Guest_Fandango_*
Oh, I'm with you. I dislike the ending almost as much as you
but I'm just saying, it's not a unique case in video game history, as Moghedia made it sound like.
Nope, the fallout that followed the launch of Mass Effect was unprecedented - extended well and beyond these forums - and spoke in the strongest possible terms to the terrible job Mac and Casey did of torching concluding the trilogy.
Yeah.
Because execution doesn't matter, only how well it sounds on paper. And lets remind ourselves that this guy wrote the Mass Effect 1's story.
Aside from the fact that it's in their interest to continue to defend their products, making some sort of public apology to somehow appease dissatisfied fans is totally meaningless. I mean, what good would it do? The people who hate the game will continue to hate it, and even if some people actually buy this apology and go "Aww they really do care", talk is cheap. If they really want to say "I'm sorry", then they just have to release better games.
I'd love to hear they've learned something from their mistakes (I did). It would make me feels a lot better about new mass effect game. But they only admitted to not understanding the relation players had with Shepard's character.
Like what? Mass Effect 3 is the best game in the series and Mac Walters is a great writer?There's so much bullshit in here I don't even know where to begin.
Seems kind of silly to try to build yet another reaper to make a second attempt to hijack the Citadel. But again, it doesn't matter, because it's well established in ME2 that the reapers will arrive regardless.
Why go through all that process of building another reaper. Can't just, 5 or 10 reapers arrive a bit earlier than the others and open the citadel relay by sheer force?
Maybe, but I guess the Reapers were desperate.Seems kind of silly to try to build yet another reaper to make a second attempt to hijack the Citadel. But again, it doesn't matter, because it's well established in ME2 that the reapers will arrive regardless.
So you think all of the games are sh*t, because of the terrible writing?Like nobody caring for the glaring f*ck ups in ME2, for starters.
So you think all of the games are sh*t, because of the terrible writing?
Why are you here then? Just to troll?
That conclusion is just ridiculous. I'm still playing Mass Effect, entire trilogy runs.
You are only here to dump on ME3. Who's the damn troll?
also, lets talk about this point you bring up:
-The force that drives the Reapers, which is to kill all organics so that they don't kill themselves (completely ridiculous and illogical, lol), was not mentioned until Mass Effect 3
AI research was banned just for the hell of it?
The writing and everything you mentioned in ME1 and ME2 were absolutely fine and made sense for the most part (the game has a little bit of space magic, but so what, it's fiction and isn't exaggerated out of proportion). The collectors had a point, i.e. build a Reaper to open the mass effect relay in the Citadel. Shepard's death and resurrection was fine, space magic tech FTW. No idea what Drew has to do with Tali's voice acting. The Reapers did not have a plan that made no sense, their plans and agenda were simply not revealed, other than the fact that they wanted to destroy/enslave all intelligent, spacefaring life in the galaxy, which made them very mysterious. Sounds to me like you just simply have a problem with this type of space opera fiction.
I have no idea why you are blaming Drew Karpyshyn for the ridiculous and terrible writing that Mac Walters was responsible for in ME3. The hole that you mentioned, the one ME3 fell into, was only dug in Mass Effect 3 by Mac Walters himself, it was not dug by Drew Karpyshyn in ME1 and ME2. You also seem to completely renounce the fact that nobody really had any problems with the writing in the Mass Effect series until ME3 was released.
- The Reapers were truly irrational and incomprehensible until Mass Effect 3,
- The force that drives the Reapers, which is to kill all organics so that they don't kill themselves (completely ridiculous and illogical, lol), was not mentioned until Mass Effect 3
- Star Child, "god" of the galaxy, was never mentioned until Mass Effect 3,
- that Shepard must pointlessy sacrifice himself, in order to prove that humans deserve to survive (what? lol), which ultimately ends the reaping cycles, was never mentioned until Mass Effect 3
and countless other ridiculous story elements, that were developed during the production of Mass Effect 3. There is absolutely no connection of these story elements to the story elements in ME1 and ME2, other than the fact, that the Reapers exist and have an agenda.
