126 réponses à ce sujet

[Farangbaa]

Oh, great.

 

We're back to 'being railroaded' and 'but.. Shepard died!'.

 

You're being railroaded from the start, Shepard dies in ME2 as well.

[sveners]

Really?

 

I can't think of a single word that would be more appropriate for this than "overreaction". Made you regret playing the entire trilogy? That's crazy. That's like saying, for instance, the last track on Dark Side of the Moon made you regret ever listening to Pink Floyd. The ending, however bad it was (and it wasn't as bad as many make it out to be, but that's another can of worms), didn't somehow remove or erase the parts of the game that made you fall in love with the trilogy. I understand that you acknowledged that an emotional reaction like this isn't necessarily rational or reasonable, but holy smokes... If this is actually true, I can't think of much else to say other than "I'm sorry". 

 

No. 

 

Because every song on Dark Side of the Moon stands on it's own. And seriously? Comparing an interactive, year-spanning, trilogy with a mediocre band's album? It would be more apt to compare it with "A Song of Ice and Fire", but that's a book series, and never lets you believe you have any control or influence. I don't hate Dragon Age because Mass Effect let me down. 

 

And no, the ending did not erase, nor remove, the parts I loved about the games. It just overshadows them to such a degree that whenever I think about Mass Effect, the only thing that comes to mind is The Catalyst and a suicide. That is what's stuck in my mind. That's why I can't even get past Joker and Kaidan bickering in ME1 before I shut it off.

 

If I had let this lead me to threatening the developers, suing them, giving the game a 0/10 review, or a number of other extreme reactions, then yes that would be an overreaction. Giving the game a lower score than critics, because you honestly felt let down in the final 10 minutes is not.

[Farangbaa]

No. 

 

Because every song on Dark Side of the Moon stands on it's own. And seriously? Comparing an interactive, year-spanning, trilogy with a mediocre band's album? It would be more apt to compare it with "A Song of Ice and Fire", but that's a book series, and never lets you believe you have any control or influence. I don't hate Dragon Age because Mass Effect let me down. 

 

And no, the ending did not erase, nor remove, the parts I loved about the games. It just overshadows them to such a degree that whenever I think about Mass Effect, the only thing that comes to mind is The Catalyst and a suicide. That is what's stuck in my mind. That's why I can't even get past Joker and Kaidan bickering in ME1 before I shut it off.

 

If I had let this lead me to threatening the developers, suing them, giving the game a 0/10 review, or a number of other extreme reactions, then yes that would be an overreaction. Giving the game a lower score than critics, because you honestly felt let down in the final 10 minutes is not.

 

If everything you think about of over a 100 hour spanning game is the last 10 minutes, I'd call it overreacting.

 

Especially since you can't even get past the first 10 minutes of ME1 anymore. 

 

Seriously, what else would you call this? A normal response to disappointment? I f'ing hope not.

[sveners]

If everything you think about of over a 100 hour spanning game is the last 10 minutes, I'd call it overreacting.

 

Especially since you can't even get past the first 10 minutes of ME1 anymore. 

 

Seriously, what else would you call this? A normal response to disappointment? I f'ing hope not.

 

Fair point. That's not really what this topic was about though. That fans give lower scores than critics. Read my last paragraph.

 

I could also have been more nuanced. It is not everything I think about. It simply smothers the rest. Because what is the point? At the end of the journey all Shepards will face the Catalyst and kill themselves. Shepard was the vessel for my journey, knowing how horribly I think that journey ends, makes any attempt at a new one.. well not very interesting.

 

And please, don't drag real life into this. We all die, so is all life hopeless? No, because in my real life I actually control my actions, and I have no idea when or where my life will end. Not saying you would, but if not you then surely someone else.

[ruggly]

Aren't opinions fantastic?

[Steelcan]

Many critics IMO overlooked other key flaws in the game, such as auto-dialogue, lack of impact for choices, railroading, etc...

[Daniel_N7]

It's been a long time since I've posted on these forums. Greetings all.

 

I think we should identify right away that there is a different approach to a game, whether you are making a professional review or enjoying it as a gamer.

 

As gamers, we play a game for the ride. That's not to say we don't notice the technical and artistic aspects that go into the making of the game. Of course graphics matter to us all, and framerate, and the conceptual design , and the flow of the gameplay. But when it comes to building an opinion, the overall feel of the experience takes precedence.

