333 réponses à ce sujet

[Fixers0]

Mass Effect 3 technically sure lagged behind it's generation.

[spirosz]

It's more a "good" game, compared to a good Mass Effect "game". Its just not what I wanted out of conclusion for Shepard's trilogy, but that is the past. Bioware should keep their head up and trying to focus on more realistic expectations, compared to their ambitious "Emotionally engaging-everything-matters" mindset.

Also, the fans should have more realistic expectations as well!  I'm not putting much faith in DAIII, regardless of it being a different team, it is still Bioware and I don't have much expecations for ME4, whatever it is, though... I do wish them well, regardless of how I feel about their direction and future games. 

Modifié par spirosz, 31 mai 2013 - 10:47 .

[TaZo_VasN]

adayaday wrote...

Best visuals?www.youtube.com/watch

This has nothing to do with the visuals. Hell, even Skyrim has a lot worse animations than any other AAA game and people still consider it a beautiful looking game... even though you can clearly see how old the engine is and how amateurish some of the devs work is (tree placement, draw distance, textures, undynamic water from 2001 etc...). You can complain about a lot of real issues in ME but if you can't contribute anything useful then just stfu.

[adayaday]

TaZo_VasN wrote...

adayaday wrote...

Best visuals?www.youtube.com/watch

This has nothing to do with the visuals. Hell, even Skyrim has a lot worse animations than any other AAA game and people still consider it a beautiful looking game... even though you can clearly see how old the engine is and how amateurish some of the devs work is (tree placement, draw distance, textures, undynamic water from 2001 etc...). You can complain about a lot of real issues in ME but if you can't contribute anything useful then just stfu.

Very well,as far as visuals go i can say the following:
-the spirtes were poorly made and were placed in plain view.
-260° head and torso turn.
-Very low res texture on some object (pile of corpes come to mind).
-awkward animations.

Those are poor design moves not bugs,and they are WAY more commen in ME3.

[frostajulie]

no op me1 and 2 were better than 3 because regardless of what you claim about story, in ME1 and 2 We got to choose who our Shepard was and how they would react the illusion of choice and interaction with the story was far superior to ME3 in every possible way. But then again that is just my opinion and no more or less valid than yours.

[TaZo_VasN]

adayaday wrote...

TaZo_VasN wrote...

adayaday wrote...

Best visuals?www.youtube.com/watch

This has nothing to do with the visuals. Hell, even Skyrim has a lot worse animations than any other AAA game and people still consider it a beautiful looking game... even though you can clearly see how old the engine is and how amateurish some of the devs work is (tree placement, draw distance, textures, undynamic water from 2001 etc...). You can complain about a lot of real issues in ME but if you can't contribute anything useful then just stfu.

Very well,as far as visuals go i can say the following:
-the spirtes were poorly made and were placed in plain view.
-260° head and torso turn.
-Very low res texture on some object (pile of corpes come to mind).
-awkward animations.

Those are poor design moves not bugs,and they are WAY more commen in ME3.

Yeah I agree on that but it's still an improvement compared to ME1 and 2. Especially ME2 had a lot of weird animations during the conversations.
Overall the game looks pretty good (especially on consoles) which kinda limits the PC version of the game... but I don't think the graphics or some animations are worth the all the fuss.
Most (hardcore) fans complained about the story, which really should be constructively criticized! I don't think that you are doing yourself or the community a favour if you start to turn ME3 into ridicule. BioWare will think we are just some stupid trolls (with good reason btw) and then start to ignore people like us - people who care about the franchise!

[Slayer299]

OP - You make it sound as if they haven't bragged about all its' perfect' scores anywhere. And I utterly disagree with you on every point about the 'wonderfulness' of ME3. At best ME3 was a mediocre game and that is without taking into account the "ending(s)" we got both post and pre.

[txgoldrush]

Gotta love the hypocrisy on this board...once again, dogging ME3 while ignoring the weaknesses of the first two games.

