I always have a bit of a problem with declaring anything the 'original idea'.
There are previous ideas, yes, but don't fool yourself that the writers didn't have at least a few concepts floating around. It's like that Dark Energy thing - no, it is not 'original' as far as any of the writers claim. It was one of many, and an example.
Sorry just peev. I do it myself, so whatever.
Guest_xray16_*
So the "guardian" or starkid or whatever AI shows up. For some reason he is shaped like the little kid. That could have been an interesting cruelty, Shepard's mind being used to confuse him/her by the Evil AI reading his/her mind and using the guilt. I thought that was the setup at first. It was a shocking revelation, but one I could get behind if it was rationalized. However, Shepard just stood there listening. Being forced to make a choice between the things he had fought so hard against.
- Control was the Illusive Man's dream,
- Synthesis Saren's, and
- Destroy was counter to everything I had come to admire about Shepard.
Absoultely. I couldn't agree more wholeheartedly. In fact I think you've just hit upon the core reason I reacted so badly to the endings.
Cruel.
Cruel, harshness.
No kid, in the real world you just can't have "that". End of. Finito. Not possible. Ever. Becasue I say so.
And yes, I really did want to smack down Harbinger after all his trash-talk in ME2, but again - he basically wasn't in ME3. It's like ME3 wasn't really a part of the same series as ME2.
Best trilogy off all-time in my opinion. As much as I disliked the ending, .1% of the series does not ruin the other 99.9% that was fantastic.
I believe both games were criticized for them because they were repetitive and kinda nonsensical, which they really can be. They could have been made much more interesting, but BioWare were batting 0/2. To the chopping block they go.The hacking minigames in Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag are proof that they can be fun, challenging, and not at all monotonous.
At this point I'm just hoping ME4 retcons the original trilogy's ending to make better sense.
I was late to the Mass Effect series, so I already knew that the ending was not a fan favorite. I was able to do the ending with my Shep gasping for breath, so it wasn't too terrible. The whole game is sort of dark and depressing though, so it's hard for me to play over and over again. I don't hate it, but I don't love it. I play more multiplayer than single play-throughs.
I don't hate ME3. I just seem to feel better when its not around.
Never hated Mass Effect 3 in the first place. Just finished it again, and had a lot of fun playing it. I think ME2 is slightly better, but it's very close between them.
As far as endings go, they make sense to me in terms of the story. Each a victory of it's own, but with their own little sacrifice.
No,I don't hate it. But I do have a grudge against it. Not just the endings,but the game as a whole. Looking at the leaked script always makes me mad since it reminds me what ME3 could have been if Bioware had taken proper time to fully develop it.
I rarely say things like this,but I have to admit that ME trilogy will remain a bitter wound for me due to ME3.
I still hate Mass Effect 3. I feel like the Nostalgia Critic at the end of the Man of Steel review, "I still think this movie is terrible!" to which AJ replies "Oh come on!" And I get why some people like the game. The combat is vastly improved over Mass Effect 2, but nowhere as satisfying as Mass Effect 1 when I was able to be an unstoppable god of destruction who didn't have to constantly worry about running out of ammo. I'm never going to let that one go. Some of the concluding stories for each of the races and characters were very touching, such as curing the genophage, or Thane's final scene with Shephard in the hospital, or the peace between the Geth and the Quarians (even though it really made no sense why Legion couldn't just wait a few minutes for a ship with higher bandwidth).
While I think that coming out with a free new ending was a big integrity move by Bioware, so bravo to Bioware on that one, it not failed to resolve a single problem I had with the ending, but added several additional problems.
The biggest problem it added was the scene where the Normandy comes to pick up the injured crew member. Now by itself this would be fine, however the timing ruins this one. Right before the change you are all making a mad dash towards the beam of light while a Reaper is constantly shooting a giant death ray at you, vaporizing everyone on both sides of your character as you are sprinting hell for leather to try to save your ass and make it to the beam of light. But then one of your squad members kinda sort gets struck by debris and injured. Now according to how this scene is paced, the danger posed by the Reaper and its giant death beams hasn't lessened one iota, you have absolutely safe space to run to and take cover from these death beams, your only hope is still to make it to the giant beam of light as quickly as you can. But you stop running, check on the injured squadmate, call the Normandy, wait around for 5-10 minutes while the Normandy disengages from the battle to come down to Earth to pick up the injured squad mate, wait another couple of minutes while the Normandy lands, take another couple of minutes to load the injured squad mate, give the Normandy a slap as it flies back into space, and only then return to running towards the beam of light. I mean what the hell was the Reaper in the background doing while all this was going on, take a lunch break?
