631 réponses à ce sujet

[iamthedave3]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...


@Klarabela

There's also the borderline sycophantic tendency for almost all sympathetic characters to praise the player Shepard on how great/awesome the Commander is, and to be appropriately conciliatory and submissive to Shepard's will, while the single most common characteristic of Bad People is that they're rude to Shepard and disrespectful.

That is simply not true at all.

Yes, characters praise Shepard after completeing missions successfully, but it's not blind praise. Fail any loyalty mission in ME 2 and the character in question becomes bitter and resentful. Make a choice that a squadmate disagrees with, and they voice their concerns pretty often. There are dozens of instances through the series where squadmates confront Shepard over major or minor issues.

Ow come on, lets be honest here, the entire Mass Effect series is a complete juvenile power-trip, right until the last 5 minutes of the trilogy, where the power-trip ends and the harsh reality (that you can't always have it your way and that sometimes compromises have to be made) hits in. It's one of the major reasons why people hate the ending, or why they desperately believe in the Indoctrination Theory. They can't believe that their Jesus Shepard isn't allowed to just kick the reapers in the daddybags, go home and have many blue babies with his/her waifu.

But until the end of Mass Effect 3, the entire series really is just a juvenile power-trip, where the player can talk-jutsu the main antagonist into comitting suicide, TWICE, where the player can go on a suicide misson, and get out of there with not single man lost, where the player can drop loads on the faces of his/her superiors and get away with it, where the player can use the council of the galaxy as his/her verbal punching bags and get away with it.
In short, the player can basically do whatever the f*ck he wants, and get away with it, without any serious compromises and without any serious repercussions.

And worst of all, is that BioWare only strengthed this childish juvenile power-trip by turning all the characters that were generally disliked by the fanbase into shallow badguys just so the player can drop his virtual loads on them so the player can feel good about himself. Just take a look at Udina. He was a good man, but the fanbase hated him and wanted to drop their loads on him, so BioWare turned him into a baddy without much of a real explanation, simply so the kids could shoot him in the brain and feel good about themselves. Pathetic...

Harsh but more or less accurate. I'd argue it's not juvenile because it does do a good job of exploring some deeper issues. The genophage is generally well-handled, for example, and that's a difficult thing to do grey, as is the Quarian/Geth conflict. But the plotting? Yeah you're pretty much spot on.

[JPR1964]

ME1 is the greatest one for me : I don't care too much about shooter...

ME2 started very poor, but the interaction with the NPC were really nice. (I always don't care about shooter)

ME3 killed them all... in the end

JPR out!

[iamthedave3]

klarabella wrote...

iamthedave3 wrote...
Oh I know what you're getting at, and no. It doesn't ever really treat him like one. Most of the time it treats him as someone who's on the very edge of going completely stark raving bonkers and up until the halfway point I was still edging around a theory that there was a twist coming where it would indeed turn out he's the killer. 

But he does display heroic qualities that raise him somewhat above the ordinary person, and thus you could argue he's a heroic character. It's much harder to make that argument for the rest of the cast.

But there is your difference.

Shepard's actions are supposed to be unsusual and often controversial.

The universe, however, doesn't acknowledge what you've actually done. Or how you've done it. Other characters aren't allowed to have any other opinion than "whatever you did Shepard, it was for the best and no one else could have done it any other way" ... even when it's pretty obvious that other options would have led to a better outcome or Shepard didn't even care about the outcome and instead just felt like killing someone.

Shepard is a hero not because of what he does.
Shepard is not even a hero despite of what he does.

Shepard is a hero just because.

And I really don't like this sort of character.

Oh yes I completely agree. As I said, we're standing shoulder to shoulder. One of the things I loved most about Javik was the way he talks to Shepherd the way renegade Shepherd talks to everyone else in the universe. True, genuine breath of fresh air.

Jesus Shepherd is not the character design I like. The things that I really liked about Mass Effect were nothing at all to do with Shepherd, I liked the secondary characters, which is why their treatment in ME 3 annoyed me a lot. Especially since - barring Javik - I dislike 3/4s of the replacement cast or just don't find them interesting.