Say all you can say about the Crucible.....but the Conduit storyline in ME1 was extremely logically flimsy. Why would Saren and Sovereign go through all that trouble and risk exposure for a backdoor in the Citadel when he has indoctrination, the krogan clones, and the geth as allies and tools? Tools that can be used to take the Citadel quite easily in a surprise attack? Oh wait, we gotta try and be clever and have them chase a backdoor through what was a relay statue in the Presidum, because we are clever. Hell, if the Reapers took the Citadel, how would the Protheans either place or know about a backdoor to the citadel centuries later. Nevermind the deus ex machinas and the plot developments that come out of nowhere...or the lack of character development for those not named Wrex or the character you romance. Nevermind the fact that the writers simply cannot decide if Renegade meant the ends justify the means or dark lord of the sith or human extremist.

Lets talk ME2, by far the weakest main plot of the series. Lets see, a complete deus ex machina opening where Shepard is unnecessarily killed and still the biggest break in a more hard scifi universe. The way Mordin gets the collector bugs for his repellant for Horizon is never explained, its convenient. Oh and really, they botched Ashley or Kaiden's appearance on Horizon...lets see, they get stung by the seeker swarms before you land but however at the end of the mission, they pop out perfectly fine. Yeah. So much for having a compelling plot for them. And really what the hell was the "mission" to remove Shepard crew from the ship so Joker and the Collectors can happen?

And then lets talk about one of the worst last bosses in video game history. Oh and the Renegade character got even LESS consistent.

Say what you want about ME3, but do not act like ME1 and ME2 were less flawed or gaming gems compared to ME3. Hell, ME3 does something the first two games don't....have a strong narrative flow AND feature strong and significant character development.

[txgoldrush]

adayaday wrote...

TaZo_VasN wrote...

adayaday wrote...

Best visuals?www.youtube.com/watch

This has nothing to do with the visuals. Hell, even Skyrim has a lot worse animations than any other AAA game and people still consider it a beautiful looking game... even though you can clearly see how old the engine is and how amateurish some of the devs work is (tree placement, draw distance, textures, undynamic water from 2001 etc...). You can complain about a lot of real issues in ME but if you can't contribute anything useful then just stfu.

Very well,as far as visuals go i can say the following:
-the spirtes were poorly made and were placed in plain view.
-260° head and torso turn.
-Very low res texture on some object (pile of corpes come to mind).
-awkward animations.

Those are poor design moves not bugs,and they are WAY more commen in ME3.

And Bioware has been not so great at technical graphics in general...so lets dog ME3, but not past Bioware games....lol

All three games have polish problems, and so does all of Bioware's catalog.

[GimmeDaGun]

txgoldrush wrote...

Gotta love the hypocrisy on this board...once again, dogging ME3 while ignoring the weaknesses of the first two games.

Say all you can say about the Crucible.....but the Conduit storyline in ME1 was extremely logically flimsy. Why would Saren and Sovereign go through all that trouble and risk exposure for a backdoor in the Citadel when he has indoctrination, the krogan clones, and the geth as allies and tools? Tools that can be used to take the Citadel quite easily in a surprise attack? Oh wait, we gotta try and be clever and have them chase a backdoor through what was a relay statue in the Presidum, because we are clever. Hell, if the Reapers took the Citadel, how would the Protheans either place or know about a backdoor to the citadel centuries later. Nevermind the deus ex machinas and the plot developments that come out of nowhere...or the lack of character development for those not named Wrex or the character you romance. Nevermind the fact that the writers simply cannot decide if Renegade meant the ends justify the means or dark lord of the sith or human extremist.

Lets talk ME2, by far the weakest main plot of the series. Lets see, a complete deus ex machina opening where Shepard is unnecessarily killed and still the biggest break in a more hard scifi universe. The way Mordin gets the collector bugs for his repellant for Horizon is never explained, its convenient. Oh and really, they botched Ashley or Kaiden's appearance on Horizon...lets see, they get stung by the seeker swarms before you land but however at the end of the mission, they pop out perfectly fine. Yeah. So much for having a compelling plot for them. And really what the hell was the "mission" to remove Shepard crew from the ship so Joker and the Collectors can happen?

