68 réponses à ce sujet

[Blind2Society]

nickkcin11 wrote...

ME1: Rough
ME2: Refined
ME3: Nerfed

Everyone should love ME1 even if it has aged quite noticeably. The texture popping, some of the voice acting, the combat, and some of the more tedious side quests are signs that it is older than the rest. But despite that, the story is told amazingly and there are more epic moments in ME1 than any of the other games. Kirrahe's speech, meeting Sovereign, and talking to Vigil are parts of ME1 that are unequaled in any other game ever and make my back tingle with their excellent execution.

Mass Effect 2 is probably the easiest of all the games to replay. It doesn't peak nearly as high as ME1, but it doesn't fall quite as low either. There are some great new characters like Legion, Mordin, and Miranda who are given some great dialogue and missions all to themselves. My problems with the game mainly stem from the loss of RPG elements and from overcrowding the Normandy with boring characters that take time away from the better ones (Samara, Grunt, and Jacob).

Then there's Mass Effect 3. It has some heartfelt moments and epic set pieces; it even brings back more RPG elements. So how is it nerfed? The dialogue is all auto-dialogue or that "A" bull****. Certain characters gain no characterization in ME3 because they don't say much onboard the Normandy (James, Ashley... Ashley.... did I mention Ashley?) The ending is a blight on an otherwise great game so I'll ignore addressing it.

That's not a bad assessment.

[PwnedDuck]

 ME1:ClunkyME2: Pinnacle (station )

ME3: Controversy

[spirosz]

Blind2Society wrote...

nickkcin11 wrote...

ME1: Rough
ME2: Refined
ME3: Nerfed

Everyone should love ME1 even if it has aged quite noticeably. The texture popping, some of the voice acting, the combat, and some of the more tedious side quests are signs that it is older than the rest. But despite that, the story is told amazingly and there are more epic moments in ME1 than any of the other games. Kirrahe's speech, meeting Sovereign, and talking to Vigil are parts of ME1 that are unequaled in any other game ever and make my back tingle with their excellent execution.

Mass Effect 2 is probably the easiest of all the games to replay. It doesn't peak nearly as high as ME1, but it doesn't fall quite as low either. There are some great new characters like Legion, Mordin, and Miranda who are given some great dialogue and missions all to themselves. My problems with the game mainly stem from the loss of RPG elements and from overcrowding the Normandy with boring characters that take time away from the better ones (Samara, Grunt, and Jacob).

Then there's Mass Effect 3. It has some heartfelt moments and epic set pieces; it even brings back more RPG elements. So how is it nerfed? The dialogue is all auto-dialogue or that "A" bull****. Certain characters gain no characterization in ME3 because they don't say much onboard the Normandy (James, Ashley... Ashley.... did I mention Ashley?) The ending is a blight on an otherwise great game so I'll ignore addressing it.

That's not a bad assessment.

That's a great way to put it.  

[Foolsfolly]

Mass Effect: Good.
Mass Effect 2: Great.
Mass Effect 3: Bad.

[KevinT18]

I'm finding it very hard to believe the majority of people in this thread legitimately think that Mass Effect 3 is a "bad" or "crap" or "nerfed" game. You guys have no idea what a bad game is. The first third of ME3 alone (which is longer than most games total) is better than 95% of games released that year in their entirety.

Go play Lair, throw in some Colonial Marines, some Walking Dead Survival Instinct, jump into The War Z. Those are poor games.

[iTrisk]

ME1: DAMN.
ME2: HMM...
ME3: YYEEESSS!!!!

[Finlandiaprkl]

1: Story, introduction of the Reaper threat, deep sci-fi feeling.
2: Story, enclosing threat of the Reapers, DARK (in a great way) sci-fi feeling.
3: Despair, Fear, constantly running away from the Reapers.

[nickkcin11]

KevinT18 wrote...

I'm finding it very hard to believe the majority of people in this thread legitimately think that Mass Effect 3 is a "bad" or "crap" or "nerfed" game. You guys have no idea what a bad game is. The first third of ME3 alone (which is longer than most games total) is better than 95% of games released that year in their entirety.

Go play Lair, throw in some Colonial Marines, some Walking Dead Survival Instinct, jump into The War Z. Those are poor games.

