138 réponses à ce sujet

[o Ventus]

Vapaä wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

The problem isn't that autodialogue is there, it's that it pervades the scene and takes Shepard out of character from how the player molds him or her.

That also happens in ME1, only that in ME1 I have 3 out of character choices and a very static and awkward conversation

ME1 runs on the illusion of choice, but you have the same amount of choice that actually matters in ME3

And how does this relate to my post or ME3?

[Vapaa]

o Ventus wrote...

And how does this relate to my post or ME3?

It's a problem that affects the whole trilogy, not just ME3

[AndyAK79]

o Ventus wrote...

radishson wrote...

ME3 is better in virtually every regard, IMO.

Lol.

For Heaven's sake! 'Lol' is not some hilarious, über-witty, catch-all way of inarguably dismissing anything you don't happen to agree with!

Contribute to the discussion or don't. 

[radishson]

o Ventus wrote...

The problem isn't that autodialogue is there, it's that it pervades the scene and takes Shepard out of character from how the player molds him or her.

The series has been doing that from the first game - investigative questions have always taken a neutral-paragon tone.  Claiming it "pervades the scene" suggests you honestly skipped out on useful information during ME1 and 2 simply to keep your Shepard more in character, which is ridiculous.  All auto-dialogue did was remove the manual part of a process that has existed since ME1.

Vapaä wrote...

That also happens in ME1, only that in ME1 I have 3 out of character choices and a very static and awkward conversation

ME1 runs on the illusion of choice, but you have the same amount of choice that actually matters in ME3

The "illusion of choice" is prevalent through the entirity of the first two games and it was probably more effective than Bioware would've hoped, judging by the expectations it created.  Let's remember that ME2 is a game in which the only sembleance of continuity occurs during minor character cameos, and the only decision of any importance is made within the last 5 minutes of play.  And yet it's ME3 that gets the heat for "not making player choices matter", even as it remains the only game in the entire trilogy that demonstrates any sort of consequence or variability whatsoever.

AndyAK79 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

radishson wrote...

ME3 is better in virtually every regard, IMO.

Lol.

For Heaven's sake! 'Lol' is not some hilarious, über-witty, catch-all way of inarguably dismissing anything you don't happen to agree with!

Contribute to the discussion or don't. 

Unfortunately, it's unwise to expect differently from BSN.

Modifié par radishson, 25 septembre 2013 - 01:00 .

[Anarchy__]

Many of you fail to see what me3 ending was supposed to mean, to represent. The A B C choices respresented "lost cause" idea, that in the end nothing you did ever mattered. It explored this through the side missions and war effort progress, that you were doing these missions that made it seem like you were winning, that there was a chance. Thats were the limited choices fit in, to show that sometimes in life no matter how far, long, hard you work sometimes it doesnt matter. The storyline was much much deeper than it's predecessors, however how it was executed was poor (we can all agree on this)

The ending of Me1 was so cheesy and gimmicky. A 10 billion year old super machine that had the technology to reside in dark space was defeated because you killed its "pawn". Also dont forget the stupid cool guy walk away shepherd did when he told the council he was going to find the reapers. Wtf are you gonna do when you find thrm? You already saw what 1 can do, imagine a whole fleet! Gimmicky cliche cool guy ending.

now me2, in the end it was an A B choice, just do some quests that explain their storyline. Sure it was cool how deep it went into character and team building, but at the end of the day it was a red or blue choice.

me1 and 2 dialogue was so static, and awkward. The autodialogue in me3 while was less deeper, was way more dynsmic and realistic.

Side missions were monotonous in me1, and both me1 and 2 was boring in gameplay. Me3 combat was way more dynamic and fun. The character levelling was way better, you could actually feel like each unlock meant something and you could feel your character getting stronger. Me1 and 2 skill points were meh, most of the time I would just waste it away.

in conclusion, mass effect 3 had a much deeper dark story and atmosphere,just how it was executed was lackluster compared to the first two. The only thing the first 2 had going was character depth, you actually felt shepherd changing. Other than that, they fell flat on everything else.

[o Ventus]

radishson wrote...

The series has been doing that from the first game - investigative questions have always taken a neutral-paragon tone.  Claiming it "pervades the scene" suggests you honestly skipped out on useful information during ME1 and 2 simply to keep your Shepard more in character, which is ridiculous.

1. The investigate dialogues were neutral.

2. I'm not sure why you're bringing up investigative or expository dialogue, which isn't developmental for Shepard's character.

3. Not all of ME3's autodialogue is expository.

Way to either miss or ignore the point in my post. To quote you, it would be unwise to expect otherwise on the BSN.

