1814 réponses à ce sujet

[durasteel]

Nightwriter wrote...

I put little stock in game reviewers. They're rarely invested enough to recognize these things. Usually they play through a game only once and have not followed the series enough to know a writing messup when they see it.

I think the overwhelming majority of the early reviews for ME3 were written without having reached the end of the game. These reviewers noted the gameplay changes, saw the story elements in place on Mars and the Citadel, tried out the multiplayer, and wrote their review based on playing the game for a day or so.

Once we started getting reviews from folks who had finished the game (like Angry Joe) we started to see a much different tone.

[dreamgazer]

durasteel wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I put little stock in game reviewers. They're rarely invested enough to recognize these things. Usually they play through a game only once and have not followed the series enough to know a writing messup when they see it.

I think the overwhelming majority of the early reviews for ME3 were written without having reached the end of the game. These reviewers noted the gameplay changes, saw the story elements in place on Mars and the Citadel, tried out the multiplayer, and wrote their review based on playing the game for a day or so.

Once we started getting reviews from folks who had finished the game (like Angry Joe) we started to see a much different tone.

What about the positive reviews that point-blank mention the ending?

[KaiserShep]

A wizard did it.

[AlanC9]

Or the positive reviews which specifically mention getting to the end of the game without giving details?

Some folks just weren't bothered by the ending, I guess.

[KaiserShep]

I would assume that a lot of reviews would have been written to avoid certain spoilers.

[Han Shot First]

dreamgazer wrote...

When Harbinger said "Your worlds will become our laboratories", he actually meant fast-food eateries.

He meant lavatories. Damn that auto-translate!

What goes in must come out.

[KaiserShep]

And then in walks Ian Malcolm.

"That is one big pile of sh*t."

[AlanC9]

Hmm... StreetMagic's post reminds me that the New York Times reviewer didn't think ME2 was all that great, and loved ME3.

Modifié par AlanC9, 19 décembre 2013 - 05:00 .

[durasteel]

dreamgazer wrote...

What about the positive reviews that point-blank mention the ending?

I assume, based on your question, that such a thing exists.

I know that some members of the gaming media, like Adam Sessler, made a point to defend the game and BioWare after they started to get slammed over the ending. His point was something along the lines of the end having value because it was not like everything else, which I suppose is a reasonable position for someone who plays as many games as Adam does.

I can't remember a single review off the top of my head that said that the ending was actually good, though. I know some people around here claim to like it, and I'm sure that with all the reviewers out there who must have played ME3 there must have been a few who thought it was great. I just can't remember them.

Of course, there were also people who liked the last episode of Twin Peaks, even though it was basically just a tantrum thrown by David Lynch because he didn't get renewed for the last season he wanted. There are also some people who claim, with apparent sincerety, to like eating fried cockroaches.

[KaiserShep]

Hey don't knock fried cockroaches til you tried it. I can't even type that with a straight face.

[AlanC9]

What if a reviewer thought the ending was just not very important?

[durasteel]

AlanC9 wrote...

What if a reviewer thought the ending was just not very important?

I do remember seeing one or more of those.

Kind of a remarkable point of view for the last game of an RPG trilogy though. Doing a good job of wrapping up the story is kind of a big deal.

[dreamgazer]

durasteel wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

What about the positive reviews that point-blank mention the ending?

I assume, based on your question, that such a thing exists.

I know that some members of the gaming media, like Adam Sessler, made a point to defend the game and BioWare after they started to get slammed over the ending. His point was something along the lines of the end having value because it was not like everything else, which I suppose is a reasonable position for someone who plays as many games as Adam does.

I can't remember a single review off the top of my head that said that the ending was actually good, though. I know some people around here claim to like it, and I'm sure that with all the reviewers out there who must have played ME3 there must have been a few who thought it was great. I just can't remember them.

Of course, there were also people who liked the last episode of Twin Peaks, even though it was basically just a tantrum thrown by David Lynch because he didn't get renewed for the last season he wanted. There are also some people who claim, with apparent sincerety, to like eating fried cockroaches.

Meh. If you start tossing out stuff like that, then you can easily apply it to the other entries in the series: everything's subjective, anything can be crap in the eye of the beholder.  Not exactly fair.

And yeah, they do exist:

As I approached the end, I felt melancholy, surrounded by characters that felt like friends that lived with the decisions I made, and the consequences of those decisions. BioWare promised to make choices matter with the Mass Effect series, and while the systems around those choices have gotten better and better, that main foundation has always been the primary draw. They built a world and a family out of decisions big and small, created a foundation to break my heart and pick it back up again, to make me care. When the credits rolled, I felt finished. Mass Effect 3 is the culmination of an unprecedented experiment in game narrative, and in the best possible way, I’m glad to have seen it through, and to see it done.