As I said, ME3 was a great game but it was nerfed. You're not comparing Mass Effect 3 to the other Mass Effects, rather you are comparing it to other games. Obviously it is better than Kabuki Warriors and Big Rigs, but that goes without saying. ME3 is better than most games yes, we understand, but it is not as good as the other Mass Effect games and that was kind of disappointing.

[KevinT18]

nickkcin11 wrote...

KevinT18 wrote...

I'm finding it very hard to believe the majority of people in this thread legitimately think that Mass Effect 3 is a "bad" or "crap" or "nerfed" game. You guys have no idea what a bad game is. The first third of ME3 alone (which is longer than most games total) is better than 95% of games released that year in their entirety.

Go play Lair, throw in some Colonial Marines, some Walking Dead Survival Instinct, jump into The War Z. Those are poor games.

As I said, ME3 was a great game but it was nerfed. You're not comparing Mass Effect 3 to the other Mass Effects, rather you are comparing it to other games. Obviously it is better than Kabuki Warriors and Big Rigs, but that goes without saying. ME3 is better than most games yes, we understand, but it is not as good as the other Mass Effect games and that was kind of disappointing.

Yeah my comment wasn't directed at you specifically, just maybe the clever adjective reference. I too was disppointed in the ending and some of the backwards design choices (eavesdropping, autodialogue? AGH!)

From a technical standpoint though I dont think ME2 is even in the same league as ME3. The combat is ME3 even beats most standard third person shooters, and with biotics and engineers, I'd say its even better than the perennial juggernaut Gears of War. And that is not by any means a bad franchise. ME>Halo, AC, pretty much every AAA title from 2012

And IMO, honestly, the story in ME3 was better up until the end. Rannoch and Tuchanka obvious highlights, both hit me like a sledgehammer. Nothin in ME2 felt that way, but the story felt more personal. ME3 was TDK to ME2's Batman Begins for me.

ME3 is also the most easily accessible. For some reason "easy to pickup and play" is a bad thing for people on this forum. Most want it to be as compicated and obnoxious as the original's mako exploration and inventory system. Which took me SEVERAL playthroughs to absolutely perfect in my head. Most want it to be not only complex, but inherently DIFFICULT to play. Why? Elitists. Exclusionists.

I just cant stand people who outright say this game is awful, atrocious, horrid, repulsive, BROKEN. This is probably the LEAST broken RPG released in the past 2 years. Yeah bethesda I'm looking at you.

Modifié par KevinT18, 13 avril 2013 - 04:03 .

[nickkcin11]

KevinT18 wrote...

nickkcin11 wrote...

KevinT18 wrote...

I'm finding it very hard to believe the majority of people in this thread legitimately think that Mass Effect 3 is a "bad" or "crap" or "nerfed" game. You guys have no idea what a bad game is. The first third of ME3 alone (which is longer than most games total) is better than 95% of games released that year in their entirety.

Go play Lair, throw in some Colonial Marines, some Walking Dead Survival Instinct, jump into The War Z. Those are poor games.

As I said, ME3 was a great game but it was nerfed. You're not comparing Mass Effect 3 to the other Mass Effects, rather you are comparing it to other games. Obviously it is better than Kabuki Warriors and Big Rigs, but that goes without saying. ME3 is better than most games yes, we understand, but it is not as good as the other Mass Effect games and that was kind of disappointing.

Yeah my comment wasn't directed at you specifically, just maybe the clever adjective reference. I too was disppointed in the ending and some of the backwards design choices (eavesdropping, autodialogue? AGH!)

From a technical standpoint though I dont think ME2 is even in the same league as ME3. The combat is ME3 even beats most standard third person shooters, and with biotics and engineers, I'd say its even better than the perennial juggernaut Gears of War. And that is not by any means a bad franchise. ME>Halo, AC, pretty much every AAA title from 2012

And IMO, honestly, the story in ME3 was better up until the end. Rannoch and Tuchanka obvious highlights, both hit me like a sledgehammer. Nothin in ME2 felt that way, but the story felt more personal. ME3 was TDK to ME2's Batman Begins for me.

ME3 is also the most easily accessible. For some reason "easy to pickup and play" is a bad thing for people on this forum. Most want it to be as complicated and obnoxious as the original's mako exploration and inventory system. Which took me SEVERAL playthroughs to absolutely perfect in my head. Most want it to be not only complex, but inherently DIFFICULT to play. Why? Elitists. Exclusionists.