To put a directly literary spin on what you've said, Shepherd has heroic qualities but not heroic flaws. He/she is basically perfect and the universe bends to always cast Shepherd in that light, and indeed, the absolute worst Shepherd can get is 'Nobody could have done it better'.

[Seboist]

Hanar left out how Shepard and by extension the player get their ego stroked by having characters like Miranda say how much of an awesome leader he is despite the fact that the only skills he displays is the ability to pull a trigger and hide behind chest high cover.

[spirosz]

Seboist wrote...

Hanar left out how Shepard and by extension the player get their ego stroked by having characters like Miranda say how much of an awesome leader he is despite the fact that the only skills he displays is the ability to pull a trigger and hide behind chest high cover.

These posts amaze me, hahaha.  The irony in them, if one is to start picking apart games you like. 

[nos_astra]

spirosz wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Hanar left out how Shepard and by extension the player get their ego stroked by having characters like Miranda say how much of an awesome leader he is despite the fact that the only skills he displays is the ability to pull a trigger and hide behind chest high cover.

These posts amaze me, hahaha.  The irony in them, if one is to start picking apart games you like. 

Cue Anderson in ME3.

Shepard, the **** you've done? Any other soldier would have been tried, court-martialed and discharged.

A few minutes later.

Shepard, consider yourself reinstated. (And have fun captaining the Normandy.)

Modifié par klarabella, 01 mars 2013 - 02:41 .

[Daniel_N7]

Maybe? No.

The Mass Effect series is objectively a relevant landmark in the history of video games.

First, Mass Effect changed the mechanics of storytelling in games. Most story-based games balance between active segments - where you play - and passive segments - where you watch. In most games the story is told through passive cut scenes. Mass Effect effectively killed the cut-scene by making it an interactive part of the game. You "play" through the cut-scenes, which are rendered in real time, with the use of a brilliant device called "dialogue wheel".
I don't think most people realize how brilliantly simple and revolutionary the dialogue wheel is. It allows you to play through the story and, at the same time, define your character as you go along. Sure, your freedom and character control happens within the boundaries defined by the game, but, still, there is a latitude of interaction that provides a sense of ownership of the main character. By making choices you make the story your own, and little by little you participate in the making of a game that is unique to every player.

The second very important structural element of Mass Effect is the save-game import feature. I believe this is the first time that such device was successfully used in a video game series. Again, by importing your saved game from a previous chapter you are taking personal customization of the story to a whole new level.

Third, as a fictional construction, BioWare crafted a sci-fi universe that is rich and filled with likable characters, with potential to become a long-lasting and popular series.

The original Mass Effect was an amazing accomplishment, especially if you consider it was made by an independent BioWare. The use of "repeated" environments in sidequests was one of its greater downsides but it wasn't such an unacceptable practice back in 2007. [I wouldn't say the same in 2011 - looking at you DA2.]
As for the rest, gameplay was great fun, it was a well balanced rpg with lots of customization, with a great story and everlasting characters.

Mass Effect 2 had its quirks. The "death" at the beginning was a questionable but effective way of resetting the player. In terms of storyline, the game may have been a detour from the main conflict, but it was one of the best written games ever made. It's not easy to make such a wide new group of characters and make sure that each and every one of them is memorable and charismatic. Great stories have that. Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, etc... And Mass Effect (2) has that too, we can't forget their names, their faces, their personal quests. And that, ladies and gentleman, is called great writing.

Mass Effect 3 also has its set of structural "flaws". And it has one of the most questionable endings in the history of video games. But I think that if you are able to make an assertive judgement of the game for what it is - not for what you expected it to be - you'll see lots of positives.

The main criticism I think we can make to the series is the lack of a strong storyline drafted from the very beginning. This is not a theory either, it was confirmed in interviews. So I think BioWare was overwhelmed with the task that was set for Mass Effect 3. In a way, they were confronted with the fact that ME1 and ME2 had opened so many threads and now everything had to come together.