Not to mention that you bash Drew for the discarded ideas that the writing team had developed and are trying use this is proof that Drew is a terrible writer, although Drew himself even mentioned that "Some of the ideas were a little bit wacky and a little bit crazy". What? Seriously?
A few things:
Considering that the reapers were arriving anyway, it's a safer assumption that the purpose of the human reaper was simply to be, well, the human reaper. The Collectors were going to harvest enough people to build it, then the rest can simply be destroyed once the reapers finally arrive. Of course, this begs the question as to why the Collectors have to do this at all, since the reaper fleet is well capable of doing this themselves. The Citadel relay plan failed. It doesn't seem sensible to bother making this same desperate move again, risking the destruction of yet another reaper, particularly one fresh off the macabre showroom floor.
Shepard's death and subsequent resurrection is pointless and stupid, because it's perfectly interchangeable with a 2 year long coma within the narrative. Hell, even the characters themselves seem to be pretty inconsistent in the way they talk about it. Shepard says "I died" then it's "I almost died" and Zaeed talks about his/her surviving the Normandy's destruction. The time away being nursed back to health in some secret facility while the leaders of the galaxy sit with their thumbs up their butt was sufficient to force the temporary Cerberus alignment. Maybe it was all an elaborate ploy to make a geth unit unique by sticking on some broken N7 armor. Killing a character off, then bringing them back should provide something unique to the story, but it doesn't. It's simply a Shepard and Normandy reset button.
While ME1 does establish that the reapers are there to "impose order on the chaos of organic evolution", that seems rather incomplete. Why should they care? What's the point of imposing order? Are they simply galactic neat freaks that get off on making sapient life operate like clockwork? In all honesty, I wouldn't have cared one iota if they never answered these questions, because the ultimate goal behind their will to impose order was never really all that intriguing to me anyway. I would have been happy enough to just kill them without ever really knowing everything behind the curtain, because it satisfies the portion of my brain that's part lizard, part caveman.
So you think all of the games are sh*t, because of the terrible writing?
Why are you here then? Just to troll?
He didn't say that, at all.
They all have flaws. Glaring ones when it comes to ME2: the two-year jump that intentionally resets the universe, Lazarus' tech and Shepard's resurrection, Cerberus cooperation, "Ah yes, Reapers" and their 180 on the Reapers, the Normandy invasion, an overflow of companions with personal issues to settle, Baby Reaper and "absorbing the essence of organics".
Grasping the trilogy's flaws comes with this franchise's territory. He's no more of a troll than those who trample the forums with rose-tinted glasses and hyperbole proclaiming ME3 to be an abomination when the previous two games have many of the same issues, some of them worse than those in ME3.
I suppose we really ought to engage with it, though. Dealing with bullshit is just something that happens on BSN. I'll get to myself when I'm back on a desktop -- no way I'm taking on that much nonsense on a mobile device.There's so much bullshit in here I don't even know where to begin.
That conclusion is just ridiculous. I'm still playing Mass Effect, entire trilogy runs.
You are only here to dump on ME3. Who's the damn troll?
Please elaborate.also, lets talk about this point you bring up:
-The force that drives the Reapers, which is to kill all organics so that they don't kill themselves (completely ridiculous and illogical, lol), was not mentioned until Mass Effect 3
AI research was banned just for the hell of it?
I'm only saying that Mass Effect 1 and 2 are great and that Mass Effect 3 is a terrible game, because the writing is horrendous (the entire internet agrees).
Good effin' grief.
All I am reading from you guys is that Mass Effect 1 and 2 had bad writing, that is why Mac Walters, as the new lead writer for ME3, was forced to create a terrible ending. It's all Drew Karpyshyn's fault, becuase he is a moron and f*cked up the writing in ME1 + ME2 - ridiculous. Please elaborate.
