41 réponses à ce sujet

[CinderSkye]

When I first heard about ME Trilogy, I was expecting it to be the plot of all three games streamlined into one engine with some necessary canon fixes like establishing the Collectors in ME1, Cerberus' visuals in ME1, etc. Having it just be an anthology rerelease just feels so pointless... it's basically just a sale price.

[grey_wind]

I feel that even had ME2 actually progressed the plot in a more tangible manner like some people suggest, the Reaper War itself needs to be split across at least two games. Trying to pack uniting the entire galaxy and all the other dangling plotlines along with defeating the Reapers into one game was always going to result in a lot of great ideas not being fleshed out or getting dropped entirely.

This why the Genophage and Rannoch arcs come across as biased towards the Krogan and Geth respectively. There's only so much time and so many missions you can spend on either plotline when there's so much ground to cover, and as a result you get incredibly biased stories that end up advocating only one side of each conflict. Then you have the entire Batarian plotline getting a bride dropped on it, and Cerberus is an incoherent hurriedly written mess by the time we get to Priority: Earth.

Personally, I'd have just spent ME3 on the liberation of Palaven. Keep the focus on the Krogan, Geth and Rachni. Spend equal time on each side of every conflict: the Krogan potential to improve versus their propensity for another galactic war, the Geth's near-genocide versus the Quarian's near-genocide and how both groups are ultimately responsible for the mess they're in, and the implications of a resurgent and quickly expanding Rachni. The game can then end with the Miracle of Palaven when you unite all these efforts under the Turian banner in an attempt to halt the Reapers' decimation of the most powerful military in the galaxy.

Then ME4 could focus on humanity's side of the Reaper War. Have Earth lost in this game, then explore the Alliance-Cerberus dichotomy (without having Cerberus go stupid-evil) and the Alliance-Hegemony conflict. Now would be the time to get into plot points like Javik, Leviathan, and the Thessia conspiracy. Then wrap up the Reaper War by the end of this game.

[Gkonone]

iakus wrote...

Mass Effect didn't need to be two trilogies.

It needed to be one trilogy that was actually planned out.

I'll take 2 trilogies any day. Speak for yourself.

[TuringPoint]

 I think some post-ME1 dlc to merge me1 and me2 could've improved the arc.

[The Night Mammoth]

I'd say they'd need to go all the way back to the first one, tidy some stuff up, add a little bit to the end that makes the transition easier into the second game, and just start all over again, preferably without the silly two year time jump and franchise restart.

[AresKeith]

Either a two-part series or a four-part series

[Excella Gionne]

ME2 was fine, and a good game, although a side story, it did good. ME3 needed to be two games, 'cause it's just not enough for one game.

[MattFini]

StreetMagic wrote...

CinderSkye wrote...

Eh. Even as I was playing ME2, I felt like it was a sidestory. Just IMO. It really always felt like "we don't want to introduce the reapers yet but we need another game." Things like Arrival should have been part of the main game and not Shepard-only DLC.

They barely ever "introduce the reapers". You're basically doing the same thing in ME2 as ME1 and ME3. Collectors are just another proxy force of the Reapers, just like Saren and Cerberus. Funnily, even when you finally think you'll have a showdown with the Reapers in ME3, they turn out to be a proxy force themselves too (of the Catalyst).

Either way, it was fun riding into the center of the galaxy with a sci-fi dirty dozen. To me, that's cool as hell, even as a standalone game.

Correct.

[Clips7]

I thought ME2 was done brilliantly....i never played ME1 and the only reason why that is because i'm not sure if the 3 disk package for ps3 has all of the DLC for it in ME2....anywayz.

While i did love ME3, parts of it felt rushed....i didn't like that you couldn't explore planets anymore in terms of side missions...you just scanned them and received the items you needed. The squadmates was boring as well...EDI an Garrus gave the most interesting dialogues while out on missions. Characters just felt much more fleshed out in 2.

ME3 did have a good storyline tho in terms of making you feel the situation was desperate and hopeless at times. As i'm playing the game and as i see civilizations drop one after another and characters desperatetly trying to save their homeworlds, the overall atmosphere at times was just somber and depressing..it still did a good job of making you care about the overall entire situation.