In a way, the Mass Effect trilogy was an experimental endeavour and BioWare was caught in the learning process. I think that if they had better control of this 3-game formula they would have made a better management of story threads. There would be long-term threads, starting in game 1, evolving (slightly) in game 2, and coming to a resolution in 3. And then there would be short-term threads, starting in game 1 and closing in 2, with others starting in 2 and closing in 3. This way, they wouldn't be overwhelmed in the end.

But even with its "flaws", even with its debatable ending, the Mass Effect trilogy is an extraordinary accomplishment and, as I said before, a defining moment in the history of gaming.

[GreyLycanTrope]

It was never perfect but it used to be enjoyable and had the potential to be grand instead of contrived.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 01 mars 2013 - 02:47 .

[Seboist]

spirosz wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Hanar left out how Shepard and by extension the player get their ego stroked by having characters like Miranda say how much of an awesome leader he is despite the fact that the only skills he displays is the ability to pull a trigger and hide behind chest high cover.

These posts amaze me, hahaha.  The irony in them, if one is to start picking apart games you like. 

What irony? The Courer in New Vegas can display knowledge in medicine, reparing,etc depending on how he's specialized but Shepard? Acts like a backwoods yokel comparing the genophage to the FCW and being puzzled that Asari can mate with each other while at the same time being praised for how awesome he is.

[iamthedave3]

Daniel_N7 wrote...

Mass Effect 2 had its quirks. The "death" at the beginning was a questionable but effective way of resetting the player. In terms of storyline, the game may have been a detour from the main conflict, but it was one of the best written games ever made. It's not easy to make such a wide new group of characters and make sure that each and every one of them is memorable and charismatic. Great stories have that. Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, etc... And Mass Effect (2) has that too, we can't forget their names, their faces, their personal quests. And that, ladies and gentleman, is called great writing.

Good enough to make people forget that the central plot was complete arse. It has some parts that are well written, but to say it's one of 'the best written games ever made' is ludicrous. You can't ignore all the parts that were horribly written and put it on a pedastal.

System Shock 2? That's one of the best written games ever made. Red Dead Redemption might be as well. Neither game has half as many awkward bits and bad writing as Mass Effect 2.

[Daniel_N7]

iamthedave3 wrote...

Daniel_N7 wrote...

Mass Effect 2 had its quirks. The "death" at the beginning was a questionable but effective way of resetting the player. In terms of storyline, the game may have been a detour from the main conflict, but it was one of the best written games ever made. It's not easy to make such a wide new group of characters and make sure that each and every one of them is memorable and charismatic. Great stories have that. Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, etc... And Mass Effect (2) has that too, we can't forget their names, their faces, their personal quests. And that, ladies and gentleman, is called great writing.

Good enough to make people forget that the central plot was complete arse. It has some parts that are well written, but to say it's one of 'the best written games ever made' is ludicrous. You can't ignore all the parts that were horribly written and put it on a pedastal.

System Shock 2? That's one of the best written games ever made. Red Dead Redemption might be as well. Neither game has half as many awkward bits and bad writing as Mass Effect 2.

Let's agree to disagree. And, btw, I loved System Shock 2. Yes, I am "that" old.

Also...

[dreamgazer]

Daniel_N7 wrote...

I loved System Shock 2. Yes, I am "that" old.

Don't have to be old to love System Shock 2 anymore.

[Kel Riever]

No. Mass Effect 1 was awesome, Mass Effect 2 was good, Mass Effect 3 would have been okay until the ending(s) made Mass Effect 3 entirely suck. And ruined the point of playing the entire series from the point of view of story or making choices.

So Mass Effect Multiplayer now has more role-playing and story in it than the entire Mass Effect SP series.

[Addictress]

Seboist wrote...

NeonFlux117 wrote...

ME2 is one of the greatest games of all time. 164 GOTY awards. inducted into the Smithsonian. 1 of only 80 games in 40 years to be selected.

