138 réponses à ce sujet

[SlottsMachine]

Choices are overrated. The illusion of choice, now that's where its at!

[RZIBARA]

If anything, ME3 was the only time i felt my choices had any sort of weight (mainly during tuchanka, having Wreav instead of wrex, and maelons data affecting Eve's survival were probably the only good demonstration of choices mattering).

[Eterna]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Anarchy__ wrote...

Honestly, the only good thing about ME2 and ME1 was the story and how choices actually mattered

No they didn't. Choices in ME have never mattered.

That is not true!

I chose to eat large amounts of food while playing this series, my consequence was obesity.

My choices mattered. Learn from me. 

Modifié par Eterna5, 21 septembre 2013 - 08:53 .

[KR96]

I agree with the OP's title, as I too believe that ME3 was the better game. T
hough I enjoyed the original Mass Effect, it was far from perfect. The UI was downright dreadful at times and the game was somewhat slow-paced, also I found that the missions were somewhat repetitive... get down in your mako, shoot a couple of turrets and get to the job at hand. I did however greatly enjoy hanging up on the council every time.

As for ME2, I enjoyed that game much more than I did ME1. But even so, ME2 also had its flaws. Though the combat was much faster paced and the detail that went into the choices your character made during ME1 was credible, it was strange to spend three-quarters of the game gathering your crew and do some ridiculous missions to get them focussed, or else they die. Furthermore the mini game concerning mining the planets for resources was simply boring at times.

ME3 was in my opinion better than ME2 was. Although the side missions got a bit repetitive as well, as it was a simple wave-type combat that your character faced, the grand scheme of it all seemed much bigger and epic than ME2 and ME1 did. ME2 felt much more like an insignificant story, especially when one takes the events of Mass Effect: Paragon Lost into consideration. Although the ending was greatly disappointing at first, bioware fixed that quite a bit with the extended-cut dlc. Also I really, really, really enjoyed saying goodbye to every single character in the Citadel DLC.

[zed888]

Anarchy__ wrote...

Gameplay is provides the entertainment and promotes replay value.

Not in my experience.  The combat was the best in 3, but it's irrelevant for me because the story is so bad it stops me from playing at all.   For the fun combat there's multiplayer which strangely turned out to be the best part of the game.

[Redbelle]

zed888 wrote...

Anarchy__ wrote...

Gameplay is provides the entertainment and promotes replay value.

Not in my experience.  The combat was the best in 3, but it's irrelevant for me because the story is so bad it stops me from playing at all.   For the fun combat there's multiplayer which strangely turned out to be the best part of the game.

Combat.... Good.

Gameplay, compared to ME1 and 2..... Really... Really bad.

ME3 is just a shooter with no attempt to pull the player deeper into it's world. Without safes, doors, terminals, etc etc... ME3 is superficial. It has lost it's RPG DNA that made it compelling as a story based shooter. Story in ME3 is now reliant on interactive cutscene's and those out of place vid sequences that never look quite as good as the game engine.

Much as I think they nailed the combat.... it was not a leap forward in combat to warrent the loss of other gameplay elements. ME2 was such a leap forward that it was easy to forgive the more streamlined approach as it made the game more accessible. ME3 stripped away to much and became.....Meh'ss Effect when it come's to giving players stuff to do.

At least Citadel rectified that to a degree. But only in the hub. Would have preferred standard gamplay mechanics from the past games to be incorporated.

[David Diablo]

Oooo, the SP forum is so polite, even Anarchy threads are treated with respect! o_O
OT: The jewel in the mass effect series will always be ME1. All of the characters were well thought out and with there own unique quirks. The story was the best of the series with Saren remaining my favourite bad guy.

The gameplay, while robotic and stiff compared to ME3, had that quintiessential RPG feel. You were genuinely excited to do side missions and explore uncharted worlds. Most of all, it felt like your decisions made a genuine impact on the galaxy (something you find out in later games isn't always true) and you were playing the hero/anti-hero your way.

ME2 and ME3 almost feel like they're on rails in comparison. But I can't seem to get enough of ME3MP...

[Redbelle]

StreetMagic wrote...

Replay value in Bioware games for me was always in the "chemistry" of how you roleplayed.. doing a certain quest one way, talking to a character this way, bonding with different characters, deciding which ones you bring on missions, etc.. Not to mention the exploring and discovery of new things. Mind you, some of this is still in ME3. I'm just saying that's what I've always liked about their games in general. The combat was the glue that binded everything, but it was never the thing that compelled me to have repeated playthroughs, personally.