Modifié par o Ventus, 25 septembre 2013 - 12:53 .

[radishson]

I think you need to reread the past few posts. It would be great if you could actually reference the auto-dialogue that broke your game, too.

[o Ventus]

radishson wrote...

I think you need to reread the past few posts. It would be great if you could actually reference the auto-dialogue that broke your game, too.

I did. You're still the only one who mentioned investigate options or expository dialogue. No amount of rereading is going to change that.

Shepard's canned response to the asari councillor is a perfect example of horrendously done autodialogue. There's also the case of Shepard automatically being close friends with all of his crew, despite being able to be a giant d**k to a number of them in either 1 or 2 (See: Liara, for example).

[radishson]

I mentioned investigative dialogue in my first post, which I was under the impression you agreed with since you replied not by denying my statements but my suggesting the problem was rather with the way it "pervades the scene".

The Asari Councilor scene is no different to me than the entirety of ME1, in which dialogue choices only ever really influence tone of voice. And forced squad friendship was introduced in ME2 with Liara, Wrex, & Garrus, among others. ME3 has the convenient scapegoat of auto dialogue to blame for the characterization problems, whereas the first two games more effectively emulated the feeling of meaningful player choice. I'm not arguing the auto-dialogue isn't bad in places, I'm arguing it's always been that way.

[o Ventus]

radishson wrote...

The Asari Councilor scene is no different to me than the entirety of ME1, in which dialogue choices only ever really influence tone of voice.

A change in tone is still a change (and can tangibly alter the intent of a word or phrase). Autodialogue is... Automated. Also, having played ME1 (twice) less than a week ago, I can tell you for a fact that not every dialogue choice is identical. Not remotely. Then again, I don't structure my entire argument around hyperbole.

And forced squad friendship was introduced in ME2 with Liara, Wrex, & Garrus, among others.

You're right. It was also in ME2. Except now you're strawman-ing because this doesn't acknowledge or invalidate my point in any way. How does a problem existing in ME2 make it less of a problem or more acceptable in ME3? If you're not saying that it does, then why bother even mentioning this?

ME3 has the convenient scapegoat of auto dialogue to blame for the characterization problems, whereas the first two games more effectively emulated the feeling of meaningful player choice. I'm not arguing the auto-dialogue isn't bad in places, I'm arguing it's always been that way.

It's not a scapegoat, not that you seem to be able to tell the difference between a scapegoat and a legitimate issue, instead hiding behind subjectivity as if it's some sort of catch-all counter argument.

Modifié par o Ventus, 26 septembre 2013 - 02:46 .

[radishson]

o Ventus wrote...

How does a problem existing in ME2 make it less of a problem or more acceptable in ME3?

Go back and reread. Thanks.

[o Ventus]

radishson wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

How does a problem existing in ME2 make it less of a problem or more acceptable in ME3?

Go back and reread. Thanks.

Just saying "hurr go and reread" doesn't so anything to weaken my position, as if I missed some crucial piece of data, which I didn't.

Ao do you mind telling me what I didn't read (despite having read your entire post) or are you going to strawman and avoid the point some more?

[spirosz]

o Ventus wrote...

radishson wrote...

I think you need to reread the past few posts. It would be great if you could actually reference the auto-dialogue that broke your game, too.

I did. You're still the only one who mentioned investigate options or expository dialogue. No amount of rereading is going to change that.

Shepard's canned response to the asari councillor is a perfect example of horrendously done autodialogue. There's also the case of Shepard automatically being close friends with all of his crew, despite being able to be a giant d**k to a number of them in either 1 or 2 (See: Liara, for example).

Yep.  Autodialogue (at the least the amount in ME3) ruined replayability.  Though, ME2 had autodialogue, but it felt like the right amount and never took away the feeling that it wasn't "my" Shepard.  One can say that about ME3 though, sadly, haha. 

[spirosz]

StreetMagic wrote...

You know that part in ME2, when Jacob says Shep was the Alliance poster boy for a few months, and then didn't "focus test" well? So they replaced Shepard with a new composite image. ME3 feels like that composite image. That's what the autodialogue does for me.

Good way to put it.  

[Slayer299]

What exactly was the *best* part there OP? Story? No, ME beats 3 there hands down. Choices? LOL, I think not. Gameplay in ME was fine and so was combat with ME2 as well, we didn't have the "All-in-one" button that started in ME2 and carried over. Planets? Yeah, can't argue, some of them got boring and Mako physics definitely needed fixing (can we say Eletania?). Side Missions, the Planetary Scanning and boring Side Missions?

What were those "best" parts?