 

On the other hand, I assume, if you are making a professional review of a game, you have to establish your opinion based on an objective set of observations: the design, the gameplay, the graphics, the sound, the music, the narrative, the interface, the menu system, and how it all stands together and provides a cohesive whole.

 

Mass Effect 3 is an interesting example of how these two points of view can render very different conclusions. I've been a gamer for several decades and I've never seen a community reaction like the one we witnessed on BSN and social networks after the launch of ME3. I'm not saying it never happened before, I'm just stating that I had never witnessed and felt invested in participating in such collective reaction over a video game. I wrote a few comments myself. Like so many others, I was shocked and confused. Keep in mind that the original release featured an ending that was much more subjective and confusing than the one we got with the extended cut. It took me a whole year to play Mass Effect all over again, and rebuild my opinion of ME3.

 

I'm not saying that Mass Effect 3 doesn't have flaws. The trilogy itself has structural problems, problems that manifest themselves more extensively in the final game. Still, it was that emotional reaction to the ending that nurtured the overdose of scrutiny that most of us directed towards ME3. Where those criticisms fair? I really, honestly, can't answer that, because it depends on personal opinion. But I do know that it was triggered by the emotional reaction we got from playing that ending with our guards down, independently of how good and bad it may be.

 

Now, imagine that you are actually writing a professional review of Mass Effect 3. It's a competently designed game, it has the best gameplay in the series, a good balance of action and rpg elements, amazing soundtrack. The narrative is debatable. Some great moments, a good mix of emotion and humor. And some failed or at least questionable moments as well, mostly due to the difficulty in incorporating the complex storyline branches that derived from ME2. Other questionable choices include the association of single and multiplayer (now fixed), the infamous "fetch-quests", and even the introduction of the Crucible as a plot-device - but lets not even get that debate started (it never ended around here anyway).

 

But here's the thing. Mass Effect 3, with all its flaws, is a solid game. Now, even if you still hate the ending, if you were writing a professional review, how much would that balance in the overall judgement of the game.

 

Do you punish the overall balance of qualities because of an ending that ammounts to probably less than 5% of the experience? And how much do you punish it?

 

There is a big difference in answering that depending on whether you are judging it as a critic or a player. For a player, that ending can be determinant to how you feel about the game, or even the entire trilogy. But if you are making an objective analysis of the game as a whole, should you be driven by that single emotion? Should that determine your final verdict?

 

I believe that's a complicated question to answer. And, acknowledging the complexity that lies in video game journalism, as with all forms of journalism, we must still have our minds open to the fact that some people actually appreciated and valued the subjective experience provided by that original ending, just as others were ultimately satisfied with the one provided by extended cut.

 

So that's my two cents. I don't really have a conclusion for you. Just providing some additional food for thought.

Cheers.

[MegaIllusiveMan]

Maybe some of the fans look in each corner to see if they find an error, a simple error that can subtract on the Critic Score. (For example, see CinemaSins on Youtube to see what I'm talking about)

 

The point is, some of the fans, IMO, are well... Too critical

[MegaIllusiveMan]

It's been a long time since I've posted on these forums. Greetings all.

 

I think we should identify right away that there is a different approach to a game, whether you are making a professional review or enjoying it as a gamer.

 

As gamers, we play a game for the ride. That's not to say we don't notice the technical and artistic aspects that go into the making of the game. Of course graphics matter to us all, and framerate, and the conceptual design , and the flow of the gameplay. But when it comes to building an opinion, the overall feel of the experience takes precedence.

 

On the other hand, I assume, if you are making a professional review of a game, you have to establish your opinion based on an objective set of observations: the design, the gameplay, the graphics, the sound, the music, the narrative, the interface, the menu system, and how it all stands together and provides a cohesive whole.

 

Mass Effect 3 is an interesting example of how these two points of view can render very different conclusions. I've been a gamer for several decades and I've never seen a community reaction like the one we witnessed on BSN and social networks after the launch of ME3. I'm not saying it never happened before, I'm just stating that I had never witnessed and felt invested in participating in such collective reaction over a video game. I wrote a few comments myself. Like so many others, I was shocked and confused. Keep in mind that the original release featured an ending that was much more subjective and confusing than the one we got with the extended cut. It took me a whole year to play Mass Effect all over again, and rebuild my opinion of ME3.