I don't know. Saying combat is more important in an RPG is like saying the sitting around and rolling dice parts are the most important experience in playing D&D. When playing D&D is more about the story and (drunk) banter and character responses you have with your friends.

That said, maybe Mass Effect isn't even an RPG anyways. It's obvious they're trying to redefine themselves and get away from it.

If Bioware want to redefine themselves..... okaaaay.

But did they have to take a gun and shoot themselves in the foot to do it?

Bioware is about RPG's because they have made RPG's in the past. Which means they know RPG's inside and out.

ME3 has always had a more, instant shooter feel compared to the old CD timers...... But it was a shooter with RPG dna, and that made it stand out above the rest.

If BW cannot understand that taking what they know of RPG's and putting it into future games of different genre's is a good idea they may as well quit while their ahead.

I've got no problem playing a shooter. But I'd prefer it to be a BW shooter in the vein of ME 1 and 2. Because the RPG element's of the past ME1 and 2 made the shooter drastically more involving than putting a reticle over a bad guy and squeezing the left click button.

[AndyAK79]

I'm a bit confused by some of these arguments. Everyone seems to agree that the combat was better in ME3 than in the other games, but some people seem to have a problem with it being different. You want the combat to be better, but exactly the same? Or just not change or develop the games at all (even if it improves them)?

All this stuff about a weak plot is ridiculous. It's a dramatic, character driven story about a threat to civilisation. Could someone tell me in what way this story is poor? What makes a good plot? If any game was light on story it was ME2 - apart from the collector missions very little of the game moved the plot forward at all.

I love all three games, but ME3 is clearly head and shoulders above the others on every level.

[Redbelle]

AndyAK79 wrote...

I'm a bit confused by some of these arguments. Everyone seems to agree that the combat was better in ME3 than in the other games, but some people seem to have a problem with it being different. You want the combat to be better, but exactly the same? Or just not change or develop the games at all (even if it improves them)?

All this stuff about a weak plot is ridiculous. It's a dramatic, character driven story about a threat to civilisation. Could someone tell me in what way this story is poor? What makes a good plot? If any game was light on story it was ME2 - apart from the collector missions very little of the game moved the plot forward at all.

I love all three games, but ME3 is clearly head and shoulders above the others on every level.

Combat - good.

Unlockable doors -  Absent

Hackable terminals - Absent

Safes - Absent

In short, no mini game's masquerading as hacking section's to offset the drive of shooting.

ME2 had these between section's when the combat tailored off. It gave the player something to do .

It's not abou wanting combat to be like ME2 and 3. It's about the combat being as good as 3....... and the stuff to engage the gamer from 2. It's the RPG segment's that need to be redeveloped to make those segment's better. Just finding and picking up stuff has a low value, player reward value because they didnt earn it. Hacking and getting stuff has a higher player reward value because they had to acheive something to get it.

So once again, the problem is, it's not all about the combat. There's more to ME than shooting, And ME3 didn't deliver on that front. Just the combat front.

[Vapaa]

ME3 gave me the best moments in the entire trilogy

Granted, it also gave me the worst one, but ME1 and ME2 had nothing that could compare with the Tuchanka or Rannoch arc, and overall, there was the continous war atmosphere that immersed me more than in th other games (mind you, in ME1 we only visited barren wastelands and third-class colonies)

gameplay-wise it's light-years ahead be it ennemies, weapons, powers, level-design, overall variety

So yes despite the atrocious ending, ME3 is just the best ME experience I've witnessed

Modifié par Vapaä, 22 septembre 2013 - 02:19 .

[zed888]

AndyAK79 wrote...

All this stuff about a weak plot is ridiculous. It's a dramatic, character driven story about a threat to civilisation. Could someone tell me in what way this story is poor?

For starters, it has...
-Implausible, unsatisfying ending
-protagonist who turns into an idiot
-masked comic book villain twisting his moustache in 3 major missions

[AndyAK79]

zed888 wrote...

AndyAK79 wrote...

All this stuff about a weak plot is ridiculous. It's a dramatic, character driven story about a threat to civilisation. Could someone tell me in what way this story is poor?

