142 réponses à ce sujet

[GimmeDaGun]

Han Shot First wrote...

I love the Citadel DLC but I also agree. I think Bioware went a little over board with the light and humorous moments. That being said, they were only giving the fanbase what it was asking for. One of the main complaints with Mass Effect 3 was that it was "too serious."

That is a complaint I disagree with by the way, but it was one commonly voiced on the forums.

Mass Effect 1 was just as serious and dark toned. ME2 was pretty dark and serious too. So I don't get why many of the fans do not take that into consideration. Ok, the romance subplots ("little blue children" khmmm... ), the paragon daddy-issue thing  and the somewhat juvenile, power-trippy, chest pounding hero-flick cliches in ME2 gave it a more ligh-hearted tone for those who chose to play it that way though. Plus most of the fans add head-canon and fan-fic stuff to the already existing dark and serious setting which definitely puts them into a different mindset (with different expectations for the last chapter / ending of a game trilogy). 

I don't know what most fans did expect for ME3 to be though. Everybody knew that the apocalyptic storm of the reapers would arrive to the galaxy in ME3 and that it would revolve around the destructive war with them. Everybody should have known that it would take more than a simple "unite the forces of the galaxy and play the generic super-hero guy" to defeat such an enemy as the reapers. Plus all the marketing material suggested (trailers etc.) that it would be a pretty grim game. 
People tend to take too seriously or as foreshadowing those typical, cliched "we can do this & give 'em hell" bravado from the squadmates' part. 

If it was up to me, I would have made it even more brutal, horrific and unforgiving. Most people who dislike ME3 for this very reason would hate me even more than Casey and Mac. 

Modifié par GimmeDaGun, 02 février 2014 - 07:16 .

[RZIBARA]

Citadel DLC is awesome, but I like to consider a whole separate thing when i play it. I dont consider it part of ME3's story, but rather as somelike non-canon holiday special or something like that

[GimmeDaGun]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

I think this picture reflects the situation well:



I find the Citadel DLC to be tonally disruptive. However, I kind of stop caring for ME3 as a story by the end of the Cerberus Coup; so I welcome Citadel completely.

Yeah, I like this caricature. 

[ImaginaryMatter]

GimmeDaGun wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

I love the Citadel DLC but I also agree. I think Bioware went a little over board with the light and humorous moments. That being said, they were only giving the fanbase what it was asking for. One of the main complaints with Mass Effect 3 was that it was "too serious."

That is a complaint I disagree with by the way, but it was one commonly voiced on the forums.

Mass Effect 1 was just as serious and dark toned. ME2 was pretty dark and serious too. So I don't get why many of the fans do not take that into consideration. Ok, the romance subplots ("little blue children" khmmm... ), the paragon daddy-issue thing  and the somewhat juvenile, power-trippy, chest pounding hero-flick cliches in ME2 gave it a more ligh-hearted tone for those who chose to play it that way though. Plus most of the fans add head-canon and fan-fic stuff to the already existing dark and serious setting which definitely puts them into a different mindset (with different expectations for the last chapter / ending of a game trilogy). 

I don't know what most fans did expect for ME3 to be though. Everybody knew that the apocalyptic storm of the reapers would arrive to the galaxy in ME3 and that it would revolve around the destructive war with them. Everybody should have known that it would take more than a simple "unite the forces of the galaxy and play the generic super-hero guy" to defeat such an enemy as the reapers. Plus all the marketing material suggested (trailers etc.) that it would be a pretty grim game. 
People tend to take too seriously or as foreshadowing those typical, cliched "we can do this & give 'em hell" bravado from the squadmates' part. 

If it was up to me, I would have made it even more brutal, horrific and unforgiving. Most people who dislike ME3 for this very reason would hate me even more than Casey and Mac. 

My problem with ME3's dark tone was often how hamfisted or misdirected it was, with the Kai Leng encounter on Thessia taking the cake. I think it was best when it was subtler with people worrying aboard the Citadel, daily emails about past acquaintances dying and entire planets falling, etc. The other problem was that most of the mayhem that personally affected Shepard wasn't done by the Reapers, supposedly the main antagonists of the entire series, but by Cerberus.

Modifié par ImaginaryMatter, 02 février 2014 - 07:21 .

[SwobyJ]

Citadel DLC is great and absolutely part of canon, but like any DLC, an optional part of it that the main story can disregard or (hypothetically) summarize in a future game.

Just wait and see, I guess.


But yeah, Citadel DLC is possibly the best DLC they've ever made, and yes, it is to be taken seriously. But 'seriously' is a certain mode in this sense. Actually listen to the dialogue, look around Shepard's settings, and pay attention to themes and details.

Modifié par SwobyJ, 02 février 2014 - 07:25 .