 

I'm not saying that Mass Effect 3 doesn't have flaws. The trilogy itself has structural problems, problems that manifest themselves more extensively in the final game. Still, it was that emotional reaction to the ending that nurtured the overdose of scrutiny that most of us directed towards ME3. Where those criticisms fair? I really, honestly, can't answer that, because it depends on personal opinion. But I do know that it was triggered by the emotional reaction we got from playing that ending with our guards down, independently of how good and bad it may be.

 

Now, imagine that you are actually writing a professional review of Mass Effect 3. It's a competently designed game, it has the best gameplay in the series, a good balance of action and rpg elements, amazing soundtrack. The narrative is debatable. Some great moments, a good mix of emotion and humor. And some failed or at least questionable moments as well, mostly due to the difficulty in incorporating the complex storyline branches that derived from ME2. Other questionable choices include the association of single and multiplayer (now fixed), the infamous "fetch-quests", and even the introduction of the Crucible as a plot-device - but lets not even get that debate started (it never ended around here anyway).

 

But here's the thing. Mass Effect 3, with all its flaws, is a solid game. Now, even if you still hate the ending, if you were writing a professional review, how much would that balance in the overall judgement of the game.

 

Do you punish the overall balance of qualities because of an ending that ammounts to probably less than 5% of the experience? And how much do you punish it?

 

There is a big difference in answering that depending on whether you are judging it as a critic or a player. For a player, that ending can be determinant to how you feel about the game, or even the entire trilogy. But if you are making an objective analysis of the game as a whole, should you be driven by that single emotion? Should that determine your final verdict?

 

I believe that's a complicated question to answer. And, acknowledging the complexity that lies in video game journalism, as with all forms of journalism, we must still have our minds open to the fact that some people actually appreciated and valued the subjective experience provided by that original ending, just as others were ultimately satisfied with the one provided by extended cut.

 

So that's my two cents. I don't really have a conclusion for you. Just providing some additional food for thought.

Cheers.

 

And I quote your post so that I can add more information:

 

See, the problem is that Mass Effect 3 reviews were centered FOR MASS EFFECT 3. Not on the whole trilogy, not the problems that Reapers can't be destroyed and not only on the ending. Hell, most of these fans actually liked the game but were drawn off it because of the ending.

If you ask many people about what they didn't like in Mass Effect 3, they'll say: The Ending. But, imagine... IF, just IF, the ending was superior in any ways necessary(Which, excuse me here... It would be impossible to please everyone) the Fans Critic wouldn't be better? (NOTE: BETTER! Not 4561551/10), because of course there would be still MINOR problems or (little) MAJOR Problems that x person liked and y didn't.

[xAmilli0n]

So what's your opinion on this mess?

 

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

 

Yes.

[Remix-General Aetius]

it's a bit of both.

[dreamgazer]

Many critics IMO overlooked other key flaws in the game, such as auto-dialogue, lack of impact for choices, railroading, etc...

 

Eh, if it didn't bother them in ME2, it wasn't going to bother them in ME3, either. 

[Bob from Accounting]

If critics weren't 'too nice' the highest a story would ever get would be around an 8 out of 10 and most would be hovering around a 2 or a 3.

[rekn2]

i think it depends on your story comprehension. some people dont understand and all they think of is the tighter shooter mechanics.

 

if you are truely understanding the over all story that youre viewing then me3's story is bad.

[Sanunes]

I really can't say that one is wrong then the other, but what bothered me with the issues around Mass Effect 3 was the amount of "you are wrong" if someone had a differing opinion. I was attacked several times for I simply said "I was indifferent to the ending, but I enjoyed the rest of the game".

 

To the topic at hand from a professional review Film Hulk prepared an essay on the ending of Mass Effect 3 and found it interesting for he normally reviews movies and puts a different insight into the review (at least for me).  Now I find his format for his column to be very hard to read for its all in caps, but if you can get beyond that it might be an interesting read to why he thinks the ending of the game works.

 

Film Hulk on Mass Effect 3's ending

[dan155]

I think it's a bit of both.  I was a little bit underwhelmed with ME3 but not because of the ending, overall I thought the game was good, just not quite as good as ME2. Biggest issue I had was the amount of auto dialogue.  I can understand people being criticizing the story and the way your choices don't have a massive impact on the ending, but at the same time I think a significant number of people were whining because Shepard dies and they wanted a super happy ending.  

