1191 réponses à ce sujet

[Steelcan]

Wait, how was Rannoch uninspired?

Did you ever watch Pinocchio as a kid?

[Lulupab]

What is this nonsense?

 

I don't have to point to another game to say that ME3 did things wrong.  I can point to the horrific villain that is Kai Leng, the utterly ridiculous and inconsistent characters like Legion and Udina, the non-sensical placement of the Cerberus coup attempt, the lack of interesting side missions, the dearth of content for many side characters, the repetitive gameplay, the uninspired writing of the Thessia and Rannoch missions, and so on

 

Kai Leng is not a villain, he is anti-hero.

 

Legion was fine because he is not "a character", he is 1500 software speaking at once.

 

Rannoch was pretty good, all your decisions dating back to ME1 affect that mission and it was a long time coming mission. I don't see anything wrong with it.

 

I think you don't like Thessia because of Kai Leng, otherwise I don't see anything wrong with it either. Its the only mission Javik shows some resemblance of character, otherwise he is actually one of the game's flaws.

 

The point here is making a game with mass effect genre in a science-fiction world is very hard. Some things are not going to make sense. It easy to judge it from your personal view perhaps but from the bigger picture its a very good game considering the circumstances. That is why its important to compare the game to its rivals. ME3 did it better than them, gamespot called it "perfection of genre". They didn't mean Me3 is perfect, it meant they have done the best possible in this genre.

[LPPrince]

Kai Leng is not a villain, he is anti-hero.

 

 

Waaaaaaaaaat

[Steelcan]

Kai Leng is not a villain, he is anti-hero.

 

Legion was fine because he is not "a character", he is 1500 software speaking at once.

 

Rannoch was pretty good, all your decisions dating back to ME1 affect that mission and it was a long time coming mission. I don't see anything wrong with it.

 

I think you don't like Thessia because of Kai Leng, otherwise I don't see anything wrong with it either. Its the only mission Javik shows some resemblance of character, otherwise he is actually one of the game's flaws.

 

The point here is making a game with mass effect genre in a science-fiction world is very hard. Some things are not going to make sense. It easy to judge it from your personal view perhaps but from the bigger picture its a very good game considering the circumstances. That is why its important to compare the game to its rivals. ME3 did it better than them, gamespot called it "perfection of genre". They didn't mean Me3 is perfect, it meant they have done the best possible in this genre.

Kai Leng is an antagonist, a poorly introduced, written, and handled one.

 

Legion has always been a character, don't give me technicalities like that.

 

Rannoch was dependent on inconsistent behavior from the Geth, non-sensical actions from several Quarian characters, filled with blatant fanservice towards the Tali fans.  It did incorporate past decisions well though, I will admit that.

 

Thessia's problems go well beyond just Kai Leng (though he makes up the majority of it), I'll point to Liara whining, the forced reaction Shepard has to the events, it does however have the best conversation with TIM in it though.

 

"Its not bad cause there's nothing else like it out there" is an incredibly weak argument.  There's not a glut of motorcycle shooters out there but Ride to Hell: Retribution isn't a good game because it lacks competition.  ME3 had good moments, no doubt, but it also fell flat in some areas, and no amount of "but there's nothing else out there like it" excuses the failings in the narrative.

[sharkboy421]

 

Legion was fine because he is not "a character", he is 1500 software speaking at once.

 

Rannoch was pretty good, all your decisions dating back to ME1 affect that mission and it was a long time coming mission. I don't see anything wrong with it.

 

 

Legion is still a single character, even if he is made up of 1500 pieces of software. Taken on its own, Rannoch is pretty awesome because your options do depend on what you've done not only in ME3 but in the previous games as well. That is great continuity from Bioware. What does feel strange however is that the geth are acting much differently in ME3. In ME2 Legion makes it clear the geth just want to do their own thing. They don't want to follow the Reapers way and they certainly don't want to follow organic species. For Legion to suddenly decide the geth "want to be real boys" now, it felt very strange.

 

I still really enjoyed Rannoch and brokering peace, but I'm not a huge fan of making the geth more organic-like.

[Xilizhra]

Did you ever watch Pinocchio as a kid?

