ending shot it in the head at point blank range. It is now a corpse. The corpse should be mourned. But you're not mourning it. You're saying it was never alive to begin with. That's whack.

I'll be the first to admit that ME3 made some writing blunders even prior to the ending, but it's hard for someone to say the game was made up of only writing blunders without discrediting themselves.

[Grubas]

The entire game is a very ambitious buildup towards the final confrontation.

If you ruin this final moment, it will ruin the game.

Heck even when the fleets report in you can see your decisions matter, just until this point. But after that bioware just "couldnt be bothered" to further follow this path. It could have been so nice...

[N7 Banshee Bait]

Everybody I talk to agrees that the endings were fine & the game is awesome. Nobody has a problem with any of it & they love the game. And we can't understand why the people on here make such a big deal out of it. The endings are nowhere near as bad as you all make them out to be. Give it a rest already! It's been a year already & you still won't shut up about the damn endings. Grow up!

Modifié par Steelgrave, 04 février 2013 - 04:14 .

[Spatchmo]

I don't want to get this off topic here but I got frustrated reading people screaming about the use of the word "rape". Rape has more than one definition:

Rape: an act of plunder, violent seizure, or abuse; despoliation; violation: the rape of the countryside.

When referring to the ending, this definition is completely apt for some people. The word "rape" itself isn't a bad word.

[Seboist]

Grubas wrote...

The entire game is a very ambitious buildup towards the final confrontation.

If you ruin this final moment, it will ruin the game.

Heck even when the fleets report in you can see your decisions matter, just until this point. But after that bioware just "couldnt be bothered" to further follow this path. It could have been so nice...

Lol wut? A linear corridor shooter whose "choices" from itself and it's predecessors amount to interchangable fluff and arbitary numbers is "ambitious" and an example of "decisions mattering"?

DA:O (and countless other games)wipe the floor with ME3 and the entire "trilogy"(of semi-reboots) when it comes to choices with ease.

[JasonDaPsycho]

Tony Romo will always be remembered as a choke job.
The 95 Knicks will be remembered for the open layup Ewing missed.

It's never the start or the journey which writes your legacy - it's the end.

[Iakus]

Steelgrave wrote...

Everybody I talk to agrees that the endings were fine & the game is awesome. Nobody has a problem with any of it & they love the game. And we can't understand why the people on here make such a big deal out of it. The endings are nowhere near as bad as you all make them out to be. Give it a rest already! It's been a year already & you still won't shut up about the damn endings. Grow up!

Well, I'm convinced.  I musta been wrong all along

/sarcasm