126 réponses à ce sujet

[Darth Death]

The game (ME3) was just bad. Popular opinion says, "ME3 was good until the ending", which (imo) isn't true. The standard I came to expect from BioWare's previous games did not exist in ME3.   

[dreamgazer]

The game (ME3) was just bad. Popular opinion says, "ME3 was good until the ending", which (imo) isn't true. The standard I came to expect from BioWare's previous games did not exist in ME3.

Yet you were alright with ME2's many, many failings?

The ending is still off, but I actually prefer ME3 to ME2 at this point, especially after all the DLC.

[KaiserShep]

A quote from Ratatouille:
 
"In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little, yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face, is that in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so".

I really love that movie.

[sveners]

Yet you were alright with ME2's many, many failings?

The ending is still off, but I actually prefer ME3 to ME2 at this point, especially after all the DLC.

 

That might be because you're in here every day defending it? If you have an opinion and get "bashed" for it, chances are you'll stick to that opinion far more vehemently. Especially if said bashing is, in your eyes, wrong.

 

Edit; By wrong I just mean hyperbole or unfair etc

[dreamgazer]

That might be because you're in here every day defending it? If you have an opinion and get "bashed" for it, chances are you'll stick to that opinion far more vehemently. Especially if said bashing is, in your eyes, wrong.

Well, sure. I wouldn't defend something I thought was awful, would I?

It deserves a little defending anyway, especially when folks put the, at best, equally flawed ME2 up on a pedestal against it.

[sveners]

Well, sure. I wouldn't defend something I thought was awful, would I?

It deserves a little defending anyway, especially when folks put the, at best, equally flawed ME2 up on a pedestal against it.

 

Probably not you, but there are many who would jump to the defense of something they didn't enjoy. ME3 got plenty of backers who never played the games, but just hated the backlash it received. When it comes to you, I'm merely suggesting that ME3 has been elevated higher than it would otherwise be, because of other peoples very vocal bashing of the game. I'm probably just projecting though ^^

[BioWareM0d13]

Yet you were alright with ME2's many, many failings?

The ending is still off, but I actually prefer ME3 to ME2 at this point, especially after all the DLC.

 

I prefer ME3 to ME2 as well, despite liking ME2's finale more. 

 

Actually now that I think about it, my rankings of the endings would run opposite to my rankings for the games overall. I'd rank ME3 has the best game of the series and ME1 as my least favorite (though I still love the game), and I'd rank ME3's ending as the worst and ME1's as the best of the series.

[Ryuzetsu]

The reviewers are paid pundits who schill for the interests that sign their pay checks. At the end of the trilogy there was a big deal made about the preservation of the creators "artistic integrity", but as far as the so called critics are concerned their "journalistic integrity" was highly suspect. That is not to say that some of the things they had to say were wrong but, they were pretty much cornered during their visits surrounded by cheerleaders from the company and then asked what they thought. I could go on but MrBtounge did a video on this very subject and can articulate it much better then I, I suggest you head over to YouTube and check it out.

[Cainhurst Crow]

I would personally say yes, I've seen some major issues glossed over by video game reviewers in the past, and I've seen fans make mountains out of molehills over the dumbest stuff, especially recently regarding dragon age inquisiton and the breif NME stuff that's been released.

[von uber]

I quite like rockpapershotgun as a news/opinion site.
It's me3 review was good.

[Darth Death]

Yet you were alright with ME2's many, many failings?

The ending is still off, but I actually prefer ME3 to ME2 at this point, especially after all the DLC.

Who said I was alright with them? I've acknowledged ME2's failings, but in comparison to ME3's blunders there's no contest. ME3's cons weighed it down in many areas with the ending being the finishing blow. ME2 had it share of problems, but its pros outshone them, leading ME2 to have more redeeming qualities than ME3 ever did.     

[Farangbaa]

Critics receive games waaaaaaaaaaaaay late nowadays. Like 2 days before release, or even a day before. Most critics don't finish games before writing their reviews.

Though even if they had ME3 wouldn't have scored as low as some people would like.

[Pateu]

The game (ME3) was just bad. Popular opinion says, "ME3 was good until the ending", which (imo) isn't true. The standard I came to expect from BioWare's previous games did not exist in ME3.   

 

And yet critics rated it the highest in the series.

 

You're just hating on it because you disliked the ending.

 

hough even if they had ME3 wouldn't have scored as low as some people would like.

 

Considering most reviews mention something alluding to the ending, they did.

[DarthLaxian]

Was the game really that bad or are fans just complaining to complain?

 

My opinion is that you can't bash a great game that spans 30-40 hours for 10 minutes at the end.