Polygon

Mass Effect 3's ending recently leaked online and was hated almost immediately. The truth is, however, there was no way to end Shepard's story without angering fans. I will admit, when I first sat through it, I was a little taken back by the route BioWare decided to take. After reflecting on the ending, however, and running through my final save to experience the multiple occurrences, I have to say I enjoy the themes present in it. I can only describe it as the Matrix Revolutions ending to the Mass Effect trilogy. After two and a half games of being purely sci-fi action sprinkled with space opera drama, Mass Effect took a turn into unknown territory. It explored spiritual themes of a greater power and self-sacrifice, but not in a way you'll likely be thinking.

UGO

As with any game that dares to be ambitious, deconstruct Mass Effect 3 into its constituent parts and of course there are flaws, but taken as a whole this is arguably the first truly modern blockbuster, a game that transcends the genre boundaries of old and takes what it needs from across the gaming spectrum in order to finish its story in the most compelling, thrilling, heartbreaking way possible. Few gaming sagas come to a definitive close, but this one signs off in breathtaking style.

Eurogamer

Mass Effect 3 and the entire series stand alongside Uncharted and Skyrim in exemplifying what games can do that cannot be replicated in other creative forms. What is so unique in this game is how the presence of its conclusion feels like the existential dread that infuses the characters that make up its universe. The paradox of the game becomes painfully prescient as it draws inexorably towards its conclusion. Here, Shepard is trying to determining the fate of everything but the inevitability of the final is inescapable. All the decisions you continue to make in Mass Effect may be less consequential but they feel all the more grave as if the game is becoming a testament to who you are, or who you want to be. That’s why I wish I could play it again for the first time.

G4TV

If it was just the characters alone that were indelible, you might think I was writing off the rest of the storytelling as average, but that is simply not the case. Each successive mission you play builds on the previous mission’s atmosphere, establishing a rising sense of scale that is so massive it will drop your jaw when you see it. Take everything you remember about Mass 1’s final mission against Sovereign, and ratchet up the intensity two, three, sometimes tenfold. And might I add that the reward of seeing the game’s amazing conclusion is truly something I will treasure as a gamer.

Machinima

How about a negative outlook on the ending from a 90-something score?

There are a couple issues to address. One is that paragon and renegade options don't really have the same impact as they once did, mainly because this is the finale and things have to end, so leaving plot points hanging is no longer an option. There are still a few key decisions to make, but they are they are much less subtle and the consequences are much more obvious. The other more painful issue is that the ending is really awful. It is unsatisfying, plain and simple. Of course there are choices to make, and paragon and renegade options do factor in, but when it comes down to it, all of the endings are pretty bad. Despite having completed most everything possible in the campaign, there is the possibility that not playing enough multiplayer could be a factor in not getting the best ending. Regardless of what might be possible in a standard playthrough, of the three different endings witnessed none of them were as grand as the rest of the game. The best moments in Mass Effect 3 happen hours before the credits.

RPGamer

Like Star Wars, Mass Effect 3 is an incredibly fulfilling story that deftly balances plot, character, conflict, and resolution. After a short exposition, an opening combat scenario cleverly combines the "big" of a reaper attack on Earth with the "small" of a single death. That one death haunts Shepard until the moving and jaw-dropping conclusion. While there is plenty of action, developer BioWare subverts our expectations. Every so often, the shooting heats up, only to lead to a climax that comes not in the form of an explosion or a boss fight, but in a simple quiet conversation, or a few limping steps.

GameSpot

All of 'em over 90. 

Modifié par dreamgazer, 19 décembre 2013 - 05:59 .

[durasteel]

dreamgazer wrote...

And yeah, they do exist:

I'm always entertained by damnation by faint praise. 

Mass Effect 3 earned high scores, although not "top marks," in my opinion. It also earned its criticism.

Regardless of what you think of her politics, it is interesting to me to read analysis of Hillary Clinton's unsuccessful bid for the 2008 Democratic nomination for President. It seems that she started off as a bad candidate, in the sense that she was a bad campaigner. She had a sense that her nomination was inevitable, that she had earned it already, that it was her turn. This attitude made it difficult for her to connect with crowds and to appear sincere on camera, and in particular turned off some members of the press who were already thinking her rival was presenting a more compelling story for their coverage.

It appears that once some of the early caucus states didn't go her way and it looked like she might not win the nomination, she changed her attitude, quit taking anything for granted, and really engaged. They say she became a much better candidate and campaigner towards the end, but it was too late by then.