And then lets talk about one of the worst last bosses in video game history. Oh and the Renegade character got even LESS consistent.

Say what you want about ME3, but do not act like ME1 and ME2 were less flawed or gaming gems compared to ME3. Hell, ME3 does something the first two games don't....have a strong narrative flow AND feature strong and significant character development.

Finally... People here are biased as hell. They admire their "perfect" ME2, since they can hook up with everyone on the Normandy and can play the invincible hero man. The game as a story was lame as hell... the weakest of the three. It's the spicing which makes it interesting (vast world, exploration, the atmosphere, the lore and some of the characters and their missions).

Also many of the characters are completely unnecessary and boring (Grunt, Kasumi, Miranda, Jack and Jacob).
The whole game is nothing but a huge daddy-issue fest, and a chase after a "huge threat" (problem is you never have the sense of urgency and of the scale of the threat), some mysterious, weird looking insect race (never seen anything like it in any other sci-fi...haha) from the center of the galaxy which - big surprise - turns out to be the pawns of the reapers (and the former protheans). So you set out with your team of potential LIs to bring the fight to the bugs' home. You have this mission in the end called the suicide mission, which is only a suicide mission if you lack the brains to play super mario (the only thing you go to do to avoid it being a suicide mission is to take care of all the daddy-issues, upgrade your ship (you tend to do that as you go) and don't make obviously stupid decisions during the mission by assigning the wrong person to do the wrong task). And there come the big-badda-boom: a huge space terminator which you have to fight with.... my jaws dropped off when I had to do that (not that Mr. Saren - the cyborgfrog - Arterius wasn't ridiculous enough. And on the top of all of this we have the most annoying reaper of the year: Harbinger, who's behaving like Skullface from that old cartoon, He-man. Infantile and ridiculous: yet people wanted it to be the "main villian" of the series: the big baddie (thank God, Bioware made it disappear in ME3) . Made the reapers look like a bunch of idiots from an '80s B-category fantasy flick. Also the Normandy functions as a huge loveboat... basically you can f. anything that moves on it. And they made Shepard become the usual hero-guy without any fallacies and errors. You can't go wrong with the Shep... he can be the jerk of the year, yet everybody is behaving like a cheerleader with him. Also the renegade Shep is a total psycho without integrity. Shepard as a character does not work. I can't and don't want to treat Shep as if he was me. I want to see the guy's story: the tale about this warrior. In a C&C based interactive game making your protagonist a blank dummy is not a necessity: The Witcher proved that. In ME3 at least he has a character and some level of character development.

You mentioned the other obvious issues with the game. Gameplaywise and presentationwise it was a superior game to ME1, but not to ME3. Also it lacks the inventory system, and the skill-tree. You can't specialise your character, you just get point after each mission so you can upgrade it.

Duh, I like the game for what it is. It is really a great and entertaining game with a great atmosphere and with some of the coolest moments of the trilogy. But I don't get all this love and bias for ME2 when it is not any better than the rest. Actually I find it worse than the rest.

All three games have tons of issues. Yet peopel only bash ME3 because they can't live happily ever after with their nerd-fantasy waifus... yeah, I'm talking abou the ending.

Modifié par GimmeDaGun, 01 juin 2013 - 07:36 .

[NeonFlux117]

ME3 is a great game, it had the best combat, best guns and best DLC (citadel) of the series. ME3 is a great game...... Just not as great as ME2 or ME1.

[FlamingBoy]

I am little confused how bioware "does not" acknowledge their game, there pretty quick to throw the words like master piece around. Not to mention even quicker with the "perfect scores"

http://blog.bioware....012/03/21/4108/
http://social.biowar.../index/10089946

Honestly bioware thinks their games are good by the grace of god. This is fine, everyone would have a confirmation bias on a series they worked on for a decade or so (me3 a bit less than 2). That is normal behavior

On topic: I am not aware that bioware abandoned their game to the critical wolves, the only example I can think of it Patrick Weeks disowning the ending and his part in it.