[Dr_Extrem]

well ... citadel is a wonderful dlc ...

but it is part of the wrong mass effect game.


put citadel into mass effect 2 and its pure gold.

Modifié par Dr_Extrem, 02 février 2014 - 07:24 .

[SwobyJ]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

well ... citadel is a wonderful dlc ...

but it is part of the wrong mass effect game.


put citadel into mass effect 2 and its pure gold.

It would be more boring in ME2.

Less strangeness, references to the ending, and hints of what's to come.

Bleh.

[Dr_Extrem]

SwobyJ wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

well ... citadel is a wonderful dlc ...

but it is part of the wrong mass effect game.


put citadel into mass effect 2 and its pure gold.

It would be more boring in ME2.

Less strangeness, references to the ending, and hints of what's to come.

Bleh.

at least it would fit to the themes of me2 ... mercs, rebirth (cloning), shepard, squadmates, wasting time ...


take citadel, tweak ist a little bit and it is a perfect me2 experience.

[GimmeDaGun]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

I love the Citadel DLC but I also agree. I think Bioware went a little over board with the light and humorous moments. That being said, they were only giving the fanbase what it was asking for. One of the main complaints with Mass Effect 3 was that it was "too serious."

That is a complaint I disagree with by the way, but it was one commonly voiced on the forums.

Mass Effect 1 was just as serious and dark toned. ME2 was pretty dark and serious too. So I don't get why many of the fans do not take that into consideration. Ok, the romance subplots ("little blue children" khmmm... ), the paragon daddy-issue thing  and the somewhat juvenile, power-trippy, chest pounding hero-flick cliches in ME2 gave it a more ligh-hearted tone for those who chose to play it that way though. Plus most of the fans add head-canon and fan-fic stuff to the already existing dark and serious setting which definitely puts them into a different mindset (with different expectations for the last chapter / ending of a game trilogy). 

I don't know what most fans did expect for ME3 to be though. Everybody knew that the apocalyptic storm of the reapers would arrive to the galaxy in ME3 and that it would revolve around the destructive war with them. Everybody should have known that it would take more than a simple "unite the forces of the galaxy and play the generic super-hero guy" to defeat such an enemy as the reapers. Plus all the marketing material suggested (trailers etc.) that it would be a pretty grim game. 
People tend to take too seriously or as foreshadowing those typical, cliched "we can do this & give 'em hell" bravado from the squadmates' part. 

If it was up to me, I would have made it even more brutal, horrific and unforgiving. Most people who dislike ME3 for this very reason would hate me even more than Casey and Mac. 

My problem with ME3's dark tone was often how hamfisted or misdirected it was, with the Kai Leng encounter on Thessia taking the cake. I think it was best when it was subtler with people worrying aboard the Citadel, daily emails about past acquaintances dying and entire planets falling, etc. The other problem was that most of the mayhem that personally affected Shepard wasn't done by the Reapers, supposedly the main antagonists of the entire series, but by Cerberus.

On that one I agree... I would have written the Cerberus subplot differently myself. It wouldn't have been an appendix force of the reapers with a huge army, but it would have been like a dagger in the dark stabbing you in the back when you would not see it coming. Like a real renegade black ops group of professional spies, double agents, assassins, strategists, scientists with lots of political influence, financial backing etc. with a secret agenda of their own that you have to figure out while playing the game (not being told about it every second encounter with them).

Their role would be a lot bigger and meaner in the long run, but a lot more subtle, less into the face and obvious. Actually I would drop the whole Cerberus-plot in ME2 (actually I would have written a completely different plot for ME2). TIM would be about the only thing I would keep from Cerberus. The rest I find garbage. Plus no secret organisation uses a coat of arms on anything. They would pretend being as part of the Alliance, corporations... it would be more like the illuminati of the ME-universe. Kai Leng easily could have been a squadmate who spies on you and stabs you in the back in a very mean way when you least expect it. And yes, I would have concentrated a lot more on the reapers myself. 

[ImaginaryMatter]

GimmeDaGun wrote...

On that one I agree... I would have written the Cerberus subplot differently myself. It wouldn't have been an appendix force of the reapers with a huge army, but it would have been like a dagger in the dark stabbing you in the back when you would not see it coming. Like a real renegade black ops group of professional spies, double agents, assassins, strategists, scientists with lots of political influence, financial backing etc. with a secret agenda of their own that you have to figure out while playing the game (not being told about it every second encounter with them).

Their role would be a lot bigger and meaner in the long run, but a lot more subtle, less into the face and obvious. Actually I would drop the whole Cerberus-plot in ME2 (actually I would have written a completely different plot for ME2). TIM would be about the only thing I would keep from Cerberus. The rest I find garbage. Plus no secret organisation uses a coat of arms on anything. They would pretend being as part of the Alliance, corporations... it would be more like the illuminati of the ME-universe. Kai Leng easily could have been a squadmate who spies on you and stabs you in the back in a very mean way when you least expect it. And yes, I would have concentrated a lot more on the reapers myself. 