No. But I don't see what relevance it has here, since the Reapers' software upgrade is objectively superior, Legion admitted that interdependence was the weakness of the geth back in ME2, and said interdependence would have gotten the entire race killed had the Reapers not stepped in.

[Legion of 1337]

So this was a troll.

Aw man, I had a whole political side tangent planned and everything.

[Steelcan]

No. But I don't see what relevance it has here, since the Reapers' software upgrade is objectively superior, Legion admitted that interdependence was the weakness of the geth back in ME2, and said interdependence would have gotten the entire race killed had the Reapers not stepped in.

The entire arc of the Geth in ME3 is inconsistent with how they are portrayed in ME2.  They don't want to be real boys to continue the Pinocchio comparison, they want to exist together as a single gestalt intelligence.  However their arc in ME3 is about them all gaining unique identity, which was a step back from a much mroe unique take on synthetic intelligence in ME2.

[The Elder King]

So lets see then, what is wrong with ME3 other than the ending? Which game of the same genre did things better? You can't answer the 1st question without answering the 2nd one as well.
 
Lets go.

Other games aren't relevant in judging ME3's flaws or qualities.

[Draining Dragon]

So this was a troll.

Aw man, I had a whole political side tangent planned and everything.

Don't worry, this is BSN. An opportunity will come along soon enough.

[Anacronian Stryx]

Other games aren't relevant in judging ME3's flaws or qualities.

Nonsense - games do not exist in a vacuum.

[The Elder King]

Nonsense - games do not exist in a vacuum.

They don't, and they can be compared. It doesn't mean that if other games of the same genre suck ME3's (or any game) faults should be overlooked.

[Iakus]

Did you ever watch Pinocchio as a kid?

Now I'm imagining the Reaper destroyer chasing Shepard and bellowing THERE ARE NO STRINGS ON MEEEEEEEE!!!!

[Steelcan]

Now I'm imagining the Reaper destroyer chasing Shepard and bellowing THERE ARE NO STRINGS ON MEEEEEEEE!!!!

 

this will only make it easier to imagine

[Iakus]

No. But I don't see what relevance it has here, since the Reapers' software upgrade is objectively superior, Legion admitted that interdependence was the weakness of the geth back in ME2, and said interdependence would have gotten the entire race killed had the Reapers not stepped in.

It was also their strength.  By combining into a gestalt mind, their intelligence grows more and ore.  Allowed to live in their structure, their mind could have gone off the charts in brilliance, wanting for nothing but to calculate pi, if that was their thing.

 

The geth mind was different.  And different =/= bad.  Unfortunately, by introducing this whole Pinocchio mentality into ME3, that's exactly what it was portrayed as

[Xilizhra]

The entire arc of the Geth in ME3 is inconsistent with how they are portrayed in ME2.  They don't want to be real boys to continue the Pinocchio comparison, they want to exist together as a single gestalt intelligence.  However their arc in ME3 is about them all gaining unique identity, which was a step back from a much mroe unique take on synthetic intelligence in ME2.

It's what they wanted before... until their Dyson sphere was attacked by the Migrant Fleet and their collective intelligence was noticeably dimmed because of so many program backups being destroyed. Thus driving the point home that said collective intelligence was ultimately a major weakness.

 

 

It was also their strength.  By combining into a gestalt mind, their intelligence grows more and ore.  Allowed to live in their structure, their mind could have gone off the charts in brilliance, wanting for nothing but to calculate pi, if that was their thing.

 

The geth mind was different.  And different =/= bad.  Unfortunately, by introducing this whole Pinocchio mentality into ME3, that's exactly what it was portrayed as

And now their minds can still link together without being rendered automatically stupid by the loss of the gestalt. It is in all ways an upgrade.

[Applepie_Svk]

Waaaaaaaaaat

 

You have also anti-christ...  

[In Exile]

I have played the first game, and part of the second.

My problem is, regardless of how well-constructed the world or the game is, in the end it's a Crapsack World. There is no making it better, there's just choosing the kind of cr*p you let slide. I don't want to play in that kind of setting, where a casual hookup is a quest reward, where ideals are worthless and "least bad" and "greater good" have pretty much the same meaning.