[CronoDragoon]

voteDC wrote...
Illusion of choice is often as powerful as real choice.

Take another choice based game in "The Walking Dead." Ask most people about the choices and they'll be able to talk about them for ages, yet they don't amount to anything significant either. Episodes are always going to end pretty much the same way no matter what.

Yet that didn't bother people, they didn't see it, because TellTale had crafted such a wonderful illusion of choice.

People did see it, and it did bother people. It bothered me especially; after Episode 3 I texted my friend saying, "Am I crazy or do none of my choices matter? I'd end up in the same place with the same people no matter what I did." He texted me back, "Nah, that's pretty on the money."

Luckily Walking Dead told it's narrative well enough to cover up the fact that choices were superficial and temporary in scope.

That is what Mass Effect 1 pulled off so well, with Mass Effect 2 perhaps doing it even better, they offered the illusion of choice.

Did Mass Effect 3 have more or less auto-dialogue than the previous two games? I genuinely don't know.

What I do know though is that Mass Effect 3 made me notice that auto-dialogue, it shattered the illusion.

When talking about choice, we should also separate dialogue wheel tone from action. Mass Effect 2 was the best, I felt, at integrating tone into dialogue wheel options in such a way that I felt I had the most control over Shepard's personality. Mass Effect 3 wins in empowering me through my actions, their scope, and the vast difference my actions made on the state of the galaxy afterwards.

The dialogue was so terrible in ME1 that I couldn't really appreciate differences in tone. Aside from that, there were less opportunities to empower me through my decisions, though they still existed in cases like the Rachni or abandoning the Council.

[DarthSideus2]

Kataphrut94 wrote...

You know, it probably was. It had the best gameplay for a start, including good use of RPG elements that Mass Effect 1 overdid and Mass Effect 2 forgot existed. That weight system was a god-send.

Also, it almost equaled Mass Effect 1 in terms of story. It had some excellent payoff to several of the big story arcs, strong development of old characters and handling of new characters, and side missions that connected nicely to the overarching plot. Also, it was possibly the first Mass Effect game to acknowledge that there are emotions beyond self-righteous piety and impotent anger, that being Renegade can mean being more than a smug moron, and that there is more to homosexuality than blue women shagging.

ME3.>ME1>ME2

[DJBare]

DarthSideus2 wrote...
ME3.>ME1>ME2

Pretty much the same here, with the caveat that ME3 was spoiled by it's ending, but the rest was good, I found ME2 had a somewhat sterile atmosphere(not gritty enough), I still very much enjoy ME1, especially now I know I can ignore nearly all the mineral and insignia searches because they mean nothing in the end.

[Raizo]

The OP is delusional.

[Abraham_uk]

Raizo wrote...

The OP is delusional.

Having an opinion that differs from the majority doesn't necessarily make one delisional.

The Opening poster isn't delusional.
Those who loathed Mass Effect 3 aren't delusional.
Those who think all three games are rubbish aren't delusional.
Those like me who loved all three games aren't delusional.

We just have different opinions because we're not robots. We don't think in terms of ones and zeros. We think, we feel, we react and dare I say it, we differ.

[KotorEffect3]

Love the whole trilogy and yes it did get better with every game. Though I will admit I can see why some people liked ME 2 the most.

[KotorEffect3]

Raizo wrote...

The OP is delusional.

Gotta love how these haters are so respectful of the opinions of the people that like the game *sarcasm*

[Raizo]

Abraham_uk wrote...

Raizo wrote...

The OP is delusional.

Having an opinion that differs from the majority doesn't necessarily make one delisional.

The Opening poster isn't delusional.
Those who loathed Mass Effect 3 aren't delusional.
Those who think all three games are rubbish aren't delusional.
Those like me who loved all three games aren't delusional.

We just have different opinions because we're not robots. We don't think in terms of ones and zeros. We think, we feel, we react and dare I say it, we differ.

Fair enough. I apologise. You are right, the OP is entitled to his opinion ( even if I think he/she is high on crack ). The main tone of my original post was in reply to his tone and language used in his opening post ( which has since been edited since I first read it weeks ago ), he sounded like an opinionated troll and I responded in kind because I got defensive.
 

[Abraham_uk]

Raizo wrote...


Fair enough. I apologise. You are right, the OP is entitled to his opinion ( even if I think he/she is high on crack ). The main tone of my original post was in reply to his tone and language used in his opening post ( which has since been edited since I first read it weeks ago ), he sounded like an opinionated troll and I responded in kind because I got defensive.
 

Don't worry. We're cool.

Anyway. How did you personally feel about Mass Effect 3?