Still i think the writing could have been a bit better and a wee bit more time probably could have had a more focused and streamlined story and more time to flesh out certain characters...

[Sovereign330]

A lot of people don't read the Novels or the Comic Books. I'd recommend reading everything except Deception. It fills in a lot of things and goes places that the games didnt get the chance to go to. I.E. Homeworlds Issue 4 paints a picture of how Liara got to Mars which Conviction places Vega as Shepards guard. A lot of this translates over into the games but a lot of players dont read that stuff. Adds a lot to it IMO.

[Invisible Man]

Sovereign330 wrote...

A lot of people don't read the Novels or the Comic Books. I'd recommend reading everything except Deception. It fills in a lot of things and goes places that the games didnt get the chance to go to. I.E. Homeworlds Issue 4 paints a picture of how Liara got to Mars which Conviction places Vega as Shepards guard. A lot of this translates over into the games but a lot of players dont read that stuff. Adds a lot to it IMO.

I just don't like the fact that now it seems to understand the plot & story of a video game I need to buy dlc and books. like I'm being sold an unfinished title at full price, then to finish the game I need to continuously pay for content. that's not cool in my book. 

---edit
to stay on topic... to me it does seem that mass effect as a series is missing a title, which is why the ending & parts of the plot to me3 do seem out of place, or out of step, from my perspective.

Modifié par Invisible Man, 18 janvier 2014 - 09:25 .

[TheRealJayDee]

iakus wrote...

[Mass Effect] needed to be one trilogy that was actually planned out.

Seriously. When making a trilogy like this you probably really shouldn't start thinking about the consequences of variables in the non-final games only after their respective release. The implications of doing something like the SM in the second entry should not be a ****ing surprising. At all. Ever.

Modifié par TheRealJayDee, 18 janvier 2014 - 10:14 .

[Singu]

ME3 was just an exersize of watching the writers slowly paint themselves into a corner. Then in the final chapter they whip out a zippo and a canister of gazoline and torch the whole place.

[Mcfly616]

Nope. A trilogy would've sufficed, had it not been for ME2 pointlessly treading water with it's side-story plot.

[Mcfly616]

I think the problem/blame does not reside with the lead writers themselves. The disconnect in the overarching narrative is due to the "change" of lead writers halfway through the trilogy. It is neither Drew or Mac's fault. Simply put: whether the plot was planned from the beginning or not, there is bound to be a disconnect whenever one man is trying to tie up another man's story. (either way imo, with the inclusion of the EC it makes sense. Leviathan doesn't hurt either.)

[Sovereign330]

Invisible Man wrote...

Sovereign330 wrote...

A lot of people don't read the Novels or the Comic Books. I'd recommend reading everything except Deception. It fills in a lot of things and goes places that the games didnt get the chance to go to. I.E. Homeworlds Issue 4 paints a picture of how Liara got to Mars which Conviction places Vega as Shepards guard. A lot of this translates over into the games but a lot of players dont read that stuff. Adds a lot to it IMO.

I just don't like the fact that now it seems to understand the plot & story of a video game I need to buy dlc and books. like I'm being sold an unfinished title at full price, then to finish the game I need to continuously pay for content. that's not cool in my book. 

---edit
to stay on topic... to me it does seem that mass effect as a series is missing a title, which is why the ending & parts of the plot to me3 do seem out of place, or out of step, from my perspective.

The Mass Effect games are good in their own right. Besides, you can read basic plot synopsis on the Mass Effect Wiki. It gives you enough information that you know what happened. I read that for FREE before I chose to buy the books. The books are fairly cheap though in price and add a lot of flavor to the overall universe. The trilogy is the core of the universe, while the comic books, DLC, and novels serve as the mantle. Side things like the ipod games and multiplayer is the crust. When you put it all together, you get a nice rich universe. How much of said universe you want to experience is up to you. But even if you don't wanna pay money, and only experience the core, you can still quite easily access the mantle and crust on the wiki. Basically? You have options so it's not a big deal IMO.