I like your idea. Mine is similar although Cerberus's role in the story is replaced by the Shadow Broker Network, with TIM assuming the roll of Shadow Broker himself.

[spirosz]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

jstme wrote...

Yeah,Citadel does not really fit into ME3. This is exactly why i like it.

This.

[SwobyJ]

And why even a more Renegade Shepard at least likes it.

(Though he may go "Is this needed?" at certain parts..)

[Colancio]

Teddie Sage wrote...

Sorry to say, but ME3 as a whole was immersion breaking.

[liggy002]

The very last DLC of the trilogy should have extended and enhanced Priority:Earth.  The war assets should have made more of a difference.  Instead, we get the Citadel:DLC.  While entertaining, the reveal that it was a Shepard clone is laughable.

[liggy002]

Colancio wrote...

Teddie Sage wrote...

Sorry to say, but ME3 as a whole was immersion breaking.

And this too, particularly the ending and their failed attempts to "clarify" their endings with their DLC.

[Teddie Sage]

GimmeDaGun wrote...

Teddie Sage wrote...

Sorry to say, but ME3 as a whole was immersion breaking.

Nah, ME3 was great.  But as it seems it did not work for you, so I guess it was immersion breaking FOR YOU. 

I guess I don't need to tell you there's no need for parroting the obvious.

Modifié par Teddie Sage, 02 février 2014 - 09:14 .

[SwobyJ]

liggy002 wrote...

The very last DLC of the trilogy should have extended and enhanced Priority:Earth.  The war assets should have made more of a difference.  Instead, we get the Citadel:DLC.  While entertaining, the reveal that it was a Shepard clone is laughable.

It seems laughable and it is presented a bit that way, but it's personally all I needed in order to (believe that I may) understand the entire trilogy.

And no, I'm not talking about "Shepard was a clone all along" or such nonsense.


EDIT: However, I largely agree. While Citadel DLC was enough to tide me over, like EC was enough to tide over more casual fans upset with the generalities of the ending... I'm still missing that last bit, that last push of finality.

Which would be something like an Earth DLC with a trip to, I dunno, Rio?

But ideally at this point more than that. Maybe a small expansion sized content of Earth + various conflict zones + more. A good several hours of core story, instead of a few hours of it (Leviathan), or a few hours of mostly combat (Omega), or a few hours of both plus an arena and party to pad out more hours (Citadel).

But nah, the endings are literal and everything ended just as they should. Right? :innocent:

Modifié par SwobyJ, 02 février 2014 - 09:17 .

[JPN17]

Meh. Citadel is a post ending DLC that can't be played post ending thanks to the nature of the ending. I find it pretty amusing that they made the DLC in such a way given it clashes with their artistic vision and whatnot, but I digress.

Modifié par JPN17, 02 février 2014 - 09:16 .

[SwobyJ]

JPN17 wrote...

Meh. Citadel is a post ending DLC that can't be played post ending thanks to the nature of the ending. I find it pretty amusing that they made the DLC in such a way given it clashes with their artistic vision and whatnot, but I digress.

It doesn't clash with it at all. It fulfills it.

It DOES interfere with narrative smoothness though, I'd agree with people on that. But I don't think it's supposed to be smooth.

[GimmeDaGun]

Teddie Sage wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...

Teddie Sage wrote...

Sorry to say, but ME3 as a whole was immersion breaking.

Nah, ME3 was great.  But as it seems it did not work for you, so I guess it was immersion breaking FOR YOU. 

I guess I don't need to tell you there's no need for parroting the obvious.

Oh, well... suit yourself. 

[Teddie Sage]

GimmeDaGun wrote...

Oh, well... suit yourself. 

I don't like how cheeky your reply was. You know we're only stating opinions here, I wasn't looking for trouble. To me ME1 and ME2 had a lot of immersion elements that made me feel like my Shepard felt like mine. ME3 broke that illusion for me and a lot of other gamers out there.

Edit: 

I'm also disappointed on how they included the kid in Shepard's dreams. It
broke my bond with my character even more. I was Shepard, I had my
dreams and my own opinions about everything as Shepard in the two first
games. Those dreams weren't supposed to be there if this was respecting
the core of what a BioWare RPG is meant to be. We're supposed to be able
to interpret a lot of things from our characters, like their faith or
their sexuality or even their dreams. That nightmare just enforced the
ideals from BioWare that Shepard didn't belong to me anymore but to them.

Modifié par Teddie Sage, 02 février 2014 - 11:46 .

[Teddie Sage]

Yeah... I guess the only thing most disappointed players can do for the third game is to headcanon everything that didn't make sense for their Shepard or their own storyline.