Maybe the writers watched too much of that one Robin Hood Men in Tights scene where Achoo yells "Time out bad guys, I am running out of air. Gotta get pumped." and the bad guys actually back off and let him pump air back into his Nike Airs. But Mass Effect 3 wasn't billed as a comedy, at least to my knowledge. Of course that would explain basically everything wrong with the game. From the Mary Sue space ninja with ridiculous plot armor, to the exhaustively searched Martian archives that still held secrets that only Liara was able to find within a mere two weeks even though the humans had finished examining every single piece of information on those archives decades ago according to Mass Effect 1, to the space brat that completely altered and castrated the Reapers by turning them from beings with a purpose greater than any mortal could understand to robots being controlled by a hypocrite that looks like the random kid you saw in the beginning of the game who Shephard and the player had absolutely no emotional connection with.
And that space brat who changed the altered the very fundamental nature and purpose of the Reapers was the problem with the ending that wasn't fixed by the extended ending. And that was the beef I had with the ending. None of what the ending actually did fix had bothered me before the new ending came out because by that point I was so pissed off with Bioware resolving a series about personal struggle and achievement against insurmountable odds by resorting to what can only be called a deus ex machina, that I just didn't care about the little things.
Biower has become the very thing they swore to destroy (avoid)
I never hated Mass Effect 3 and I still don't. Regardless of how it ended, I felt pretty satisfied by the end of the game, although I will admit that the EC really helped clear things up with the original ending.
Biower has become the very thing they swore to destroy (avoid)
I'm a little confused. If the problem with ME2/3 combat is that it isn't unbalanced enough, why not just turn on godmode?The combat is vastly improved over Mass Effect 2, but nowhere as satisfying as Mass Effect 1 when I was able to be an unstoppable god of destruction who didn't have to constantly worry about running out of ammo. I'm never going to let that one go.
This isn't correct. I think SwobyJ's right a few posts back when he says that stuff that didn't actually get established a game doesn't count. There were some ideas kicking around, but the Reapers never had a nature and purpose until the Catalyst came along.And that space brat who changed the altered the very fundamental nature and purpose of the Reapers was the problem with the ending that wasn't fixed by the extended ending.
This isn't correct. I think SwobyJ's right a few posts back when he says that stuff that didn't actually get established a game doesn't count. There were some of ideas kicking around, but the Reapers never had a nature and purpose until the Catalyst came along.
I wouldn't say they had no purpose or no nature before the Catalyst came along. Sovereign and Harbinger both had negative feelings towards organics and the Reapers did regularly wipe them out. They were also fairly different personality wise which could mean each Reaper was an individual. It's not anything definitive but we could infer several things about them.
Anyway, that isn't a purpose or a nature. It rules out a few purposes and natures, but that's it.
This seems to be a semantics issue. How are you defining 'nature' here?
I never hated it, I still fire it up every once in a while. It wasn't one of my favorite Bioware games even before the end. I had other problems with it, and the quality seemed to go down after Tuchunka and Rannoch which were the high point. DLC really saved the game for me, and that's usually what I play if I turn it on.
I loved Aria so I like Omega
I like Leviathan
And I just love the Citadel. I play through that mission, the party and run around the arena for a mirror match or two every so often.
I can't say how I would feel if I played through the entire game again. After the Citadel came out I just played that before the Cerberus base raid and called it a game.
This seems to be a semantics issue. How are you defining 'nature' here?
I never really hated ME3. My biggest criticism was the harsh finality of the possible outcomes, especially pre-EC. But never enough to actually warrant enough displeasure towards the game. And the EC, even though it's a just a last minute band-aid, makes the outcomes a bit more bearable then before.
I never hated ME3.
I didn't play it (or any ME game) until well over a year after ME3's initial release, so I had already witnessed, albeit from a distance, the outrage over the endings. That helped to temper my expectations when playing the trilogy for the first time, but to be honest, I have never fully grasped the level of outrage the endings elicited. And I say that as someone who considers the ending (everything post - Priority: Earth) to be pretty damn flawed.
I've never hated Mass Effect. It gave me one of the greatest gaming experiences I've ever had and will always remember it as such.
Mass effect is probably the main reason I'm into gaming and RPG's, I love the lore, the characters, just everything. I was introduced to the trilogy (does it even count as a trilogy anymore?) quite late, but I remember pouring hours, days and months into the first game because I just love all those little nook and crannies where you can find out more about the universe.
I don't buy a game for combat or because "its mainstream", whats the point in all of it if the story cant stand on its legs. That is why I was disappointed with ME3 (and ME2 to a certain extent) by trying to appeal to a wider audience, you leave out what attracted people in the first place, that is why I don't really enjoy mainstream gaming because one way or the other it usually destroys some part of the foundation that the game was originally built on. Saying that I never did get truly angry with the ending, I was just perplexed as to the direction it went in and how it will effect the rest of the franchise.
Retour en haut
