865 réponses à ce sujet

[Erez Kristal]

ioannisdenton wrote...

Did not read anything but i ll say this as a former ending hater:
Stop hating.
Stop repeating the same things-arguments over and over.
The ending at it's current form with Ec and Leviathan is fine.
What did you expect people seriously???
A happy "galaxy united" win win win the reapers?
it was obvious that this would not be the case.
Did you want shepard to live?
It is better that shepard dies. It is more meaningful this way.
Also a note on war assets:
READ them, as you did with the Codex.
Making separate cutscenes for each war assets OR race is impossible.
Too many choices; one may NOT recriuted volus, other may not recruited hanar, geth may be absent, you get the picture. It could NOT be done. Unlike Me2 squadmates which they should have more screentime.

As i formely said, the ending are tiny part of the problem... i bet you played a paragon 

[ioannisdenton]

Dubozz wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Right, Dubozz, because Bio never had a clue what those motives were.

ME1 dug the hole that ME3 fell into. ME2 evaded the hole by not being about anything.

So are you telling me that this is bad writing or something? What a revelation.

Can you name some games that have better writing and story than Mass effect?
Cause for me Mass effect along with some others is in the top.

[ioannisdenton]

erezike wrote...

ioannisdenton wrote...

Did not read anything but i ll say this as a former ending hater:
Stop hating.
Stop repeating the same things-arguments over and over.
The ending at it's current form with Ec and Leviathan is fine.
What did you expect people seriously???
A happy "galaxy united" win win win the reapers?
it was obvious that this would not be the case.
Did you want shepard to live?
It is better that shepard dies. It is more meaningful this way.
Also a note on war assets:
READ them, as you did with the Codex.
Making separate cutscenes for each war assets OR race is impossible.
Too many choices; one may NOT recriuted volus, other may not recruited hanar, geth may be absent, you get the picture. It could NOT be done. Unlike Me2 squadmates which they should have more screentime.

As i formely said, the ending are tiny part of the problem... i bet you played a paragon 

ME1 3 playthroughs
Me2 9 playthoughs
Me3 4 playthoughs.
I like renegade better.

[AlanC9]

Dubozz wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Right, Dubozz, because Bio never had a clue what those motives were.

ME1 dug the hole that ME3 fell into. ME2 evaded the hole by not being about anything.

So are you telling me that this is bad writing or something? What a revelation.

Always bad, yep. Though it's only in one small aspect of the writing that the games are bad; other aspects are quite good, as Bio games usually are.

Why did you reply to me, anyway? What did you think I was saying?

Modifié par AlanC9, 25 juin 2013 - 10:49 .

[TheProtheans]

dreamgazer wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

erezike wrote...

Thats some way to look at statistics.
The players wrote the feeling they had while playing the game.
Because the ending was so bad for them. they failed to notice the badness that was the mass effect 3 plot.

On xbox in meta critic its 5.5 for me3 and 8.9 for me2....  i havent found even one place where you have mass effect 3 outscoring mass effect 2 in user scores.

it ranges from 9 points to 38.

So, if it's so terrible, why did 1.692 people give it a positive review on Metacritic? That's more positive than negative.  And my apologies: looking at the more accurate expanded graphs, Mass Effect 2 does have more positive reviews than ME3: 2,356.  Their front-page numbers are misleading. 

User scores on the Internet are a very poor gauge of quality in the first place, because petulant audience members will flock to dump on it if it doesn't meet expectations and to "make their voice heard" with 0.0 bombs. But you're still sweeping the largest number of reviews under the table in your assessment.  ME3's writing needed more work, but plenty of people were satisfied---even those who gave it negative marks simply because they didn't like the ending. 

5.5 is a pretty terrible score for game, a score deserving of a bad game.
And it is no surprise I find you taking only one point in order to defend ME3, you totally skip imbeciles giving it 10's just out of spite.

There are imbeciles all around, kiddo.  That's part of my point, and something I'm sure you understand well. 

The other part is that people actually liked the game, despite what the BSN would love to believe.

Son, the overall point was generally negative towards negative scores and had no mention of postive score in the same like.
If you wish to show you share them in the same light then I suggest you give them an equal or similar number of points.

Modifié par TheProtheans, 25 juin 2013 - 10:49 .

[Erez Kristal]

ioannisdenton wrote...

erezike wrote...

ioannisdenton wrote...

Did not read anything but i ll say this as a former ending hater:
Stop hating.
Stop repeating the same things-arguments over and over.
The ending at it's current form with Ec and Leviathan is fine.
What did you expect people seriously???
A happy "galaxy united" win win win the reapers?
it was obvious that this would not be the case.
Did you want shepard to live?
It is better that shepard dies. It is more meaningful this way.
Also a note on war assets:
READ them, as you did with the Codex.
Making separate cutscenes for each war assets OR race is impossible.
Too many choices; one may NOT recriuted volus, other may not recruited hanar, geth may be absent, you get the picture. It could NOT be done. Unlike Me2 squadmates which they should have more screentime.