I really hope that BioWare and EA had similar realizations after DA2 and ME3. I think that EA was taking BioWare for granted, assuming that the time screws could be tightened without losing much product quality, but they learned the hard way the error of that assumption. BioWare established a process for making great games, games that we've all enjoyed over the years. I hope EA has come to respect the BioWare process as much as they value the product. Unlike Hillary '08, it's definately not too late for them.

Sometimes the understanding that it is possible to fail is the only thing that keeps you from failing.

[David7204]

That fact that DA:1 is being released three and a half years after DA:2 and that we've heard pretty much nothing about the next Mass Effect close to two years after ME:3 seems to support that.

[AlanC9]

durasteel wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
What if a reviewer thought the ending was just not very important?

I do remember seeing one or more of those.

Kind of a remarkable point of view for the last game of an RPG trilogy though. Doing a good job of wrapping up the story is kind of a big deal.

I meant something more like the ending being neither bad enough nor good enough to change the final evaluation of the game by more than a couple of points. 

Modifié par AlanC9, 19 décembre 2013 - 07:30 .

[AlanC9]

 Here's one dreamgazer missed:

Storytelling and immersive characterizations have long been BioWare’s trademark, and Mass Effect’s story of how you, as Commander Shepard, decide to shape the future of all sentient life is deeply personal. If you have played the previous games, hundreds of decisions you have made in the past will help determine how the story ends. As the credits rolled after about 50 hours, I found myself steeped in appreciation for how BioWare’s game developers had made so many wrinkles of the story my own.

...

With the second installment, BioWare overcompensated by going to an almost purely action-based style. That made Mass Effect 2 more streamlined but ultimately less tactically interesting. And narratively, the second game felt a bit like a holding pattern, a mere waystation between discovering the big, bad threat in the first game and the promised opportunity to destroy it in the third.Fortunately, the final chapter brings all of the ingredients together into a gripping, coherent triumph.

New York Times.

The ME2 review's interesting too.

Modifié par AlanC9, 19 décembre 2013 - 07:30 .

[ImaginaryMatter]

I always got the feeling that game reviewers don't judge games based on a close analysis of the story, most people like shooting! ME3 does have a very good soundtrack and high quality voice acting, and -- at least in my opinion -- really fun combat. The story elements that probably do attract good reviews, drama and hyper charged emotions, are packed everywhere into ME3; even though they do come off as hamfisted, contrived, silly, etc. to those who pay close attention -- I mean to we need to bring up Kai Leng?

Modifié par ImaginaryMatter, 19 décembre 2013 - 07:35 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Starting with the first of a number of quotes as I catch up...

dreamgazer wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Maybe next time Bioware should PLAN AHEAD

Words of wisdom.

I fail to see what planning ahead would do to fix glaring issues such as autodialogue, crappy emotional railroading, and comic book writing

Which game had the comic book writing again?

Was it the one with: "You're just a machine, and machines can be broken?"

Nah, it was the one which started on the premise of 'Sole Survivor Paragon Shepard will join with Cerberus in the first hour of the game.'


Mind you, as is said later, comic book writing can be good. Something on the level of, say, The Watchmen could be a good deconstruction of the RPG genre.

[DarthSliver]

One thing I think that made the ending a spotlight was because of the Starkid thingy that seamlessly seems to pop out of nowhere. You are at the console about to reach over and barely press the button than you get lifted up to a new room. You proceed to be given 3 options to choose one from and the game ends.

Another thing, consistency in the story from start to end. Indoctrination has been a big part of the METrilogy and they seem to throw it all out the airlock in the end. Shepard is about to go up a beam to try and stop them, why didn't they try to indoctrinate Shepard? Why didn't they try to even make an effort to brainwash you to their side? I mean the Reapers have the ability to mess up your mind or completely turn you into a husk.

Indoctrination isn't a theory that was randomly created, it was a fan creating something using what had been introduced in the series. In the end it seemed like Bioware threw that all out the airlock, didn't use established lore they set for us. The endings seem so messed up that it could've been interpreted as Reaper indoctrination on your Shepard. I found the theory to be sound myself, only issue I had with it was it would mean we didn't get an ending to ME3 when we brought the game.

But Indoctrination can be the saving grace for Bioware with ME3 endings, just not sure how they can work that into the backstory with the next Mass Effect title assuming the story continues off from the Trilogy.

Modifié par DarthSliver, 19 décembre 2013 - 07:58 .

[Dean_the_Young]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Dear David and his plot that has conventional victory succeed without using space magic?

Where is this conventional victory plot of David's. It's been brought up several times so I've grown curious, especially since I am a fan of the conventional victory idea -- although mostly for thematic reasons.

