115 réponses à ce sujet

[KaiserShep]

Well as I said, just about all of these have been around much longer, decades even, so they've had far more time to establish a lot of world-building and who knows how many characters in total for most of these cases.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

TheMyron wrote...

Argentoid wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Why is Shepard leaving when there is no reason for Shepard to leave the ship? Better yet, why is she bringing EVERYONE with her, leaving the ship unprotected Where did they go? Omega to get Grunt some lap dances? There was no reason for Shepard to leave.

But I always thought the only reason Shepard left was to take Grunt to Omega for some lap dances.

How many shuttles did they have? Did all twelve squadmates cram into one?

Kodiak can pack in 14.

It is canon for them to take the entire team on the missions anyway. You just don't see them because of the engine limitations. They should have had the abduction take place when you went on an actual mission.

I think Grunt's entire purpose in the story was so Shepard could kill a thresher maw on foot, and see Wrex again or meet Wreav. Otherwise the character was terrible. Interesting idea but it came off like an orc.

I see the game series does have a lot of really good solid characters, some weak ones, most could be done a lot better, but then this is a video game they had resource limits. The dialogue overall was bad to meh, with some good spots, and the story had more unrealized potential that was limited by resources and lack of planning.

[KaiserShep]

To be fair, the krogan pretty much came off as orcs in general anyway. I mean listen to the sounds they make in ME1, with that creepy sounding "Watch out!"

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

BloodxGusher wrote...

KaiserShep wrote...

BloodxGusher wrote...

In this context and subject matter, better and richer are pretty much the same. you can't have a Better story while is have no RICH content about it...

No, "better" is simply a subjective term for the universe of your preference, whereas rich simply means which one has more content under its belt. Having more content does not automatically make it better. For instance, Warhammer has tons of content, but I would not consider it better, as I do not particularly like that universe. I would take the Firefly universe long before I take WH40K.

Im talking in a sense to show  progression. I see what you are saying and that definitely apply's when you are comparing two different "worlds". Im talking in a sense of self comparing. Even still, in a comparison fashion, I think it it is safe to say other "worlds" can be thought of as better than ME. ME is relatively new compared to what the OP was comparing it to. While the scale of the story is galactic, StarTrek has touched on concepts ME has 10 fold and so have others. I personally feel ME has tones of room to grow into but with stunts like ME3 ending, that could be cut short. Lol

Yes it does have a lot of room to grow. The ending? They just need to make one of them default and go. The only one that allows for conflict is Destroy. So there's your default ending. Stories need conflict. 

I think they did that on purpose in the EC. It's pretty well clarified that there's peace in Synthesis so that's out. Shepardlyst is the guardian or dictator of the many and maintaining the peace in Control so that's out. This leaves you with the default ending of Destroy. Bioware clarified how the series moves forward.

[Deathsaurer]

I like Grunt, he has some hilarious lines.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Yes, Grunt has some hilarious lines, and he has a lot of hit points, but other than that do you care about him?

Wrex on the other hand was an awesome character. His confrontation with Shepard on Virmire was one of the high points of the series.

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 09 décembre 2013 - 06:52 .

[dreamgazer]

Deathsaurer wrote...

I like Grunt, he has some hilarious lines.

As do I, partly because he's a product of ME2's scant amount of actual science-fiction.

[Deathsaurer]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Yes, Grunt has some hilarious lines, and he has a lot of hit points, but other than that do you care about him?

Wrex on the other hand was an awesome character. His confrontation with Shepard on Virmire was one of the high points of the series.

Is there some other reason I should need to care about him? If he entertains me then he has served his purpose.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Deathsaurer wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Yes, Grunt has some hilarious lines, and he has a lot of hit points, but other than that do you care about him?

Wrex on the other hand was an awesome character. His confrontation with Shepard on Virmire was one of the high points of the series.

Is there some other reason I should need to care about him? If he entertains me then he has served his purpose.

I need more than that.

[TheMyron]

To me and Wrex: Grunt is like an adopted son to one, and a godson to the other...

P.S. Anyone ever wonder what Okeer would have been like?

Modifié par TheMyron, 09 décembre 2013 - 07:02 .

[KaiserShep]

That doesn't stop the characters from being a huge part of the story.