As i formely said, the ending are tiny part of the problem... i bet you played a paragon 

ME1 3 playthroughs
Me2 9 playthoughs
Me3 4 playthoughs.
I like renegade better.

How did you cope with being captured on earth?
Cerberus turning into sith, Rachni alive after you killed them and geth and quarrians going all crazy. this is even before the big bad dues ex catalyst

[TheProtheans]

StreetMagic wrote...

5.5 is a terribly unjust rating. Even as a critic of the game, I can see that. I like it well enough that I feel sorry for the teams that did excellent work on parts of it, only to get overshadowed by the controversy of the ending.

Games aren't just rated for the game, they're rated for the company and the game.
Considering what happened they're lucky it is only 5.5.

[ioannisdenton]

StreetMagic wrote...

5.5 is a terribly unjust rating. Even as a critic of the game, I can see that. I like it well enough that I feel sorry for the teams that did excellent work on parts of it, only to get overshadowed by the controversy of the ending.

.. check skyrim please... that overrated overpraised shallow game. After the first couple of hours you dinf yourself repeating everythins, same as oblivion, or fallout 3.
5.5 is a classic example of internet abuse. Anyone can pick a game-movie and score it with a 1 or a 10.
 we almost all do it : 10 if we liked ti 1 if we hated it.
On topic people who rate Me3 with 1 are hypocrits at best. Even the game's productions alone guarantee that game is not on the lowest grade

[Erez Kristal]

StreetMagic wrote...

5.5 is a terribly unjust rating. Even as a critic of the game, I can see that. I like it well enough that I feel sorry for the teams that did excellent work on parts of it, only to get overshadowed by the controversy of the ending.

Well i gave it a 4 on gamespot, so 5.5 feels right for me...
The multiplayer-gameplay is 8.5
single player story is 3.
General feeling after being greatly attached to the story is 4.


When you combine the 10 with the 1 you will get a good reliable score. some people also rate in between

Modifié par erezike, 25 juin 2013 - 11:00 .

[xAmilli0n]

erezike wrote...

ioannisdenton wrote...

ME1 3 playthroughs
Me2 9 playthoughs
Me3 4 playthoughs.
I like renegade better.

How did you cope with being captured on earth?
Cerberus turning into sith, Rachni alive after you killed them and geth and quarrians going all crazy. this is even before the big bad dues ex catalyst

Probably like any renegade would, by shooting things. 

[Erez Kristal]

StreetMagic wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

5.5 is a terribly unjust rating. Even as a critic of the game, I can see that. I like it well enough that I feel sorry for the teams that did excellent work on parts of it, only to get overshadowed by the controversy of the ending.

Games aren't just rated for the game, they're rated for the company and the game.
Considering what happened they're lucky it is only 5.5.

Sure, but it still stinks. It's a bit like, say, if some caterers were preparing for a big night, and the main chefs brought their A game - made a delicious meal.. but the guy preparing the dessert was stoned or tired and poured in a lot of salt in the cake instead of sugar. And then the whole restaurant gets blamed for his dumbassery.

If the guy who is making the desert is also the guy who incharge of the story then yes its quite shameful because the gameplay department did its job very well.
squadmates banter was also very fun.

Losing control over shepard for bioware sake- not so much/

Modifié par erezike, 25 juin 2013 - 11:02 .

[TheProtheans]

StreetMagic wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

5.5 is a terribly unjust rating. Even as a critic of the game, I can see that. I like it well enough that I feel sorry for the teams that did excellent work on parts of it, only to get overshadowed by the controversy of the ending.

Games aren't just rated for the game, they're rated for the company and the game.
Considering what happened they're lucky it is only 5.5.

Sure, but it still stinks. It's a bit like, say, if some caterers were preparing for a big night, and the main chefs brought their A game - made a delicious meal.. but the guy preparing the dessert was stoned or tired and poured in a lot of salt in the cake instead of sugar. And then the whole restaurant gets blamed for his dumbassery.

Well yeah, if a worker harmed the customer then the customer could sue the restaurant.
It always looks bad on the restaurant.

[AlanC9]

StreetMagic wrote...
The Reapers didn't have to make sense before, because they were a bit inspired by Lovecraft, I think. They're just supposed to be unknowable forces that you can't placate or understand. For whatever reason, the Reapers suddenly became more Wachowski than Lovecraft, and are puppeteered by an Architect like figure. A step down, in my opinion. They wanted to graft in more cyberpunkish themes instead of horror.

The problem with this is that Bio never intended any such thing. If interviews are to be believed, they always intended  to have an explanation for the Reapers. The Lovecraftian aspect was temporary, until Shepard learned the truth.

Maybe they should have stuck with the Lovecraft? I would have hated that, but ithat's just, like, my opinion.

[Dubozz]

ioannisdenton wrote...

Dubozz wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Right, Dubozz, because Bio never had a clue what those motives were.

ME1 dug the hole that ME3 fell into. ME2 evaded the hole by not being about anything.

So are you telling me that this is bad writing or something? What a revelation.

