266 réponses à ce sujet

[CronoDragoon]

It's entirely subjective to try and quantify levels of ridiculousness, but assuming I could, I would say its magnitudes above the rest. The fight itself is a big source of it. As far as game play goes it's uninspired and lame; it also creates this huge disconnect when you can utterly thrash Kai Leng and he then goes to recharge his shields in the wide open (in a covered base third person shooter), where you can continue to strip them down faster than he regenerates. Then the cut scene magic happens. When the gunship leaves at the end of it, I'm just wondering if I was destined to lose the fight no matter what, why every one decided to walk up to a guy who only uses a sword, where the gun ship was hiding the entire time, why the temple is just a thin floor built above a giant chasm, Prothean reasoning, why all these pointless exchanges with TIM, etc. And then the debriefing happens.

By the end of Thessia I am no longer engaged in the story but engaged in second guessing the developers. And all this happened on my first play through because it was so jarring to be beating Kai Leng and then lose to him through a cut scene and then have Shepard act incredibly out of character. I just can't take the game seriously any more when Cerberus shows up. Previously in the series when these kind of things happened, mainly the intros to both ME2 and ME3 the parts after them made up for their shortcomings. Unfortunately, for Thessia this is the point in the series where I no longer care what happens in the series, which especially cements it in my mind as the worst scene in the entire trilogy.

 

This cutscene/gameplay disparity happens in ME1, too, with the first Saren fight, though. Are you against scripted defeats of any kind? If so then I can respect that while disagreeing. Also, gunships routinely appear out of nowhere in ME.

[von uber]

The kai leng fight spoils a really good level.

[archangel1996]

Citadel DLC is a good piece of DLC. Well worth my $15. I'd buy it over LOTSB anyday.

 

I don't know why you're trying to label it as "bad"

 

What i meant to say is that the DLC is good simply because, in my opinion, the rest of the game is quite bad.

A good example, IMO, of a good DLC that is actually good is the Left Behind DLC for TLU, contrary to this one it was not needed to feel a sense of closure because the main game already gave that (a questionable ending done in the good way) nor it felt like it was missing from the main game (you could argue that neither was this and you may be right because this one DLC is more of a "feelings/closure" thing than a explanation thing, Leviathan though )

Simply put, a good game doesn't need a 15$ DLC to feel some closure and another two to understand a little bit about the ending(i still don't actually)

But i'm going OT in my own topic

[voteDC]

For me it feels disconnected because it did what the main game forgot.

The reason people fell in love with the series was not all the awesome pew-pew action but the characters that made up that world.

Citadel made those characters important again. Yes the story was a little silly but you can forgive almost anything if the ending, in this case the Party, is good enough.

Plus the final scene of the DLC, where Shepard is looking out at the Normandy, carried far more emotional impact for me than the four in the main game.

[von uber]

Plus the final scene of the DLC, where Shepard is looking out at the Normandy, carried far more emotional impact for me than the four in the main game.

 

Yep. It gets very dusty for some reason when I get to that point and I need to wipe my eyes clear of it. Dust. Definitely.

[ImaginaryMatter]

This cutscene/gameplay disparity happens in ME1, too, with the first Saren fight, though. Are you against scripted defeats of any kind? If so then I can respect that while disagreeing. Also, gunships routinely appear out of nowhere in ME.

 

It's not the scripted loss that bothers me, it is beating an enemy in gameplay only to lose through a cutscene. It irked me back with Saren as well. I still consider Kai Leng to be much worse just because the action is that much more goofier (subjective I know).

[L. Han]

I thought the DLC's purpose is to try and please fans via putting in all the characters and hope one or two is a hit.

 

I personally thought it was fun but it was somewhat whacky and out of place compared to the overall tone and style of the game.

[Bob from Accounting]

It's not the scripted loss that bothers me, it is beating an enemy in gameplay only to lose through a cutscene. It irked me back with Saren as well. I still consider Kai Leng to be much worse just because the action is that much more goofier (subjective I know).

So how do you suggest the player characters get defeated in combat, as is sometimes necessary?

[TheOneTrueBioticGod]

So how do you suggest the player characters get defeated in combat, as is sometimes necessary?

Kai Lang could been scripted just to run up to Shepard mid-fight, stab her through the stomach, then the mission ends as she loses consciousness. Or something. It certainly can be done. I can't name something off the top of my head, but it has happened before in other games I've played. 

[Argolas]

So how do you suggest the player characters get defeated in combat, as is sometimes necessary?