For starters, it has...
-Implausible, unsatisfying ending
-protagonist who turns into an idiot
-masked comic book villain twisting his moustache in 3 major missions

What? I personally found the ending perfectly satisfying, but that's subjective. In what way was it implausable?

In what way does Shepard turn into an idiot? Who is the masked villain you're refering to?

I don't honestly see how you can subtantiate these opinions.

[Vapaa]

AndyAK79 wrote...
What? I personally found the ending perfectly satisfying, but that's subjective. In what way was it implausable?

The ending is indeed inplausable, it's so implausable in fact that the Leviathan DLC outright states that the Catalyst is full of sh*t

AndyAK79 wrote...
In what way does Shepard turn into an idiot? Who is the masked villain you're refering to?

Shepard is no more a tool than in ME1 and ME2, as for the moustache-twirling villain....well TIM has always been like this

[Linkenski]

ME3's biggest flaw was the lack of the series original charm. I don't know, I just didn't feel it, but ME3 is not even a great game to my tastes.

And I was constantly put off by how convenient everything turned out to be. All those "biggest moments" you're all talking about... I thought they were forced and superficial to be quite frank.

Modifié par Linkenski, 22 septembre 2013 - 06:08 .

[Vapaa]

Linkenski wrote...

And I was constantly put off by how convenient everything turned out to be. All those "biggest moments" you're all talking about... I thought they were forced and superficial to be quite frank.

It's a staple of the series, look at Illos in ME1, you arrive just at the same time as Saren, for maximum convenient points

ME don't, and never had a subtle storytelling

[zed888]

AndyAK79 wrote...

What? I personally found the ending perfectly satisfying, but that's subjective. In what way was it implausable?

In what way does Shepard turn into an idiot? Who is the masked villain you're refering to?

I don't honestly see how you can subtantiate these opinions.

Masked villain=Kai Leng. 

   Shepard becomes idiotic starting at the Cerberus base.  Vendetta offers to interface with the Catalyst and activate everything, but Shepard seems to think it would be a better idea to try wandering around the Citadel looking for a promising button to push.  Then (in the extended cut) during the win-or-lose rush to the beam, she wastes precious time and risks losing the Normandy by calling for the evac of a squadmate with some burns and maybe a broken ankle.   Then, after neglecting to being Vendetta along, she activates the biggest weapon of mass destruction ever made by following the directions of a REAPER HOLOGRAM, without even trying to contact edi or somebody from the Crucible project for technical help.

  There have been 10,000 threads on various ways the ending was implausible.  I don't have time to type up my own highlights right now.   Maybe later.

[Degrees1991]

Nah 2 but 1 had the best story. 3 was a good game though.

[AndyAK79]

zed888 wrote...

AndyAK79 wrote...

What? I personally found the ending perfectly satisfying, but that's subjective. In what way was it implausable?

In what way does Shepard turn into an idiot? Who is the masked villain you're refering to?

I don't honestly see how you can subtantiate these opinions.

Masked villain=Kai Leng. 

   Shepard becomes idiotic starting at the Cerberus base.  Vendetta offers to interface with the Catalyst and activate everything, but Shepard seems to think it would be a better idea to try wandering around the Citadel looking for a promising button to push.  Then (in the extended cut) during the win-or-lose rush to the beam, she wastes precious time and risks losing the Normandy by calling for the evac of a squadmate with some burns and maybe a broken ankle.   Then, after neglecting to being Vendetta along, she activates the biggest weapon of mass destruction ever made by following the directions of a REAPER HOLOGRAM, without even trying to contact edi or somebody from the Crucible project for technical help.

  There have been 10,000 threads on various ways the ending was implausible.  I don't have time to type up my own highlights right now.   Maybe later.

Okay, I think it's worth addressing these points individually;

"Vendetta offers to interface with the Catalyst and activate everything, but Shepard seems to think it would be a better idea to try wandering around the Citadel looking for a promising button to push."

This doesn't actually happen.

"...she wastes precious time and risks losing the Normandy by calling for the evac of a squadmate with some burns and maybe a broken ankle."

Whilst some burns and a broken ankle aren't that serious when shopping in Croyden they can easilly prove fatal when there are MASSIVE REAPERS EVERYWHERE!

"...she activates the biggest weapon of mass destruction ever made by following the directions of a REAPER HOLOGRAM, without even trying to contact edi or somebody from the Crucible project for technical help."