Right, a TPS that lacks the basic features of the genre like rolling and going from cover to cover that Gears 1 standardized in '06, mediocre level design where everything looks like a warehouse and A.I from circa 1998 is one of the "greatest games of all time".

Pardon me while I wipe the tears from laughing at such an assertion.

wow so you obviously value the stupid shootfest element more than the reason people like ME2 so much: cinematic story and characters

[SpamBot2000]

Dunno, I really liked it, a lot. Until that thing with the thing. That sucked.

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 01 mars 2013 - 04:14 .

[argan1985]

The first game, despite its problems, is one of my favourite sci-fi games. The second and third one are mediocre shooters, pretty much so I can agree with the op about those.

[o Ventus]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

ioannisdenton wrote...

Joke thread?? what?
No mass effect is NOT overrated at all.
Crysis - halo - god of war are overated.

Mass Effect is more over-rated AND over-hyped than any of those games you just listed.

So Mass Effect is more hyped than God of War or Halo?

I don't think you know what hype is.

[CronoDragoon]

I don't know if ME1 was overrated when it came out, but I'm playing it on PS3 right now and I am getting the same feeling as when I played Ocarina of Time years after its release: might have been great for it's time, doesn't hold up.

YMMV of course.

Edit: As for ME2, it's gameplay was also great when it came out, although when I play ME3's gameplay - which is essentially the same structure but with everything more polished and improved - it's hard to see ME2's gameplay as anything but a little outdated.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 01 mars 2013 - 04:52 .

[BirdsallSa]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

ioannisdenton wrote...

Joke thread?? what?
No mass effect is NOT overrated at all.
Crysis - halo - god of war are overated.

Mass Effect is more over-rated AND over-hyped than any of those games you just listed.

So Mass Effect is more hyped than God of War or Halo?

I don't think you know what hype is.

Their hype is well deserved, though. They are standouts in a very diluted genre and arguably the best of their genre. It's difficult to say the same for Mass Effect since the genre it's under isn't well defined and there's not that many good RPG series to compare it to. The only ones that are big enough to compare them to are the Elder Scrolls, Fallout and Final Fantasy series and really, none of those can really be compared to one another.

Hanar, if you would have found the me3 ending flawless, would you still have this stance?

[CronoDragoon]

BirdsallSa wrote...
Hanar, if you would have found the me3 ending flawless, would you still have this stance?

I don't think that post has to do with quality so much as how difficult it is to pin down ME3's genre. Is it a shooter? RPG? Sim?

Of course, if I were to say shooter, I would call it the best, but mostly because of everything else involved in the combat mechanics like tech and biotic skills, which really prevent the gameplay from getting stale like it does for me in all other shooters.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 01 mars 2013 - 04:55 .

[o Ventus]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Their hype is well deserved, though. They are standouts in a very diluted genre and arguably the best of their genre. It's difficult to say the same for Mass Effect since the genre it's under isn't well defined and there's not that many good RPG series to compare it to. The only ones that are big enough to compare them to are the Elder Scrolls, Fallout and Final Fantasy series and really, none of those can really be compared to one another.

Then compare it to Dragon Age.

Regardless, it's irrelevant. What's-his-name is blatantly wrong when he says ME is more hyped than Halo or GOW. Ask someone on the street if they know Halo, they will almost certainly say yes. Ask somebody on the street if hey know Mass Effect, and you will probably not get a response.

[BirdsallSa]

CronoDragoon wrote...

BirdsallSa wrote...
Hanar, if you would have found the me3 ending flawless, would you still have this stance?

I don't think that post has to do with quality so much as how difficult it is to pin down ME3's genre. Is it a shooter? RPG? Sim?

Of course, if I were to say shooter, I would call it the best, but mostly because of everything else involved in the combat mechanics like tech and biotic skills, which really prevent the gameplay from getting stale like it does for me in all other shooters.

Agreed. I can't stand shooters, but I love Mass Effect.