I just cant stand people who outright say this game is awful, atrocious, horrid, repulsive, BROKEN. This is probably the LEAST broken RPG released in the past 2 years. Yeah bethesda I'm looking at you.

Okay, I can agree with you on most of that since I think ME3 is a great game too. However, I disagree that ME2 lacked the highlights that ME3 had. The first time I played ME2, hell even now when I replay it, I was absolutely amazed at the opening. AMAZED. The destruction of the Normandy and Shepard's death were wholly unexpected and perfect ways to open the sequel. And the suicide mission, while it ended with the semi-ridiculous-terminator-reaper, was really a great way to see all the team come together and accomplish the impossible. And lastly, the LotSB is a great piece of DLC that is amazing start to finish (if you want to count DLC).

All in all, ME3 has far superior combat and some great moments, but ultimately lacks the polish and thorough nature of ME2. For lack of a better word, ME3 is inconsistent.

[ref]

KevinT18 wrote...

I'm finding it very hard to believe the majority of people in this thread legitimately think that Mass Effect 3 is a "bad" or "crap" or "nerfed" game. You guys have no idea what a bad game is. The first third of ME3 alone (which is longer than most games total) is better than 95% of games released that year in their entirety.

Go play Lair, throw in some Colonial Marines, some Walking Dead Survival Instinct, jump into The War Z. Those are poor games.

So using 4 of the most infamously poor games as examples of games that ME3 is better than isn't proving your point. They are also completely different in genre. It's also subjective.

Length of the game also does not mean anything. Skyrim is absurdly long with very mediocre boring content. (Granted, this is just my opinion). Doesn't mean it's a good game. DA2 is around the same length as ME3, and the 'majority' of BSN thinks the game is terrible (and it is, but again, my opinion )

ME started as an RPG with TPS elements. It ended as a third person shooter with RPG elements. The issue with BioWare is whenever the fans have an issue with something from a previous game they just get rid of it instead of trying to fix it and make it good. ME3 puts the nail in the coffin by severely limiting player choice in where it matters most, the conversation. That is how you build your character, and only having 2 options, sometimes them being borderline good or bad (which completely disallows for any neutral responses) severely limits you.

Again, my opinion but ME's writing quality has gone down each time through the 3 games.

Modifié par Refara, 14 avril 2013 - 01:12 .

[BounceDK]

ME1: RPG
ME2: Action
ME3: http://www.vgcats.co...s/?strip_id=313

[Renmiri1]

ME3 has some good missions (Tuchanka, Ranoch), improved combat but absolutely atrocious writing and abandoned most of what made fans like ME1 and ME2. Autodialog, no ME2 content, absurdly bad endings, options that don't matter, broken scan / fetch system for planets exploration, lame system for handing quests (http://www.vgcats.co...s/?strip_id=313) skin deep characters (chobot, vega). so they both spit on older squaddies and games and didn't come up with anything better.

Yes there is a sizable contingent of ME fans that don't like ME3. Believe it or not, it is very clear in just about any survey ever made about the game.

But if you like shooters and don't care for story I guess it is bearable, maybe even fun. But Call of Duty and other shooters are better.

[Persephone]

TinuHawke wrote...

FireW4lker wrote...

ME - Adventure
ME2 - Characters
ME3 - Emotion

 This is what I would pick too. 

[Renmiri1]

Persephone wrote...

TinuHawke wrote...

FireW4lker wrote...

ME - Adventure
ME2 - Characters
ME3 - Emo   tion

 This is what I would pick too. 

Fixed that for ya

Modifié par Renmiri1, 14 avril 2013 - 05:01 .

[Iakus]

1 Hope
2 Distraction
3 Can't describe since we're supposed to stay positive

[FlamingBoy]

1. Iconic
2. Brilliant
3. Less

[JDee3]

Damien-III wrote...

ME1: amazing
ME2: overrated
ME3: underrated

THIS. is how I feel.
Not that I didn't like ME2, just thought it changed the whole feel ME1 had set up and took us off track of the main story and added all these characters I personally didn't care too much for (some) and just wanted my old squad back. I'd be surprised if anyone who played ME1 when it first came out and loved it, disagreed.
ME3 brought back that feeling of ME1 and kept a little bit of the ME2 feel