That's just it, it doesn't exist. 

David claims to have the end-all-beat-all ending that uses this without changing anything in ME1 or ME2, but when pressed, he consistently ignores the request and changes the subject (mostly by attacking someone over something). 

IMO, conventional victory is kind of a cop-out for the Reapers, which is why I support a superweapon idea.

Doubleplusgood to this. ME2 went out of its way to ignore any conventional victory buildup, making a sudden-win condition pretty much a necessity to beat the Reapers in one game. A superweapon gambit is just one of them.

On the other hand, I was actually expecting a keystone army gambit instead. When ME2 ended with the Reaper armada leaving dark space, I figured they would leave their species-cores behind, at the Dark Citadel, while sending the Sovereign-bodies forth. That way, if the ships are destroyed, the Reaper 'essence' inside isn't.

After Arrival, I expected ME3 would end with Shepard and the Galactic Alliance retaking the Citadel, going across the Citadel relay to the Dark Citadel, and triggering the Dark Relay to go supernova ala Arrival, destroying all the nearly-helpless Reaper-cores and thus nullifying the Reaper shells back in the Galaxy.


Alternatively, I could see a political gambit in which Shepard, by finding what the Reapers actually want, is able to force a cease-fire by threatening to ruin it. In the case of the Synthetic Singularity, Shepard threatens that the organics will fight and distract the Reapers while setting one up in secret to survive. For the Dark Energy theory, the threat would be a technological gambit to trigger the Dark Energy Apocalypse then and there.



I never saw ME resolving the Reapers after the game in an epilogue, so Superweapon, Keystone, and Negotiation gambits were what I was expecting.

[Dean_the_Young]

wright1978 wrote...

I accept the crucible as a contrivance device as a means of short cutting to victory. However i feel that if it was ever to do anything other than blow up reapers that should have been a choice during the construction phrase as various blueprints emerge & any negative consequences equally should have been built in as balancing choice checks at the same time.

In a sense, this already is the case- it's a reflection of EMS and the ME2 end-game decision, which is itself a summation of choices. If you play low-EMS, you face a lot more restrictions.

Yes, I do understand you want a more direct role in this. I can understand that, and don't feel the impacts that were given were particularly well done. But they are there.


Personally, I'd have broken the end-game EMS into three different categories: Land Armies, Space Fleets, and Crucible Science. Each category would have its own low/med/high Consequences, making the various either/or recruitments have more weight.

[Dean_the_Young]

wright1978 wrote...

Armass81 wrote...

Yes it is. Its good for a game set in ME universe. The problem was that the game in question was MASS EFFECT 2. The middle parter of the trilogy in a story about the reapers. And it didnt really advance the plot, or it did it so poorly they had to conjure up a super weapon just so we had some convoluted way to beat a legion of nearly invincible death machines in the end.
 

Disagree ME2 did a great job as a middle chapter, expanding upon some of the key arcs during the breathing space pre harvest(Geth, Genophage/Turians, Quarians) whilst introducing the Reaper servants trying to get a head start for their masters. Without ME2 Tuchanka and Rannoch arcs wouldn't make half as much sense. I think reaper invincibility was a problem introduced in ME1 & hence the need for a superweapon to dispose of them in 3.

This confuses the function with the effectiveness. ME2 introduces Rannoch and Tuchanka, but it's hard to say it does either one well when you consider the format and the alternatives. Rannoch and Tuchanka arcs are, collectively, four side quests in a game with two dozen- they are not only not a major focus, but they are entirely voluntary in the plot flow. Unlike the critical path, such as the Suicide Mission or Virmire or the end of ME1, you can not only never do the missions, you don't even need to meet most of the characters involved. The sequel will have to plan on the possibility the player never went into either arc, because neither is critical plot. (True, the next story will have to re-introduce the plots regardless, but now it must do so without even the reliance of prior experience.)

In terms of setting the stage for ME3, ME2 did poorly. Only one of the plot threads became a plot function of note (the genophage cure), while the events of ME3's arcs did not flow as a consequence of the ME2 arcs but rather regardless or indifferent to them. The Geth/Quarian and Genophage arcs have about as much to do with Legion/Tali/Grunt's loyalty missions as the Batarians did with Arrival.

If ME2 wanted to set the stage for ME3 well, it should have involved those arcs into the core plot. Make the Krogan involved with the fight against the Collectors, establishing some need or history for their forces to make them allies. Have the Geth/Quarian plots tie into the struggle, and the upcoming battle. Don't dance around making recommending war or peace a Big Decision when it's a foregon conclusion.

ME2 introduced plots. It was hardly the only way those plots could be introduced.