[Farangbaa]

i think it depends on your story comprehension. some people dont understand and all they think of is the tighter shooter mechanics.

 

if you are truely understanding the over all story that youre viewing then me3's story is bad.

 

Ah, one of these again:

 

"you're too stupid to understand the story, only I hold the truth!!"

[Farangbaa]

Film Hulk on Mass Effect 3's ending

 

I like this human, he understands.

[DuskWanderer]

To answer the original question, fans are undeniably harder to begin with, especially on sequels.

 

That is all

[Massa FX]

Most reviewers didn't play the entire game to completion before submitting their review. And if they did, they didn't want to be the first to say "WTF?"  So instead they gave glowing reviews based on the better parts of the game and sugar coated the ending or didn't address it at all.

 

Gamers played the entire game before submitting their review. And they were brutally honest.

 

Clearly this is the issue.

[Bob from Accounting]

Most reviewers didn't play the entire game to completion before submitting their review. And if they did, they didn't want to be the first to say "WTF?"  So instead they gave glowing reviews based on the better parts of the game and sugar coated the ending or didn't address it at all.

 

This is a heaping load of drivel.
 

[Humakt83]

Player expectations were definitely too high. Sure Bioware is partly to blame due to hype but you should never fell into that and definitely not start building dreamcastles which would be possible to build only with more resources, time, better target platforms and with great organizational wisdom.

Bioware did a superb job with time they were given and vanilla ME 3 is content-wise (mp excluded) more or less equal to ME 2, and easily surpasses that of ME 1. I started playing ME 3 with expectations that decisions in earlier games would be handled similarly to how they were handled in previous games. I also expected Quarian-Geth conflict to play part in the story and previous squadmates to make appearances. Needless to say I was pleasantly surprised.

[Gtdef]

Reviews became directed/subjective some time ago. Used to be that there was a system that graded graphics, combat, story, and taking an average. After a while for some reason, the average was higher than it should be because "story is more important", or "gameplay is more important". 

 

Now they ditched it all together, started avoiding the issues or belittling them like "the ending is not for everyone", or "some sequences may feel a bit clunky" and slap a 9 or 10. But if it's a game on lower budget or a completely new ip, they bash it to oblivion, like alpha protocol. "Combat sucks", "technical issues", "big loading times". GTA IV for pc got a 9.5 on ign even if you were unable to play it for a month or so till they released a patch to fix the shaky camera. Battlefield 3 was the jesus of shooters, none really addressed the compatibility problems with most mainstream VGAs or the disconnect problems with punkbuster, lag etc. Total War games are the flagships of fine reviewing. "Improved AI". Meaning horseshit became 1% less horseshit. Everyone knows that you need to wait for 15 patches and 1-2 expanions before buying Total War games. But reviews never ever address this. They go like "an improvement from the previous games" without even giving info on how the game is changed instead of saying the truth. "HEY PEOPLE, THIS IS A GREAT GAME BUT YOU WON'T REALLY BE ABLE TO PLAY THIS GAME FOR A FEW MONTHS CAUSE IT HAS TECHNICAL ISSUES AND BUGS". It's like rating chicks in the club. She's a 9, bed her, she's a 6 ignore her.

 

Everyone and his cat can feel the issues of Mass Effect ending. You don't have to be an academic to figure out that something feels out of place or forced. You don't choose to "not understand what is happening" and "why am I even here". Good thing you've read the review and you know that the ending is "not for everyone". You are totally prepared.

 

My rule is that if a review is higher than an 8 I don't even bother to read it. Instead just google the game a few times, like "game problems", "game technical issues", "game ati hd 7970" and if the results aren't that damning then I bother.

[General TSAR]

In my opinion there's two additional reasons for this situation: A sense of entitlement and not wanting to hurt anyone's feelings. 

[Pateu]

Many critics IMO overlooked other key flaws in the game, such as auto-dialogue, lack of impact for choices, railroading, etc...

 

Choosing not to stop Samara = she dies.

 

Choosing not to enter the Consensus and save the Admiral = Either the Geth or the Quarians die.

 

Choosing not to give Miranda her funds = Miranda dies.

 

Choosing anything but HIGH EMS DESTROY = Shepard dies.

 

Choosing not to talk to Ashley/Kaidan = You have to shoot them.

 

Choosing not to scold Arya for her crap = The population of Omega dies in droves.

 

And so on.

 

How did this game not have choices?