[Mcfly616]

...Dune?......BSG?! ....Aliens???!!!!!!!!!


Oh hellz no you didn't. Your sci-fi debating rights are hereby revoked from this point forward.




Anyways......Even with the 'hey we found this super-weapon at the opportune moment' narrative and synthesis' "space magic", ME3 actually has a more logical and far more cohesive plot than that of its predecessor. It always baffles me when ME2 gets a pass, even though it is easily the worst in some of the more important storytelling elements (and gameplay elements....but thats another topic entirely)

Modifié par Mcfly616, 09 décembre 2013 - 08:08 .

[Erez Kristal]

Linkenski wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

erezike wrote...

I dont think i am posting this because of a need of further circle jerk. i do hope people here will be able to turn the mass effect salvageable in my eyes.

I strongly doubt this, but good luck if it's actually the case.

Have you ever looked back at this forum's circle-jerking about ME2's pointlessness and problems?

Oh, the pre-ME3 era. Those were the days; back when I didn't even care to look up online opinions and discussions because I was content with what I had in ME1 and ME2. ME3 not only broke my impression about that one game, but it made me realise how whiny people had been of all the other Mass Effect games's flaws as well.

And to be honest, looking into some of the valid critisisms I've become more aware of them when replaying the trilogy and it just doesn't feel as good now. ME3 is partly to blame, but a lot of BSN opinions have chaned my opinion just a tad, for the worse. :-3

Unlike some people I had this awful feeling getting into ME3 not only when I saw the ending, but just throughout the whole intro of the game. I had half the control of Shepard, the characters said stuff that was very questionable to their pre-established characters from ME1 and ME2. It just didn't feel like an actual followup to ME2.

More so than anything you could just tell that either the writers had changed direction or had been switched out. Mac's incompetence as a plot-director shows throughout the entirety.

Pretty much my feeling after me3. although i still enjoy me1&me2 for what they are 

Mcfly616 wrote...

...Dune?......BSG?! ....Aliens???!!!!!!!!!


Oh hellz no you didn't. Your sci-fi debating rights are hereby revoked from this point forward.




Anyways......Even with the 'hey we found this super-weapon at the opportune moment' narrative and synthesis' "space magic", ME3 actually has a more logical and far more cohesive plot than that of its predecessor. It always baffles me when ME2 gets a pass, even though it is easily the worst in some of the more important storytelling elements (and gameplay elements....but thats another topic entirely)

BSG is my most favorite tv series of all time (the new one) but i find its setting less compelling for a game or additional stories at any point of its timeline. dune- i was never much of a dessert guy. aliens-i never understood the big deal.

Modifié par erezike, 09 décembre 2013 - 08:25 .

[KaiserShep]

I've said before that people are willing to let things slide if the game provides in other ways. Not necessarily a good thing on the storytelling front, but if you dazzle people enough with entertaining bits and give them some kind of cathartic conclusion, they're likely to forgive quite a lot of flaws, of which there are quite a few in ME2. If ME3 had a climactic conclusion, there would no doubt still be tons of criticism, but I'm willing to bet that the fan rage we've all no doubt read about would be nigh nonexistent.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 09 décembre 2013 - 08:15 .

[Ieldra]

erezike wrote...
I think mass effect pre mass effect 3, has the best Scfi- universe in nowday fiction. I think its much better than enterprise, starwars, battlestar galactica, aliens, starcraft, dune, starship troopers, E.T, Babaylon 5, quake, riddick, warhammer (I never played halo or read hyperion. so i wouldnt know about them.) its just nice to have a live feeling world with fun  lore based combat system and traveling system.

I disagree with this assessment. There are some among this list I think are better-made than the MEU.

I agree, however, that ME3 damaged the integrity of the MEU (or changed it into a very different universe, depending on your preference). I don't think it's salvageable. At least for me, most likely it will never again have the appeal it had before ME3. Or rather, before certain parts of ME2's ending, LotSB and Arrival. The signs were there for all to see, I just hoped what they portended wouldn't come true.  

Edit:
This is about worldbuilding, lore and characterization, not about plot.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 09 décembre 2013 - 08:35 .