Yes, I get it. It is Drew Karpyshyn's fault that Mass Effect 1 and 2 had crappy writing, which in turn forced Mac Walters to write a ridiculous ending for ME3, which that fans of course hated. It is completely irrelevant that the fans had no problem with the writing until ME3.I suppose we really ought to engage with it, though. Dealing with bullshit is just something that happens on BSN.
Hey, did they change the swear filter?
Please elaborate.
AI Research was banned in fear of developing an AI that destroyed all life. This is not a retcon, this has been in the game since ME1.
Good effin' grief.
I'm waiting for this guy to start talking about his 4 nephews and his mates.
Guest_Fandango_*
He's no more of a troll than those who trample the forums with rose-tinted glasses and hyperbole proclaiming ME3 to be an abomination when the previous two games have many of the same issues, some of them worse than those in ME3.
The entire internet agrees, except for dreamgazer, AlanC9 and one or two others.Good effin' grief.
What drama?Could you dial down the drama a little?
Yes, I get it. It is Drew Karpyshyn's fault that Mass Effect 1 and 2 had crappy writing, which in turn forced Mac Walters to write a ridiculous ending for ME3, which that fans of course hated. It is completely irrelavant that the fans had no problem with the writing until ME3.
I get it, seriously. It's all Drew's fault, even though he had nothing to do with Mass Effect 3, which simply makes Mac Walters a victim of circumstances. Mac Walters is the best writer ever and will now prove it after he miserably failed in Mass Effect 3.
No one's saying Mac Walters is the best writer ever.
They all have flaws. Glaring ones when it comes to ME2: the two-year jump that intentionally resets the universe, Lazarus' tech and Shepard's resurrection, Cerberus cooperation, "Ah yes, Reapers" and their 180 on the Reapers, the Normandy invasion, an overflow of companions with personal issues to settle, Baby Reaper and "absorbing the essence of organics".
I guess it really comes down to the ending. People generally forgive flaws when they're satisfied with how a story concludes. If ME3 had an ending that gamers generally liked or loved, they'd be less inclined to pick apart the dumb stuff.
I guess it really comes down to the ending. People generally forgive flaws when they're satisfied with how a story concludes. If ME3 had an ending that gamers generally liked or loved, they'd be less inclined to pick apart the dumb stuff.
I've been saying that for two years.
Even worse are those who fake indifference in continually trying to excuse the blatant failings of a game that prompted the biggest shitstorm I've witnessed in my 30 odd years as a gamer. Those guys are the worst.
Fake indifference? You mean the people who still enjoy all three of the games, warts and all?
The entire internet agrees, except for dreamgazer, AlanC9 and one or two others.
The general consensus has always been that ME3 was a strong game with a weak ending. Get any deeper than that, and you're approaching the same territory ME2 went down with its many criticized failings: daddy issues, a pointless plot involving a side-villain, and a two-year jump that promptly set the trilogy up for inconsistency.
I guess it really comes down to the ending. People generally forgive flaws when they're satisfied with how a story concludes. If ME3 had an ending that gamers generally liked or loved, they'd be less inclined to pick apart the dumb stuff.
Probably, but it'd depend on the level of stupidity within the ending.
A straightforward tactical victory would've received some major eye-rolls, not to mention having its own gaping holes.
ME3 ending >>>>>>>>> Baby Reaper
Yeah, the baby reaper is pretty dumb, but the mission around it is quite fun, albeit a bit underwhelming because it's a little too easy. The oculus battle and the push through the base were pretty satisfying moments, particularly the long walk. The thing about the baby reaper though, is that the main reason why it's dumb is because of the way it looks. I get they were trying to focus on the idea that it's made of people, but making it look like the T-800 is reaching its final form was unnecessary. Had this thing simply been a Sovereign-like reaper, just incomplete, the dumbness is suddenly gone, assuming the human smoothie part doesn't make your brain itch.
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut