Here it is.
To much enthusiasm...
Débuté par
Larry-3
, déc. 04 2014 11:53
#26
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 01:17
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
-
- Guests
- mybudgee aime ceci
Retour en haut
#27
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 01:19
Mr.House
-
- Members
- 23 338 messages
Sorry I don't buy it. I think they were winging it from the start and didn't have any real idea where they planned to go with the series and its muddled storyline, which is why ME2 actually did very little to advance the main plot and ME3 is so shoddy and disparate compared to the previous two. Maybe they meant to fill in the gaps later but if they did they failed miserably.
If ME series was properly planned, then Cerberus introduction in ME2 would not feel half assed or create some plotholes from how they where in the first game, and many other retcons.
#28
Guest_simfamUP_*
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 01:19
Guest_simfamUP_*
Guest_simfamUP_*
-
- Guests
I'm srs guys.
Watch LOTGH
Forget this crap.
I'm like, really srs guys.
- Mr.House aime ceci
#29
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 01:19
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
-
- Guests
Nope. ME1 and ME2 were setting things up for ME3. However, ME3 team didn't really know how to make the game entirely Mass Effect-ish, Specially after the departure of the brilliant Drew Kaypshyr. These plot holes weren't left there without a purpose, They were just setting things up for the ultimate twist at the end ME3 that never happened.
I hope you're not talking about that "dark energy" thing, because that idea was almost as bad as the actual ending.
I don't see Drew K as anything more than merely decent/serviceable as a writer either; KOTOR and ME1 are actually two of my least favourite Bioware games (along with ME3), and his rather (to me anyway) dry and boring style has a lot to do with that.
- Zeroth Angel, Mr.House et Sebby aiment ceci
#30
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 01:22
Vroom Vroom
-
- Members
- 4 000 messages
That's a cop out. I could go on and tell a joke with so much set up and which has you just waiting on the edge of your seat for a punch line and then say "and everyone died" at the end without any closure to the joke. But you wouldn't say "man, Fast Jimmy had the funniest joke the other day." You'd say "man, Fast Jimmy wasted my time telling me the most idiotic joke."
I've told a joke like that before. It's called "The Pink Joke." It's insaenly funnier to be the person telling it than to be the one being told it. Which is a lot like ME3, except their prank was (hopefully) not intentional.
Darn it, Fast Jimmy, your post reminded me of this:
I'm going to wait for reviews before I consider getting the next Mass Effect game. I really wish that they would have just went with something new, but it still has a little smidgen of potential left in my books. Has anyone else noticed that Bioware has been slowly moving away from RPGs and into Action games? Mass Effect 3 and Dragon Age Inquisition (as much as I enjoy it) felt more like action games with a couple of RPG elements than RPGs to me.
#31
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 01:24
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
-
- Guests
Sorry I don't buy it. I think they were winging it from the start and didn't have any real idea where they planned to go with the series and its muddled storyline, which is part of why ME2 actually did very little to advance the main plot and ME3 is so shoddy and disparate compared to the previous two. Maybe they meant to fill in the gaps later but if they did they failed miserably.
False. He left Bioware for good sometime after he finished his third ME book, which you know, built up Cerberus role in ME3. People like to blame Mac but really, half the issues where Drew and lack of proper planning. He already admitted that Cerberus was a asspull for ME2 and they never planed that/ There was never any plans, only ideas and that is why the series as a whole is a giant mess.
Drew is just as bad as Mac.
Nope and Nope. Yes, Sometimes, You have to improvise to create new direction to the story, But that doesn't mean that they do it every time. The concept of the reapers is really brilliant, I had similar concept in mind even before i had played mass effect. One of the reasons why i like the ME universe so much. I'm glad you mentioned the ME books, The only book that Drew didn't write, Was mass effect: Deception, Which was a really, really, really, Crappy book and had a lot of inconsistencies. It actually was what messed up Cerberus' role in ME3, And Kai Leng.
As for ME2, As i said, Just a set-up. And it actually was pretty realistic, Sometimes in life, You don't get all the answers because you're not supposed to get them all. Sometimes, There's no way of getting your answers. Also, It helped define the MEU by its alien diversity, Not by the reapers.
#32
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 01:24
Fast Jimmy
-
- Members
- 17 939 messages
About the reapers, Many of you guys see them as massive space jerks who are just in the way of progress. I see them differently, You're actually their tool, You develop according to their plans because you use technology that you don't understand. Legion spoke of this issue quite eloquently. And quoted Sovereign several times while talking about the matter. It really made sense to me that we didn't understand the reapers' motives just yet, And i had hoped that ME3 would explain the entire mystery, As Drew was intending to do by his dark energy ending, If it had been properly developed. But after his departure, The storyline went in a different direction.
As for the devs, That's sadly true.
I think the Dark Energy storyline could have been interesting. Still, the paint started peeling off in ME3 well before the Catalyst.
Why attack Earth? It leaves the Reapers open to retaliation, when they could have just as easily taken the Citadel directly and cut off any hope for reinforcements, like every other cycle. The ME2 answer is "human Reaper!" but this was abandoned completely, making the story of ME2 even more of a joke.
Why is Cerberus the bad guys? After spending an entire game with them as your allies, the game abruptly derps them, most likely because they realized something Ashley in ME1 realized - what can a space marine with a gun do against Reapers? It was terrible planning and even worse execution.
The Crucible plans being found JUST in the nick of time, RIGHT at Mars to make humanity seen more Uber special... no, let's just leave that alone.
The sad thing is, Tuchanka and Rannoch are the best sequences in the game, possibly in the series. So there is goodness in the game... it just winds up having nothing to do with the story at hand. At all. It gives us a snapshot of what greatness the series could have been if the Reapers hadn't been introduced, or if there was just Sovereign, preying on the races growing up on the Citadel alone. Instead, everything had to simply be distractions from the 9 billion pound elephant in the room. Ultimately, nothing in the entire game world makes sense in light of the drivel paraded out in the last game. It retroactively killed the narrative worth of the entire galactic lore.
- Dermain et mybudgee aiment ceci
#33
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 01:25
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
-
- Guests
I hope you're not talking about that "dark energy" thing, because that idea was almost as bad as the actual ending.
I don't see Drew K as anything more than merely decent/serviceable as a writer either; KOTOR and ME1 are actually two of my least favourite Bioware games (along with ME3), and his rather (to me anyway) dry and boring style has a lot to do with that.
Well, Then i guess you're not invested in the mass effect lore, Which explains a lot really. ME1 was a masterpiece.
#34
Guest_greengoron89_*
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 01:26
Guest_greengoron89_*
Guest_greengoron89_*
-
- Guests
I hope you're not talking about that "dark energy" thing, because that idea was almost as bad as the actual ending.
I don't see Drew K as anything more than merely decent/serviceable as a writer either; KOTOR and ME1 are actually two of my least favourite Bioware games (along with ME3), and his rather (to me anyway) dry and boring style has a lot to do with that.
One thing people who've played KOTOR should notice is that much of the characters, lore, and basic plot elements and structure of ME1 are almost identical to those of KOTOR (and KOTOR itself borrows a lot of its character and story tropes from the movies). Originality and planning are not Drew's strong suits and ME3 would've only been slightly better off with him in charge. The ME series was a total dud from the start.
#35
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 01:26
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
-
- Guests
I think the Dark Energy storyline could have been interesting. Still, the paint started peeling off in ME3 well before the Catalyst.
Why attack Earth? It leaves the Reapers open to retaliation, when they could have just as easily taken the Citadel directly and cut off any hope for reinforcements, like every other cycle. The ME2 answer is "human Reaper!" but this was abandoned completely, making the story of ME2 even more of a joke.
Why is Cerberus the bad guys? After spending an entire game with them as your allies, the game abruptly derps them, most likely because they realized something Ashley in ME1 realized - what can a space marine with a gun do against Reapers? It was terrible planning and even worse execution.
The Crucible plans being found JUST in the nick of time, RIGHT at Mars to make humanity seen more Uber special... no, let's just leave that alone.
The sad thing is, Tuchanka and Rannoch are the best sequences in the game, possibly in the series. So there is goodness in the game... it just winds up having nothing to do with the story at hand. At all. It gives us a snapshot of what greatness the series could have been if the Reapers hadn't been introduced, or if there was just Sovereign, preying on the races growing up on the Citadel alone. Instead, everything had to simply be distractions from the 9 billion pound elephant in the room. Ultimately, nothing in the entire game world makes sense in light of the drivel paraded out in the last game. It retroactively killed the narrative worth of the entire galactic lore.
I agree that mass effect 3 had its problems, But the overall story was very good. And btw, I'm not a big fan of the Krogan, So yeah. 
But i personally believe that Priority: Rannoch could have had more diplomatic complexity, The mission was just too short and too easy.
#36
Guest_simfamUP_*
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 01:29
Guest_simfamUP_*
Guest_simfamUP_*
-
- Guests
*sigh*
You are all lost.
#37
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 01:37
Sebby
-
- Members
- 11 993 messages
If ME series was properly planned, then Cerberus introduction in ME2 would not feel half assed or create some plotholes from how they where in the first game, and many other retcons.
I'd go further than that and say that if ME was properly planned, ME1 Cerberus wouldn't have been some throwaway half-baked side quest enemy with minimal development(that's also implied to have been wiped out if you do toombs' mission last)that was hardly any different from exogeni or binary helix.
#38
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 02:02
Fast Jimmy
-
- Members
- 17 939 messages
The fact that the corporations become non-existent in ME2 is just further examples of good world building being bulldozed by lack of coherent direction.I'd go further than that and say that if ME was properly planned, ME1 Cerberus wouldn't have been some throwaway half-baked side quest enemy with minimal development(that's also implied to have been wiped out if you do toombs' mission last)that was hardly any different from exogeni or binary helix.
If I was an exec at EA and ME1 had come out and sold millions, I would be meeting with the lead writers and saying "where do you plan to go with these immortal, Galaxy killing machines you've introduced as the bad guys?" And, of course, not taking "well, we're kicking around some ideas" as an acceptable answer.
Because that's what it seems most writers don't understand. Pulling a magic rabbit out of the hat at the end that your audience didn't see coming isn't good writing. In fact, it is often crappy writing, since it usually involves huge leaps in logic or 11th hour introductions that invalidate entire swaths of past content with "why did X character/information/phenomoen/what-have-you not do Y or Z back earlier?"
You know what was a great ending? The Office. Because everything that happened wasn't crazy or contrived, but rather pretty in line with what the show had long implied was likely to happen - Jim and Pam moved on with their lives outside the office, building their family. Dwight achieved his dream of becoming office manager. Andy wound up going back to the college he has been talking since his first episode. Ryan and Kelly are still off again/on again. Michael came back, but in the most perfect and chill way possible.
The way it was great is in the little details, the way the characters were made perfect through their stories, showing that everything felt RIGHT in the end. Sure, it was happy but not in a ridiculously impossible way, but rather in the way you'd want to see people you had known ten years finally make their way in life.
It's predictable through and through. But that's not the point - it's a good story and one that people will remember as being a great way to send off a series. Contrast that with How I Met Your Mother or Lost or Dexter, which tried to have things play out in a way that the viewer wasn't supposed to guess. Which, instead, means it requires logic and information that isn't avaiable or which twists old facts into ways that defy pre-established lore, let alone logic.
Mass Effect could have ended with a MacGuffin which ended the Reaper threat, period. Then, the choices you made throughout the series could have resulted in a myriad of different outcomes and ripple effects, making a very different Galaxy depending on what your character did.
Instead, they tried to pull a surprise ending out and try and shoehorn some larger philosophical message that quickly unravels with even the smallest tugging at its frayed plot threads and having that one RBG choice trump 100+ hours of game story and decisions over the course of a trilogy.
That's why I say ME:N should not see the light of another day. Because it is, at this point, completely unsalvageable.
- Dermain aime ceci
#39
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 02:29
Larry-3
-
- Members
- 1 284 messages
I have loved Star Wars for as long as I can remember. I probably will always love Star Wars. I knew Episode VII was coming sense 2012. I eagerly await for episodes VII, VIII, and IX. After the first six episodes I am starting to think the Jedi will come out on top over the Sith, but I am not fully sure. We will see. Now Mass Effect, I have only liked it sense 2013. I know it is still RELATIVELY new: three games, three books, and anime movie. But i am following it. Before Mass Effect came out, a franchise called "Stargate" was number two on my universe list. But it got bumped down to number three when Mass Effect came out. I love Space Opera's and a lot of Science Fiction i started this thread because I am eager.
#40
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 02:42
TheClonesLegacy
-
- Members
- 19 014 messages
Lol Mass Effect.
It ended pretty conclusively (If completely disappointing and dumb). Making a fourth one is pointless and stupid.
Granted same could be said about Star Wars 7. But I'd actually be ok with it if it didn't have that stupid lightsaber. Which is something I've made quite apparent.
#41
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 02:49
CrazyRah
-
- Members
- 13 290 messages
*sigh*
You are all lost.
At least you tried, none can say otherwise!
#42
Guest_greengoron89_*
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 03:00
Guest_greengoron89_*
Guest_greengoron89_*
-
- Guests
As flawed as the first two were I still enjoyed them and was willing to let those flaws go on the hope that the final payoff in ME3 would make it all worth it. But ME3 not only failed to deliver on that front but was so damn bad that it totally wrecked the previous two games and made them unplayable to me.
Really, the lapses in common sense by the writers regarding not just the Reapers but the entire plot itself are just bewildering. I could go on all night just picking the storyline and characters apart, and questioning decisions the writers made to include or not include things I thought should've been painfully obvious to them. It's totally baffling to me that this game turned out as bad as it did even with the flaws in the previous games.
I have to wonder things like why we're warring with Cerberus even though in the last game you had the option of siding with them on just about everything including preserving the Collector base, and the Illusive Man really had no reason at all to cut Shepard loose (or vice versa) when he'd gone through all that trouble to revive him and had been such an effective ally. Wouldn't it have made the plot in ME3 so much more interesting and make more sense if Shepard rejoined the Alliance but could actually serve as TIM's inside man and continue working with him in secret? It would've been another layer of intrigue in an otherwise really thin and straightforward plot.
I guess it was a good reason to feature the super cool and bad ass Kai Leng in the game though, so he could have that cool fight with Thane in the Citadel and die that cool death with the cool one-liner by Shepard. An overdose of cool.
Anyway, why are the Alliance and our other allies wasting precious time and resources on building a giant object that no one even knows the function or purpose of instead of working on things like designing and building advanced weaponry, finding exploitable weaknesses in Reaper technology, and working to prevent or reverse the effects of indoctrination?
Why was Harbinger set up in ME2 as a primary antagonist and later revealed him as the first and head honcho of the Reapers, and then only have him appear in the game for like five minutes without any lines of dialogue? Don't you think it's important for a character like this to play a central role in the game's plot, or at least a significant one?
Why didn't the writers do (what I consider) the logical thing and make the finale a Suicide Mission-esque battle where we have to command this vast galactic fleet we spent the last 20-30 hours putting together to fight our way through the equally vast Reaper fleet to get to Harbinger, who is perhaps the one controlling all the other Reapers since he's supposed to be the head honcho? Why not have the final choice be to destroy Harbinger and thus defeat the Reapers, or do it TIM's way and take control of the Reapers yourself with technology Cerberus had been working on?
Why are we even going to Earth anyway? Why would all the other races just abandon their home systems to come and defend yours? Why is Harbinger there? Why didn't he and the other Reapers just take over the Citadel instead which is basically the central hub of the entire galaxy and spread out from there?
Why is the last living Prothean relegated to an optional DLC and plays no significant part in the story? Don't you think discovering the last living Prothean is kind of a big deal and could make a massive difference in the war thanks to his first-hand experience and knowledge with the Reapers?
Really, I could do this all night. These are but a handful of the questions this terrible game left me with, and I didn't even get into the Catalyst and Leviathan and all of that mess. This game was embarrassingly bad from beginning to finish and the ending was just the straw that broke the camel's back really.
The ME team might not know when to quit, but I and several others here do. Mass Effect is done. Let it go.
- Dermain aime ceci
#43
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 04:11
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
-
- Guests
That's Mass Effect. I wonder how you guys got invested in the series in the first place if you dislike the lore that much.
Curiosity is killing me though, What kind of videogames do you like? And What are your favorite videogames of all times?
P.S: Just a friendly question to try and understand how you all think, Nothing more, Nothing less.
#44
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 04:27
TheClonesLegacy
-
- Members
- 19 014 messages
That's Mass Effect. I wonder how you guys got invested in the series in the first place if you dislike the lore that much.
This reminds me of a Lewis Black joke.
- Dermain, mybudgee et Gravisanimi aiment ceci
#45
Guest_simfamUP_*
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 04:29
Guest_simfamUP_*
Guest_simfamUP_*
-
- Guests
At least you tried, none can say otherwise!
No.
I have failed Yang Wenli.
The greatest sci-fi character to have ever graced this planet.
I CAN'T SLEEEEP
#46
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 04:29
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
-
- Guests
The fact that the corporations become non-existent in ME2 is just further examples of good world building being bulldozed by lack of coherent direction.
Things change, Jimmy. It has been two years. If you cling to the same concepts over and over and over again, The universe would no longer feel real. Cerberus flourished, But the others did not. It is realistic. ME2 presents an insight of the moral views of almost everyone. Salarian, Korgan, Cerberus, ... Etc.
Because that's what it seems most writers don't understand. Pulling a magic rabbit out of the hat at the end that your audience didn't see coming isn't good writing. In fact, it is often crappy writing, since it usually involves huge leaps in logic or 11th hour introductions that invalidate entire swaths of past content with "why did X character/information/phenomoen/what-have-you not do Y or Z back earlier?"
Sometimes twists are necessary, Sometimes they are not. Depends on the storyline and plot really. The Mass Effect trilogy needed a plot twist. However, Priority: Earth didn't need a plot twist. It was forced and poorly executed. Though The starchild does make sense to some extent, About 60% of its views are subjectively accurate, But the rest of his world views are faulty and are only based on its own personal opinion. But i wouldn't go any further on the logic of the starchild because that conversation would be very long.
#47
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 09:14
Dermain
-
- Members
- 4 477 messages
I hope you're not talking about that "dark energy" thing, because that idea was almost as bad as the actual ending.
I don't see Drew K as anything more than merely decent/serviceable as a writer either; KOTOR and ME1 are actually two of my least favourite Bioware games (along with ME3), and his rather (to me anyway) dry and boring style has a lot to do with that.
I have a few Forgotten Realms books written by Drew, but I don't recall if they were decent. Seeing as I don't remember them at all, I think I'll settle on them not being decent. 
This reminds me of a Lewis Black joke.
How fitting.
That's Mass Effect. I wonder how you guys got invested in the series in the first place if you dislike the lore that much.
Curiosity is killing me though, What kind of videogames do you like? And What are your favorite videogames of all times?
P.S: Just a friendly question to try and understand how you all think, Nothing more, Nothing less.
A lack of cognitive dissonance would be my guess.
#48
Guest_TrillClinton_*
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 09:20
Guest_TrillClinton_*
Guest_TrillClinton_*
-
- Guests
>Mass Effect 2.
>plot.
Pick one
>plot.
Pick one
#49
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 09:36
bussinrounds
-
- Members
- 1 434 messages
Glad I never played any ME games. Sounds like a mess.
Gameplay never appealed to me and the story looked like a bad Babylon 5 rip off actually.
#50
Posté 05 décembre 2014 - 10:02
mybudgee
-
- Members
- 23 051 messages
Has anyone else noticed that Bioware has been slowly moving away from RPGs and into Action games? Mass Effect 3 and Dragon Age Inquisition (as much as I enjoy it) felt more like action games with a couple of RPG elements than RPGs to me.
Anyone who actually pays $$$ for another Mass Effect game is indoctrinated in a very real and tragic way. We are being duped guys. (See: AC: Unity, DA:I, Watch Dogs, Madden 45, CoD: Extra-Super-High-Tech-Warfare, etc...)
Wake up...