Modifié par FlamingBoy, 01 juin 2013 - 07:47 .

[FlamingBoy]

GimmeDaGun wrote...


All three games have tons of issues. Yet peopel only bash ME3 because they can't live happily ever after with their nerd-fantasy waifus... yeah, I'm talking abou the ending.

This myth really needs to die

[GimmeDaGun]

FlamingBoy wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...


All three games have tons of issues. Yet peopel only bash ME3 because they can't live happily ever after with their nerd-fantasy waifus... yeah, I'm talking abou the ending.

This myth really needs to die

Maybe, but this is all I see coming from those who still keep bashing ME3. "Why can't I have my trippy-happy ending where Shep can carry on with the LI?" 

The A,B,C,D ending is not the real issue... actually how many options did people expect? All these four endings have several permutation based on how you played the game and what "choices" you made throughout the trilogy (that quote from Casey about the "ABC" has been taken out of context, people should read the whole thing). The ending choices only gives you the chance to decide the reapers' and the galaxy's fate. The very galaxy's fate which you have already changed in many (different) ways. 

People wanted an ending which is based on former decisions? And how on Earth would your former decisions affect the war on the reapers. This way?: If the rachni were alilve they could have jumped on Harbinger and beat the **** out of it, if they were dead Harbinger would kill Zaeed (if alive) with its beam? You can't build another suicide mission which could be based on so many factors and permutations. It's impossible to do and it's also stupid: a typical choices and consequences orgy. Shepard is just one man, the consequences of his formal deeds alone can't change the ending of the war. 

Not enough foreshadowing for the Intelligence? The reapers (huge ass AIs in artificial super-starship bodies) themselves were foreshadowing enough: when I first glimpsed Souvering I knew that something or someone created this thing and its pals with a purpose. No wonder that in the end the game reveals this purpose and the creator. Plus ME3 is all about the Crucible, the reapers, the search for the Catalyst and Cerberus' aim to control the reapers. Foreshadowing.
I also hate this obsession with foreshadowing: it's today's information-addict youth which can't handle twists and revelations in a story. They should read some books.

The reaper origins, their goals,  the Intelligence and whether they make sense or not has been debated to death. For many it does, for many for some reason it doesn't. Whether you like it or not is up to your own personal taste (hell some who disliked this reaper origin story like the billion times more stupid dark energy theory).

We could go on and on. It's not a matter of whether the ending is good or bad. That's up to personal taste: for some it works, for some it does not. Some like it, some hate it. It's a matter of whether it meets people's expectations or not. But expectations are very personal and differ from each other. You can't please all, especially if you want to tell your story to them.

As far as I can see - judging by BSN users' comments - most ending-bashers still complain because they want a happier, less morally ambiguous ending. And that's why they hate ME3 so much (not for its other flaws). So whether it's a myth or not, I don't know... this is what I see. 

Modifié par GimmeDaGun, 01 juin 2013 - 08:58 .

[oO Stryfe Oo]

Lizardviking wrote...

Arcian wrote...

I'm sorry, but how have they NOT acknowledged it?

Pretty much. It is only ME1 that Bioware seems ashamed of for some bizare reason.

I approve of both of these posts.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

The writing of the overarching plot in ME3 is the worst in the series, while the writing of the mini plots as in Tuchunka is the best in the series.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

*sorry double post.

GimmeDaGun wrote...

FlamingBoy wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...


All three games have tons of issues. Yet peopel only bash ME3 because they can't live happily ever after with their nerd-fantasy waifus... yeah, I'm talking abou the ending.

This myth really needs to die

snip

While I do agree that some people's complaints is why can't we have a happy ending, I would have to say that I find most of the complaints are about the bad writing, various plot holes and the breaking of established lore.

Modifié par DinoSteve, 01 juin 2013 - 09:16 .