 

Hey,

 

Firstly:

 

Yes it was, at least compared to ME1 and 2 (and other Bioware Games like Dragon Age (well except for DA2) and KOTOR) with it's retcons, linearity (1 and 2 weren't linear), sense of disconnectment (you build a weapon (crucible) but are unable to go to the building site, don't have to keep it save etc. and your screentime with the big movers and shakers (human admirals for one) was limited, too...come on vidcom alone does not cut it...)), the cutting (and bashing/trashing) of the ME2 crew (only a limited few join you...the others have oh soooo important stuff to do (or turn out to be total assholes, like Jakob!) etc.

 

Note: It's the story-telling I have a problem with (and them firing the original writers and dropping the original story-line!), the gameplay is better than in ME1 and 2

 

Secondly:

 

Yes, you can (and should) bash a game for it's ending, if it is crap (how would say Star Wars fans feel, if the Emperor Palpatine was suddenly killed by an Ewok wearing underpants on his head? (and yes, IMO that would be equally ridikulus than what we got in ME3))

 

greetings LAX

ps: Note: Critics try to be impartial, but I can't and wont and I wont compare ME3 to all the other games out there (as compared to a lot of those, it is still pretty good), but to other works by Bioware (and you have done a bad job IMO, if your own previous games are way better then your current game!)

[Farangbaa]

Hey,

 

Firstly:

 

Yes it was, at least compared to ME1 and 2 (and other Bioware Games like Dragon Age (well except for DA2) and KOTOR) with it's retcons, linearity (1 and 2 weren't linear), sense of disconnectment (you build a weapon (crucible) but are unable to go to the building site, don't have to keep it save etc. and your screentime with the big movers and shakers (human admirals for one) was limited, too...come on vidcom alone does not cut it...)), the cutting (and bashing/trashing) of the ME2 crew (only a limited few join you...the others have oh soooo important stuff to do (or turn out to be total assholes, like Jakob!) etc.

 

Note: It's the story-telling I have a problem with (and them firing the original writers and dropping the original story-line!), the gameplay is better than in ME1 and 2

 

Secondly:

 

Yes, you can (and should) bash a game for it's ending, if it is crap (how would say Star Wars fans feel, if the Emperor Palpatine was suddenly killed by an Ewok wearing underpants on his head? (and yes, IMO that would be equally ridikulus than what we got in ME3))

 

greetings LAX

ps: Note: Critics try to be impartial, but I can't and wont and I wont compare ME3 to all the other games out there (as compared to a lot of those, it is still pretty good), but to other works by Bioware (and you have done a bad job IMO, if your own previous games are way better then your current game!)

 

Are you joking me?

 

The entire intro of Mass Effect 2 is one, giant retcon. If you're a sole survivor (you know, that Shepard which has his entire unit killed by Cerberus) the disconnect is more extreme than anything you'll ever encounter in ME3. ME2 does nothing to move the plot forward.

 

And that's just the start.

[jstme]

Are you joking me?

 

The entire intro of Mass Effect 2 is one, giant retcon. If you're a sole survivor (you know, that Shepard which has his entire unit killed by Cerberus) the disconnect is more extreme than anything you'll ever encounter in ME3. ME2 does nothing to move the plot forward.

 

And that's just the start.

Don't know about retcons in ME2 (though to be true i played it before ME1) but suggesting that it did not advance the plot is wrong. In the end of ME2 you have 

1) access to reaper tech on unimaginable scale.   

2) shadow broker in your pocket

3) squad of experienced and talented individuals (and Geth).

 

ME3 used it all for silly numbers. It could have used it for plot continuation. You know,finding something important in collectors base instead of ,say,in Mars archives. Et ctr. Blaiming prequel for choices made by sequel writers is rediculous,frankly.  

[Sion1138]

Both.

[windsea]

both.

 

Some of the players are too whiny no doubt about it, disregarding the quality of the whole game because of the ending. Some of the critics are too nice but the reviews are opinions so yeah.

[KaiserShep]

The game (ME3) was just bad. Popular opinion says, "ME3 was good until the ending", which (imo) isn't true.

 

That the game is good until the end can't be both popular opinion and untrue. #pedantry

[q5tyhj]

 

Was the game really that bad or are fans just complaining to complain?

 

The latter, beyond a sliver of a shadow of a doubt. The ending wasn't very good. But we're talking about the last 10 minutes of a game that probably takes something like 20 hours for a typical playthrough (and can take 30-40 hours if you do absolutely everything), and is the third game in a trilogy. And its not like the ending was without any redeeming qualities in the first place. But even with the ending, ME3 is clearly one of the best video games in its genre, ever. The fan rating (5.1) for a game like that is just ludicrous, so clearly there's something else going on there- namely, people being whiny crybabies.