I want a world where I can create my own hero (or anti-hero) and be more than a predefined monster hunter/mercenary. I want to play my own character, not the adaptation of someone else's frankly pretty unlikable protagonist.

That's not a very fair description of the world. It's not exactly crapsack: it's just incredibly cynical. There are lots of "heroic" moments in TW3, and Geralt does do a lot of good - but much of the story is about the baser nature of people, and so you'll often see darkness. But it makes those more heroic moments poignant: because they're earned.

Geralt stands up for the abused, tries to stop persecutions, helps fight oppression. It's just that despite being an ubermensch in the combat sense, being awesome at killing won't fix the world.

Anyway I get the second point (though I disagree Geralt is unlikable).

[LPPrince]

You have also anti-christ...  

 

 

Apparently pissing in vases, stealing cereal, and stabbing girls to death with sharpened toothbrushes makes you an anti-hero.

 

Yeah, I don't get it either.

[Steelcan]

It's what they wanted before... until their Dyson sphere was attacked by the Migrant Fleet and their collective intelligence was noticeably dimmed because of so many program backups being destroyed. Thus driving the point home that said collective intelligence was ultimately a major weakness.

 

However that's not a point that is ever brought up by Legion or the Geth VI.  And after the upgrade is disseminated we get the god awful "I" bit with Legion and the other Geth and the talk with EDI about "him" being a fully realized individual.  There is no mention of more interconnectedness, its all about how each geth unit is its own person now.

[KaiserShep]

I honestly have no qualms with the geth's desire to augment themselves so that each program can become independent. There's a serious advantage that comes with this. For one, there's no reason why the geth still wouldn't have something akin to its old consensus, but at the same time, they're no longer vulnerable if their numbers were to ever diminish, which was something that nearly got them wiped out when the quarians deployed Xen's cyberweapon. It would be understandable that they'd want to plug that security hole when the opportunity strikes. The unfortunate part is that ME3 totally glosses over this part and uses the hokey "alive" bit and of course Legion consolidating into an individual consciousness rather than each individual program becoming a greater part of the collective.

[In Exile]

They are not significant characters in Inquisition, otherwise there is extensive information about all the important characters. The codex helps a lot as well.

In beginning of Witcher 3 game you have no idea who Ciri is therefore 70% of the game is you chasing someone you don't know, with more characters greeting you warmly and again you have no idea who they are. I had to ragequit and go back and play previous witcher games.

I don't have much sympathy for people who play the third game in a series and complain about relationships established in the previous game. That's not on CDPR.

As for Ciri, you know exactly who she is - Geralt's foster daughter. You have an extended and brilliant scene with Ciri and Yen to start the game, being literally Geralt's dream about his family.

[Iakus]

 

And now their minds can still link together without being rendered automatically stupid by the loss of the gestalt. It is in all ways an upgrade.

That's not the impression I got.  It looks like now their programs are all individuals, just like everyone else.

[In Exile]

The entire arc of the Geth in ME3 is inconsistent with how they are portrayed in ME2. They don't want to be real boys to continue the Pinocchio comparison, they want to exist together as a single gestalt intelligence. However their arc in ME3 is about them all gaining unique identity, which was a step back from a much mroe unique take on synthetic intelligence in ME2.

The ME arc was weird and nonsensical when it comes to the science bug that's largely because Bioware is comically ignorant when it comes to AI. ;ut it wasn't thematically inconsistent. The Geth were always about "Pinocchio" as you somewhat dismissively put it, because it was always about their right to exist as thinking and sapient beings. They want to exist and be recognized as people (self-aware beings with rights and so on).

[Iakus]

That's not a very fair description of the world. It's not exactly crapsack: it's just incredibly cynical. There are lots of "heroic" moments in TW3, and Geralt does do a lot of good - but much of the story is about the baser nature of people, and so you'll often see darkness. But it makes those more heroic moments poignant: because they're earned.

Geralt stands up for the abused, tries to stop persecutions, helps fight oppression. It's just that despite being an ubermensch in the combat sense, being awesome at killing won't fix the world.

Anyway I get the second point (though I disagree Geralt is unlikable).

From what I played, no matter what Geralt did, someone was getting screwed.  The setting was drowning in cynicism.  Even the most "noble" of characters had their monstrous sides.  Either literally or figuratively.