[ImaginaryMatter]

I agree. Stories are like knit sweaters. If there is a major flaw players will notice it and start tugging at it which begins to unravel the rest of the sweater revealing more flaws that players were either not aware of before or were willing to look past.

[Erez Kristal]

I just came back from the dazzling looking star citizen video. i dont think people who werent ever that much into mass effect universe will be able to grasp. so if you dont think that much of the Mass effect universe and doubt the high spot i gave mass effect universe potential then maybe this thread(or universe) isnt for you.

Story is the most important aspect in a game, movie or book for me. its what makes me want to kill the bad guys or listen to the fellow characters stories.
When the story breaks immersion due to a terrible beginning middle and end where everyone goes derp and makes the worst decisions possible. it makes its very hard to truly enjoy any following game. may it be sequel or prequel. unless that problem is fixed. The derp includes almost everyone involved: Anderson, Cerberus, auto piloted Shepard, The systems alliance, Turian Hierarchy, Salarians, Quarian, Geth and most of all the reapers. you may argue that not all of them made foolish decisions. but the game progress of events would counter your argument.(for full list go to the end of the post)

Now i agree with the myron who believes all three games should be remade with a new engine and more coherent plot. because the me universe has a lot of potential, its very gameplay oriented and it is very easy to be immersed in it. sadly

(Derp List: Anderson - Destroying cerberus, Cerberus - becoming indoctrinated, Shepard doing nothing for six months, systems alliance- not keep tabs on the batarians, holding shepard in custody for six months when noone really seemed to care about shepard status and for lack of proper preparations. Turians not utilizing separatists ftl drives for collisions, salarians for not doing anything, and of course the reapers for doing any mistake possible and letting their
enemies win.

Modifié par erezike, 09 décembre 2013 - 05:34 .

[KaiserShep]

erezike wrote...
Turians not utilizing separatists ftl drives for collisions

What's this about? 

[Erez Kristal]

KaiserShep wrote...

erezike wrote...
Turians not utilizing separatists ftl drives for collisions

What's this about? 

http://masseffect.wi...r_Cruiser_Crash

[durasteel]

SR72 wrote...
Mass Effect 3 was never really about the characters. ...

I cannot agree with this.

While the opening sequence and the steaming pile of ending were not about the characters (and arguably weren't really about much of anything) the rest of the game totally was. Despite its shortcomings, ME3 had moments of brilliance that were entirely character driven. When Mordin hummed "Scientist Salarian" and achieved inner peace and redemption, I got choked up from the sheer awesomeness. When Tali assured Legion that this unit had a soul, I had to wipe at least one eye. These were moments when the action receeded for just long enough for you to feel the characters and share their triumph or tragedy.

The main story of Mass Effect 3 was an umitigated failure, but the 90% of the game that was devoted to side quests was really quite good, in large part because it was character driven.

[ImaginaryMatter]

durasteel wrote...

SR72 wrote...
Mass Effect 3 was never really about the characters. ...

I cannot agree with this.

While the opening sequence and the steaming pile of ending were not about the characters (and arguably weren't really about much of anything) the rest of the game totally was. Despite its shortcomings, ME3 had moments of brilliance that were entirely character driven. When Mordin hummed "Scientist Salarian" and achieved inner peace and redemption, I got choked up from the sheer awesomeness. When Tali assured Legion that this unit had a soul, I had to wipe at least one eye. These were moments when the action receeded for just long enough for you to feel the characters and share their triumph or tragedy.

The main story of Mass Effect 3 was an umitigated failure, but the 90% of the game that was devoted to side quests was really quite good, in large part because it was character driven.

My favorite parts of ME3 were the ones that closed the character arcs.

[Deathsaurer]

erezike wrote...

and of course the reapers for doing any mistake possible and letting their
enemies win.

If they had bumrushed the Citadel and shut down the relay network it would have been an awfully boring game don't you think?

[dreamgazer]

Deathsaurer wrote...

erezike wrote...

and of course the reapers for doing any mistake possible and letting their
enemies win.

If they had bumrushed the Citadel and shut down the relay network it would have been an awfully boring game don't you think?

I don't think people fully realize how ugly the Reaper plot could've (should've) actually been, had the game concentrated more on directly fighting the Reapers instead of being distracted by Cerberus and their clashing ideology.