[Cakcedny]

Agree with most of your points, op. ME3 is a story about sacrifice, not pure triumph. Also, it's a magnificent accomplishment within limited time, and the effort Bioware had put in the game is clear. I believe that given more time, the story would have been polished to a whoole new level, cuz too much potential was wasted and it was all up to the time(or maybe money limitation).

Anyway, I was happy to see the trilogy finally come to an end, and then moved on with the bittersweet feelings.

[Reorte]

FlamingBoy wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...


All three games have tons of issues. Yet peopel only bash ME3 because they can't live happily ever after with their nerd-fantasy waifus... yeah, I'm talking abou the ending.

This myth really needs to die

Some people only support ME3 because they love misery. They usually seem to defend it by trying to insult people who dislike it, which speaks volumes about them.

Various aspects of the game OK but it had none of the life of the previous games and the rushing was all too visible too often. Whilst it had the best moment in the trilogy (Tuchanka) the writing was in general even worse than the others and because of the godawful timing of when it hit its lowest depths can't be rescued by the good points, and so it drags everything else down with it whereas the other two succeeded despite those issues.

[txgoldrush]

Reorte wrote...

FlamingBoy wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...


All three games have tons of issues. Yet peopel only bash ME3 because they can't live happily ever after with their nerd-fantasy waifus... yeah, I'm talking abou the ending.

This myth really needs to die

Some people only support ME3 because they love misery. They usually seem to defend it by trying to insult people who dislike it, which speaks volumes about them.

Various aspects of the game OK but it had none of the life of the previous games and the rushing was all too visible too often. Whilst it had the best moment in the trilogy (Tuchanka) the writing was in general even worse than the others and because of the godawful timing of when it hit its lowest depths can't be rescued by the good points, and so it drags everything else down with it whereas the other two succeeded despite those issues.

People like ME3 because they are intelligent enough to see that the entire story was about sacrifice. Which means a complete triumphant ending is not possible.

The stupid haters really try to make the game be about something else....its not. The game had its secondary themes, but if you truly believe that the ending did not match the series themes.....you really didn't get it.

[txgoldrush]

DinoSteve wrote...

*sorry double post.

GimmeDaGun wrote...

FlamingBoy wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...


All three games have tons of issues. Yet peopel only bash ME3 because they can't live happily ever after with their nerd-fantasy waifus... yeah, I'm talking abou the ending.

This myth really needs to die

snip

While I do agree that some people's complaints is why can't we have a happy ending, I would have to say that I find most of the complaints are about the bad writing, various plot holes and the breaking of established lore.

Which ME1 and ME2 also had but they choose to ignore.

[txgoldrush]

GimmeDaGun wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Gotta love the hypocrisy on this board...once again, dogging ME3 while ignoring the weaknesses of the first two games.

Say all you can say about the Crucible.....but the Conduit storyline in ME1 was extremely logically flimsy. Why would Saren and Sovereign go through all that trouble and risk exposure for a backdoor in the Citadel when he has indoctrination, the krogan clones, and the geth as allies and tools? Tools that can be used to take the Citadel quite easily in a surprise attack? Oh wait, we gotta try and be clever and have them chase a backdoor through what was a relay statue in the Presidum, because we are clever. Hell, if the Reapers took the Citadel, how would the Protheans either place or know about a backdoor to the citadel centuries later. Nevermind the deus ex machinas and the plot developments that come out of nowhere...or the lack of character development for those not named Wrex or the character you romance. Nevermind the fact that the writers simply cannot decide if Renegade meant the ends justify the means or dark lord of the sith or human extremist.

Lets talk ME2, by far the weakest main plot of the series. Lets see, a complete deus ex machina opening where Shepard is unnecessarily killed and still the biggest break in a more hard scifi universe. The way Mordin gets the collector bugs for his repellant for Horizon is never explained, its convenient. Oh and really, they botched Ashley or Kaiden's appearance on Horizon...lets see, they get stung by the seeker swarms before you land but however at the end of the mission, they pop out perfectly fine. Yeah. So much for having a compelling plot for them. And really what the hell was the "mission" to remove Shepard crew from the ship so Joker and the Collectors can happen?

