1638 réponses à ce sujet

[ruggly]

dreamgazer wrote...
From the second the protagonist was killed and resurrected (lol) to jump ahead two years, heat clips replaced the overheat mechanism, and  Shepard was railroaded to work alongside Cerberus against the Collectors, it becomes obvious that cohesivenss went straight out the window. "We have dismissed that claim" was the nail in the coffin.

Flaws.  Flaws everywhere. 

Yeah, but I'll continue looking at ME2 through my rose tinted glasses.  It remains my  favorite of the trilogy despite all of the flaws.


ME3 did a lot of things right, but there are clearly things that needed a lot more polishing. Next trilogy they make, I suggest they plan it all out, but who does that anyways.

[dreamgazer]

ruggly wrote...

Yeah, but I'll continue looking at ME2 through my rose tinted glasses.  It remains my  favorite of the trilogy despite all of the flaws.

I dunno about favorites in the trilogy, but I still certainly like ME2, despite having a few negative things to say about it. 

Thinking that the flaws, railroading, autodialogue, space magic, and lack of cohesiveness somehow started in ME3, however, is bananas.

[ruggly]

dreamgazer wrote...

ruggly wrote...

Yeah, but I'll continue looking at ME2 through my rose tinted glasses.  It remains my  favorite of the trilogy despite all of the flaws.

I dunno about favorites in the trilogy, but I still certainly like ME2, despite having a few negative things to say about it. 

Thinking that the flaws, railroading, autodialogue, space magic, and lack of cohesiveness somehow started in ME3, however, is bananas.

Certainly. ME3 definitely struggled in areas thanks to ME2's story leading to nothing, and they really did the best they could with it, trying to fit in every single character they've introduced and what not. 

Now ME1 is very boring to me compared to the other two, while ME3 improved on combat (and bleh at trying to go back to one and sludge through that combat!) and many other things found in the games, but ME2 just has that certain something that makes me love it, though I can see why it would be peoples' least favorite.

Modifié par ruggly, 11 février 2014 - 10:56 .

[RangerSG]

dreamgazer wrote...

ruggly wrote...

Yeah, but I'll continue looking at ME2 through my rose tinted glasses.  It remains my  favorite of the trilogy despite all of the flaws.

I dunno about favorites in the trilogy, but I still certainly like ME2, despite having a few negative things to say about it. 

Thinking that the flaws, railroading, autodialogue, space magic, and lack of cohesiveness somehow started in ME3, however, is bananas.

Agreed. They're games with nearly 50 hours to play between all the quests, sidequests and other ways to snoop around the corners. There are bound to be flaws. Some big ones. The only thing that makes them worse in ME3 is we know it's the last memory of Shepard, and it's a very bad note to end on. EC or not. Not because he dies. But because he's no longer an agent of change. 

[Andrew Lucas]

Never hated ME3, for me its a awesome game with a dissapointing ending and the treatment that ME2 companions got, in fact i like ME3 history more than ME2,

ME2 =Characters
ME3=History

Its what i think

Modifié par JShepardN7, 11 février 2014 - 11:09 .

[Barquiel]

I've never hated it. I didn't like the endings but I made my peace with them (extended cut). The story may not be great, but Bioware did a decent job telling it across at least half the game...and despite its flaws, ME3 had some great moments. There are many things I thought ME3 did well (gameplay, soundtrack, the dynamic Normandy and Shepard, the squadmates, side quests, Rannoch and Tuchanka, the DLC missions, multiplayer,...).

[78stonewobble]

I really don't think the me2 resurrection is any more spacemagic than the spacemagic of well uhm ... biotic magic ... or FTL magic and so on.

The cerberus side of me2 was... somewhat forced... but the collectors and abductions seemed an okayish intermezzo in the greater reaper invasion story... Apart from the terminator at the end.

Even though me1 had lots of skills and lots of gear it felt quite bland. I'd say too much... Me2 went completely overboard and simplified that too much. Me3 seems to strike a decent balance though a bit on the too simpliefied side.

What me2 did right... was the character interactions, the character stories and universe immersion. It did that very very right imho.

Me3 is somewhere inbetween those 2 on those aspects.

[spirosz]

StreetMagic wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

ruggly wrote...

Yeah, but I'll continue looking at ME2 through my rose tinted glasses.  It remains my  favorite of the trilogy despite all of the flaws.

I dunno about favorites in the trilogy, but I still certainly like ME2, despite having a few negative things to say about it. 

Thinking that the flaws, railroading, autodialogue, space magic, and lack of cohesiveness somehow started in ME3, however, is bananas.

The autodialogue is a unique beef for ME3, I think. I think Action mode and lack of neutral comments might have a lot to do with it (I mean, Action mode sort of imposes a more seamless conversation style.. so maybe it was easier for them to automate dialogue paths. The result is more cutscene-ish, even if you're not playing Action mode).

Not entirely true, since I've heard that the auto dialogue in ME2 did the same thing to that person's Shepard, that the ME3 dialogue did to my Shepard.  Both have auto dialogue, ME3 obviously more so, but I found ME2 to have the perfect balance.   

[grey_wind]

 Gotta love that the OP devolves into a rant about Man of Steel for a whole paragraph. 

I don't hate ME3, at least not anymore. It left a lot to be desired, but it's got a lot of good things going for it too. I still enjoy the series, though I don't view it through my rose-tinted glasses anymore.