 

A battle you can't win? Or resolve the entire thing in a cutscene? Just beating the boss and then seeing cutscene hero screwing up feels weird.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

If a player character is going to be defeated in combat, i.e. has absolutely no chance of winning the fight, is going to be defeated no matter what fancy set of twitch skills or equipment they have to use for that particular section, I'd rather just run the entire thing as a cut scene. I mean what the hell is the point otherwise than wasting the player's time?

[Bob from Accounting]

A battle you can't win? Or resolve the entire thing in a cutscene? Just beating the boss and then seeing cutscene hero screwing up feels weird.

 

First of all, it doesn't seem to me that doing everything in a cutscene solves a thing. Players would just shriek "I could have beaten this guy in gameplay!"

 

Secondly, how exactly are developers supposed to make a human-sized opponent 'impossible' to beat in gameplay? Make him hit 100x harder than other enemies? Give him 100x the health? That seems to be no less contrived.

[von uber]

The worst thing is when cutscenes contradict what you know about how the ingame universe works and when you have direct experience of defeating them in the way that is suddenly contradicted..

 

[Argolas]

If a player character is going to be defeated in combat, i.e. has absolutely no chance of winning the fight, is going to be defeated no matter what fancy set of twitch skills or equipment they have to use for that particular section, I'd rather just run the entire thing as a cut scene. I mean what the hell is the point otherwise than wasting the player's time?

 

It depends on the situation and game really. It can add to the atmosphere to feel the power of an enemy inside the game mechanics, give you a taste of your enemy's power. In the Thessia situation, however, I would consider a simple cutscene the better solution. Unless you have Garrus with you to take advantage of his gunship disabling skills, of course.

[Bob from Accounting]

...How that does particular shot contradict how 'you know' the game universe works?

[cyrslash1974]

not a parody but a tribute I think

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

This is the "boss that cheats" fight. Again what the hell is the point? Okay so have this boss charge up and stab the PC, making the PC go unconscious. The "boss" runs off, and then there's a cutscene in Med Bay or back at camp or where ever with the PC being treated for the wound.

[Bob from Accounting]

What a silly question. What's the 'point' of having combat gameplay in any game? What's the 'point' of defeating any enemy in combat and not just using a cutscene for every victory?

[Argolas]

First of all, it doesn't seem to me that doing everything in a cutscene solves a thing. Players would just shriek "I could have beaten this guy in gameplay!"

 

Secondly, how exactly are developers supposed to make a human-sized opponent 'impossible' to beat in gameplay? Make him hit 100x harder than other enemies? Give him 100x the health? That seems to be no less contrived.

 

Depends on the cutscene, don't you think? It must be a convincing scenario, of course.

 

Add a tactical advantage to your opponent, like they did with the gunship firing at you. Just come up with something that makes the battle unfair. A little creativity is required, of course, but that's what they are paid for.

[von uber]

...How that does particular shot contradict how 'you know' the game universe works?

 

the whole sequence is ridiculous as you know that

1) Thane the assassin wouldn't go in running to get stabeed

2) My shep would've have just shot him when Thane was fighting

3) My shep would have used a combination of biotics etc to get rid of him

4) My Shep wouldn't be using that bloody pistol which she dosn't have equipped to shoot his sudden magic shields

 

and so on.

[Bob from Accounting]

And what if the writers don't want the battle to be 'unfair'? What if that's precisely the point? What if they want the protagonist to be defeated in a fair fight with his nemesis? To be weaker?

[von uber]

And what if the writers don't want the battle to be 'unfair'? What if that's precisely the point? What if they want the protagonist to be defeated in a fair fight with his nemesis? To be weaker?

 

then you do it like they did in Arrival.

[Bob from Accounting]

the whole sequence is ridiculous as you know that

1) Thane the assassin wouldn't go in running to get stabeed

2) My shep would've have just shot him when Thane was fighting

3) My shep would have used a combination of biotics etc to get rid of him

4) My Shep wouldn't be using that bloody pistol which she dosn't have equipped to shoot his sudden magic shields

 

and so on.

The first two complaints are legitimate, although perhaps you should have posted a picture that actually illustrates them, instead of one that does no such thing. The last two are just silly. Have you actually given any thought at all to the complications of such a thing for the developers?

[Bob from Accounting]

then you do it like they did in Arrival.

Uh, no. Shepard can win a 'fair fight' in Arrival. He only loses because the artifact knocks him out.

[von uber]

Uh, no. Shepard can win a 'fair fight' in Arrival. He only loses because the artifact knocks him out.

 

Exactly. But that is reasonable in the context of the fight.

Sudden cutscene incompetence coupled with sudden cutscene badassness isn't.