And then lets talk about one of the worst last bosses in video game history. Oh and the Renegade character got even LESS consistent.

Say what you want about ME3, but do not act like ME1 and ME2 were less flawed or gaming gems compared to ME3. Hell, ME3 does something the first two games don't....have a strong narrative flow AND feature strong and significant character development.

Finally... People here are biased as hell. They admire their "perfect" ME2, since they can hook up with everyone on the Normandy and can play the invincible hero man. The game as a story was lame as hell... the weakest of the three. It's the spicing which makes it interesting (vast world, exploration, the atmosphere, the lore and some of the characters and their missions).

Also many of the characters are completely unnecessary and boring (Grunt, Kasumi, Miranda, Jack and Jacob).
The whole game is nothing but a huge daddy-issue fest, and a chase after a "huge threat" (problem is you never have the sense of urgency and of the scale of the threat), some mysterious, weird looking insect race (never seen anything like it in any other sci-fi...haha) from the center of the galaxy which - big surprise - turns out to be the pawns of the reapers (and the former protheans). So you set out with your team of potential LIs to bring the fight to the bugs' home. You have this mission in the end called the suicide mission, which is only a suicide mission if you lack the brains to play super mario (the only thing you go to do to avoid it being a suicide mission is to take care of all the daddy-issues, upgrade your ship (you tend to do that as you go) and don't make obviously stupid decisions during the mission by assigning the wrong person to do the wrong task). And there come the big-badda-boom: a huge space terminator which you have to fight with.... my jaws dropped off when I had to do that (not that Mr. Saren - the cyborgfrog - Arterius wasn't ridiculous enough. And on the top of all of this we have the most annoying reaper of the year: Harbinger, who's behaving like Skullface from that old cartoon, He-man. Infantile and ridiculous: yet people wanted it to be the "main villian" of the series: the big baddie (thank God, Bioware made it disappear in ME3) . Made the reapers look like a bunch of idiots from an '80s B-category fantasy flick. Also the Normandy functions as a huge loveboat... basically you can f. anything that moves on it. And they made Shepard become the usual hero-guy without any fallacies and errors. You can't go wrong with the Shep... he can be the jerk of the year, yet everybody is behaving like a cheerleader with him. Also the renegade Shep is a total psycho without integrity. Shepard as a character does not work. I can't and don't want to treat Shep as if he was me. I want to see the guy's story: the tale about this warrior. In a C&C based interactive game making your protagonist a blank dummy is not a necessity: The Witcher proved that. In ME3 at least he has a character and some level of character development.

You mentioned the other obvious issues with the game. Gameplaywise and presentationwise it was a superior game to ME1, but not to ME3. Also it lacks the inventory system, and the skill-tree. You can't specialise your character, you just get point after each mission so you can upgrade it.

Duh, I like the game for what it is. It is really a great and entertaining game with a great atmosphere and with some of the coolest moments of the trilogy. But I don't get all this love and bias for ME2 when it is not any better than the rest. Actually I find it worse than the rest.

All three games have tons of issues. Yet peopel only bash ME3 because they can't live happily ever after with their nerd-fantasy waifus... yeah, I'm talking abou the ending.

When ME2 is a crime drama...and most of it is...it works extremely well. But when the Collectors are present, the story simply isn't that good.

[Eterna]

Some people only support ME3 because they love misery. They usually seem to defend it by trying to insult people who dislike it, which speaks volumes about them.

As it currently stands, there is no Misery in the ME3 endings, so I don't know what you're talking about.

Modifié par Eterna5, 01 juin 2013 - 09:42 .

[txgoldrush]

Eterna5 wrote...

Some people only support ME3 because they love misery. They usually seem to defend it by trying to insult people who dislike it, which speaks volumes about them.

As it currently stands, there is no Misery in the ME3 endings, so I don't know what you're talking about.

except for low EMS.....lol