[KaiserShep]

I dunno. The original ending was pretty awful though. As for 10 minutes, I guess its importance changes with its position in the story. The first 10 minutes being crappy can be forgiven more easily when the rest of it is great, or 10 minutes of crap somewhere in between, but the end is where all of that stuff is leading, and if the ending is bad, I can see why people see the entire thing collapsing. But anyway, the original ending is dead, though its effect obviously lingers on for many, especially since there's certain bits that had to remain with the extended cut.

[justafan]

Another thing to consider, professional critics from popular organizations often have very little time to actually review the game.  Sure they may get an advanced copy, but ME3 took me upwards of 25+ hours to finish.  Thats over an entire day devoted to Mass Effect 3 to even finish it, and thats for only one play through for one Shepard.  Critics must review dozens of games as well as fulfill other duties of their magazine/paper/website, so they probably have to rush through the game rather quickly, and some probably never even saw the ending, or at least assumed that other playthroughs would get better results then their speed run to meet the deadline.  As a result, technical aspects are probably given a disproportionate amount of the score, and lets be honest, ME3 looks great and the combat is the most polished of the series.  While these technical aspects inflate the score, the lack of time to dissect the story keeps the reviewer from weighing the ending very heavily.

 

The fans on the other hand have no deadline, and have plenty of time to notice the flaws and shortcomings of the game.  They also have the time to really delve into the characters and universe.  While a reviewer is probably playing a default Shepard, we have two previous games of choices coming in with us, and what might seem a mediocre ending for a reviewer, is a betrayal of the illusion of choice dedicated players have perceived over the years.

 

Anyways, that's my two cents on the reviewer/fan dissonance.

[BioWareM0d13]

Eh, all the reviewers will have finished the game, publishers send review copies out a couple of weeks before a games release specifically so that reviewers have time to play through it and finish it.

 

 

That isn't always the case. Sometimes reviewers only get a couple days with a game before its scheduled release date. Also whether the review gets it days or weeks ahead of time, it also probably isn't the only game he or she has to review. That person may also have other responsibilities to their website or magazine that cut into hands on time with the game. There any number of reasons why a reviewer might not finish a product with 25 to 30 hours of gameplay. I wouldn't be surprised if at least some of the critics reviewing Mass Effect 3 never completed the game.

 

Also not all gamers have the same interests and that is also true for the people who get paid to review them. Some of the people reviewing Mass Effect 3 might not necessarily be into RPGs outside of having to review them, and as such wouldn't be invested in the series to the same extent as fans. 

[q5tyhj]

I dunno. The original ending was pretty awful though. As for 10 minutes, I guess its importance changes with its position in the story. The first 10 minutes being crappy can be forgiven more easily when the rest of it is great, or 10 minutes of crap somewhere in between, but the end is where all of that stuff is leading, and if the ending is bad, I can see why people see the entire thing collapsing. But anyway, the original ending is dead, though its effect obviously lingers on for many, especially since there's certain bits that had to remain with the extended cut.

Even giving the ending more weight than any other 10 minute segment of the game, we're still talking about a fraction of the overall content. And the ending wasn't all bad, without any redeeming qualities. The battle scenes were epic. The soundtrack is awesome, and the sequence where "An End, Once and For All" is playing is more poignant than any game has a right to be. There's just a bunch of plotholes, and a lack of variety and player control over the endings, which is contrary to the theme of the series (and statements by Bioware about the conclusion of the trilogy). And honestly, I feel like there are just as many people who dislike the ending simply because Shepard (and others) dies as there are that dislike it because of the problems with the story- which is just stupid (IMO, at least).

 

And in any case, regarding a game which, everything else considered, was about as good as any video game can be, and which has become something of a gold standard for precisely that reason, as bad or a failure overall simply because there were problems with the ending can hardly be anything other than an overreaction. 

[Raizo]

Yet you were alright with ME2's many, many failings?
The ending is still off, but I actually prefer ME3 to ME2 at this point, especially after all the DLC.

I acknowledge ME2's many failings, always have. The thing is despite all the things wrong with it I still love ME2, I have a lot of fun playing it. I can't say the same about ME3, it does not matter how many of ME2's shortcomings ME3 manages to fix, at the end of the day, if I am not enjoying myself when I am playing ME3 then it is not a good game.

I remember very little about the professional critic reviews of ME3, I do remember most of them being full of praise for ME3 and very few addressed the ending controversy let alone mentioned my other core issues with the game. I fail to understand how any gamer could call them selves a ME fan, import a character from ME to ME2 to ME3, get to the end and not have wtf reaction ( especially back in the early days when the extended cut had not been released ), I'm not saying the game should have been marked lower for the end but very few reviewers acknowledged this issue. So yes, I think critics can sometimes be a bit to nice to certain franchises ( they can also be very harsh to other series )

By contrast I also think gamers or fanboys can be very harsh in their criticisms, I remember all the negative fan reviews on Amazon and Metacritic after ME3 came out. Despite not liking ME3 I would never mark or review it unfairly.