[SwobyJ]

Here's a good way to understand the RP of Mass Effect:

Imagine you're using comms and speaking into Shepard's ear/mind like you're talking him through dating someone (like that Citadel scene where we help Garrus with a date haha). That's what the options are like, and how they're worded. YOU say one thing, then Shepard does something that fits his more predefined setup anyway.

[Br3admax]

spirosz wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

ruggly wrote...

Yeah, but I'll continue looking at ME2 through my rose tinted glasses.  It remains my  favorite of the trilogy despite all of the flaws.

I dunno about favorites in the trilogy, but I still certainly like ME2, despite having a few negative things to say about it. 

Thinking that the flaws, railroading, autodialogue, space magic, and lack of cohesiveness somehow started in ME3, however, is bananas.

The autodialogue is a unique beef for ME3, I think. I think Action mode and lack of neutral comments might have a lot to do with it (I mean, Action mode sort of imposes a more seamless conversation style.. so maybe it was easier for them to automate dialogue paths. The result is more cutscene-ish, even if you're not playing Action mode).

Not entirely true, since I've heard that the auto dialogue in ME2 did the same thing to that person's Shepard, that the ME3 dialogue did to my Shepard.  Both have auto dialogue, ME3 obviously more so, but I found ME2 to have the perfect balance.   

Also, there weren't really any neutral comments. No matter what you said, the same outcomes happened, and Shepard reacted the same way. It was, "Okay," "No, but Okay." "Hell no, but okay." The "neutral" option was really just a unclever rewording of one of the other options, and very obviously so. 

[This is the End My Friend]

^What a hater.

[spirosz]

In ME2? Depending on the situation - as I found the neutral worked better for me in a lot of cases, especially with dialogue concerning Jack - which I found the most memorable in terms of seeing that whole "extreme" side to both paragon and renegade and the not so therapist-like neutral aspect.

[MrFob]

Never hated ME3. In fact, apart from the beginning (until Palaven) and the ending (Citadel: The Return), I was quite impressed with the things they did in the game.
I think a lot of the grievances that I have with ME3 have more to do with the fact that the trilogy is at an end and looking back at it as a whole, I can see all the potential that wasn't realized, all the things that "could have been". As dreamgazer says, a lot of those originate from ME2, rather than ME3 and during the middle of the game, they did a wonderful job with what they had.
The only parts of the game, I still have legitimate and rather strong dislike for are the beginning of ME3 and the ending. Unfortunately they are among the most important parts of the game IMO, so these problems weigh heavily with me.
Another disappointment that is still very present in my mind is how BW as a company has developed during the ME trilogy, especially they way they changed their interaction with the community (as in reducing it from an open exchange to mostly a bunch of BS PR phrases).

[Br3admax]

spirosz wrote...

In ME2? Depending on the situation - as I found the neutral worked better for me in a lot of cases, especially with dialogue concerning Jack - which I found the most memorable in terms of seeing that whole "extreme" side to both paragon and renegade and the not so therapist-like neutral aspect.

Listen to them again. Most of the time, it's just a toned down version of Renegade responses. Instead of saying, "lolTime for you die, splody!!!" and wringing your hands, you would say, "No, and you probably shouldn't have done that." As side character stuff, I admitedly didn't really pay attention to most of it, especially once it got towards the romance parts of it, just pressed Square through those. However, I doubt that it was really that different.  

[Excella Gionne]

Are we seriously still mad?

[Br3admax]

StreetMagic wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

spirosz wrote...

In ME2? Depending on the situation - as I found the neutral worked better for me in a lot of cases, especially with dialogue concerning Jack - which I found the most memorable in terms of seeing that whole "extreme" side to both paragon and renegade and the not so therapist-like neutral aspect.

Listen to them again. Most of the time, it's just a toned down version of Renegade responses. Instead of saying, "lolTime for you die, splody!!!" and wringing your hands, you would say, "No, and you probably shouldn't have done that." As side character stuff, I admitedly didn't really pay attention to most of it, especially once it got towards the romance parts of it, just pressed Square through those. However, I doubt that it was really that different.  

I think that's more the case with ME1. Like talking to Wrex, for example. Or the Council. Every response is meant to move his stories along the same way.

Kaidan and Ashley - not so much. And ME2 conversations borrow more from that style, I think.

For me, it's pretty much the same. Nothing's really that radically different, and everything lead to the same conclusions, it was only a matter of two opinions on the subject. Hoenstly, the only neutral options I saw that weren't really Hiddengade, or a few Hidden Paragon one were the options that said no on a matter. "No, I don't want this." "No, I don't want to sleep with you." Otherwise, they weren't really that different. Not for the most part, anyway. 

[Seboist]

johnnythao89 wrote...

Are we seriously still mad?

Only IT nutjobs and those who desperately want happy ending with space waifu are.

[spirosz]

Toned down is still a different type of response though, regardless if you get the same or different outcome. It's the choice that the player makes of picking these options that helped mould Shepard and I felt this was critically missing in ME3 for my Shepard.

[Mr.House]

Never hated ME3.

[spirosz]

StreetMagic wrote...
I think what they were going for with Ash, Kaidan, and Jack was similar to DAO's "hardening" of Alistair or Leliana. It was just wasn't as well done, imo. They all ended up going down a destined path no matter what.

and that is because of the uncoordinated planning it seems for the trilogy as a whole.  They could of had these characters be drastically different depending on your Shepard co-exsistence -- if it wasn't for some odd design choices in the middle of the trilogy, IMO.