Can you name some games that have better writing and story than Mass effect?
Cause for me Mass effect along with some others is in the top.

 
LA Noire, HL, Portal, Deus EX (old one), Silent Hill 2, Farenheit, Heavy Rain, Red Dead Redemption, Witcher 2, Bastion, Planescape Torment,  VTM Bloodlines, Max Payne 2, To The Moon and so on. ME3 has it's moments, but ending ruined them for me.

[Erez Kristal]

AlanC9 wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...
The Reapers didn't have to make sense before, because they were a bit inspired by Lovecraft, I think. They're just supposed to be unknowable forces that you can't placate or understand. For whatever reason, the Reapers suddenly became more Wachowski than Lovecraft, and are puppeteered by an Architect like figure. A step down, in my opinion. They wanted to graft in more cyberpunkish themes instead of horror.

The problem with this is that Bio never intended any such thing. If interviews are to be believed, they always intended  to have an explanation for the Reapers. The Lovecraftian aspect was temporary, until Shepard learned the truth.

Maybe they should have stuck with the Lovecraft? I would have hated that, but ithat's just, like, my opinion.

Its the lesser evil. unless you have a better idea for why the reapers where doing what they were doing that was beyond the comprehension of shep

[dreamgazer]

TheProtheans wrote...

Son ...

You're adorable.

... the overall point was generally negative towards negative scores and had no mention of postive score in the same like.
If you wish to show you share them in the same light then I suggest you give them an equal or similar number of points.

Why should I? It's a lot easier to peel through the red ratings and see that the score has been bombed by angsty infants than it is to sort out the "dishonest" positive reviews.  They exist on both sides, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see where it skews and why it skewed. And I never said that I see them in the same light, only that imbeciles exist on both ends.  Hint: there's more on one end than the other.  It's the Internet, after all. 

Also, if we were to somehow say that the exaggerated voting were equal on both sides, there'd still be more positive scores---and the overall total would almost assuredly be higher than a 5.5 after the flood of hasty zeroes were axed.

Modifié par dreamgazer, 25 juin 2013 - 11:09 .

[Erez Kristal]

Dubozz wrote...

ioannisdenton wrote...

Dubozz wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Right, Dubozz, because Bio never had a clue what those motives were.

ME1 dug the hole that ME3 fell into. ME2 evaded the hole by not being about anything.

So are you telling me that this is bad writing or something? What a revelation.

Can you name some games that have better writing and story than Mass effect?
Cause for me Mass effect along with some others is in the top.

 
LA Noire, HL, Portal, Deus EX (old one), Silent Hill 2, Farenheit, Heavy Rain, Red Dead Redemption, Witcher 2, Bastion, Planescape Torment,  VTM Bloodlines, Max Payne 2, To The Moon and so on. ME3 has it's moments, but ending ruined them for me.

portal has no story.
Planescape torment was clearly a masterpiece when it came to deep writing.and thinking over what you say

[ioannisdenton]

erezike wrote...

How did you cope with being captured on earth?
Cerberus turning into sith, Rachni alive after you killed them and geth and quarrians going all crazy. this is even before the big bad dues ex catalyst

Well the game somehow had to begin right?
I always do arrival and the reason why Shep is on earth  is justifiable. A human blowed up a batarian relay, humans and batarians have enough tension between them so a scapegoat is found: Shepard.

Rachni: if one is renegade then the rachni queen must be killed again , in my first renegade playthrough i spared the queen and the rachni-breeder betrayed me. i read it in the war assets, yes i enjoy reading in bioware games.
They ARE bioware games so one must read the various stuff in my opinion.
Now i can totally see your annoyance  (i did too in the beggining): but Bioware decided noone should miss the rachni enemy.
Note that the rachni queen is different than the Breeder, it has a different personality. Also aralach company survives. Why do we have to be so strict with Me3 all the time? Me2 did nothing on Me1 main desicions by your logic.

Quarians and geth, yeap it is as you worte it, quarians got crazy but it was after admral Xen developed the special weapon against the geth.

[xAmilli0n]

AlanC9 wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...
The Reapers didn't have to make sense before, because they were a bit inspired by Lovecraft, I think. They're just supposed to be unknowable forces that you can't placate or understand. For whatever reason, the Reapers suddenly became more Wachowski than Lovecraft, and are puppeteered by an Architect like figure. A step down, in my opinion. They wanted to graft in more cyberpunkish themes instead of horror.

The problem with this is that Bio never intended any such thing. If interviews are to be believed, they always intended  to have an explanation for the Reapers. The Lovecraftian aspect was temporary, until Shepard learned the truth.

Maybe they should have stuck with the Lovecraft? I would have hated that, but ithat's just, like, my opinion.

I personally think they should have, but I'm of the belief that the enemy you don't understand is scarier than the one you do.  Did they really need an explanation?  I don't think so, but I think many would agree that what we got was not the most satisfying of explanations.

[xAmilli0n]

erezike wrote...

Portal has no story.

Whoa, what game did you play?  Because I can assure you it was not Portal.