Technical help? He's trying to save the universe, not fiddling with his laptop. A ten minute conference call wouldn't make Shepard look very decisive and wouldn't make for a very exciting climax to the game either. Besides, what was the alternative? Leave and hope everything worked out for the best?

Also, whilst I agree there are many  threads picking the ending apart I haven't been especially convinced by those I've read, and if you don't have time to repeat your favourites, I definately don't have time to look through 10'000 threads waiting to be convinced.

Modifié par AndyAK79, 22 septembre 2013 - 09:28 .

[AlanC9]

Redbelle wrote...
ME3 is just a shooter with no attempt to pull the player deeper into it's world. Without safes, doors, terminals, etc etc... ME3 is superficial. It has lost it's RPG DNA that made it compelling as a story based shooter. Story in ME3 is now reliant on interactive cutscene's and those out of place vid sequences that never look quite as good as the game engine.

The minigames were compelling?

[Fatiguesdualism]

@AlanC9 I enjoyed the mini-games - at least it was a break from the 'pew-pew-pew' which is the only thing ME3 seemed to have on offer.

RE: OP I'm sorry but I disagree.  The 'pew-pew-pew' was more polished than that in it's predecessors and the inventory (well gun-selection would be more accurate) was improved since ME2's lack-lustre effort.  On the other hand everything else (vehicles, conversation choices, mini-games, armour and gear selection) was either ditched or only given a token appearance.  As for the plot of ME3 - the less said the better.  So sorry I didn't enjoy much of the single-player experience of ME3 as I value story over mechanics.  Should I want to play a third-person, cover based shooter - well there's plenty others (more polished) on the market and if that's what BioWare intends to produce in the future - they'll have to really improve to gain my custom.

PS on discussing the ending and any implausibility it may contain - I thought this was the NO ME3 Spoilers section of the forums?

Modifié par Fatiguesdualism, 22 septembre 2013 - 10:28 .

[Redbelle]

AlanC9 wrote...

Redbelle wrote...
ME3 is just a shooter with no attempt to pull the player deeper into it's world. Without safes, doors, terminals, etc etc... ME3 is superficial. It has lost it's RPG DNA that made it compelling as a story based shooter. Story in ME3 is now reliant on interactive cutscene's and those out of place vid sequences that never look quite as good as the game engine.

The minigames were compelling?

I refer you to the above poster.... but seriously...... Did you never hack a thing in the ME trilogy?

We had ME1's spatial awareness and timing tests.

And ME2's memory games against a time limit.

And ME3's....... oh.

[Treacherous J Slither]

I watched ME1 on YouTube after falling in love with ME2. I liked it. Good stuff. Heard the combat was terrible though.

ME2 was the first one that I played. Gave it a shot after losing my life to Dragon Age. Figured these BioWare guys knew what they were doing. The more I played, the better it got. Huge fan right here. Saw a girl with a N7 hoodie on a few days ago while wandering around alphabet city. I thoroughly embarrassed myself by gushing all over her and geeking out about the game and our mutual fandom.

ME3 was enjoyable the first time I went through it. Some parts were tough to get through though because they were sooo corny. Going to the various races homeworlds was pretty cool. Expected them to do better than they did though. Not win maybe but at least put up a much better fight. Especially the asari. Biotic explosions everywhere? Nope. Didn't happen. How did Earth hang on while Thessia fell? They have an advanced civilization and every single one of them is a powerful biotic. Whatever. The story has it's ups and downs as all things do but the ending was just too much. Massive disappointment. Epic letdown. The multiplayer however has me hooked. I expected to be able to create and customize my very own character for play in the rich and vast ME universe but instead i'm forced to pick a premade character and color them in. I'ts still fun though. Lot's of fun. Could've been much better but it's still very addictive.

Overall though ME2 is the best to me. So much awesome in that game. Mirandas catsuits. Her getting massively burned by that hella cool asari commando as a result of her penchant for them. Lots of terrific character interaction in this game. All the great renegade interrupts. The drell race being damned cool. All the great music and DLC. The classes. First time i've ever come across the concept of the Infiltrator. Invisibility cloak? I've seen Predator. Yeah it's cool. Snipers? I've seen Enemy At The Gates. Yeah it's cool. A sniper with a cloaking ability? **** yeah! I've tried to recreate this class in just about every game i've played since then. So cool. I mean seriously how scary is something like that on the battlefield? A freaking nightmare.

Anyway enough of my rambling. ME2 roolz.