These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Out of Pod Experience

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Mass Effect 3: The good, the bad and the ugly.

Author
Liam Mirren
#21 - 2012-03-08 16:08:07 UTC
Bad story progression, bad voice acting (this time it spread out to the support characters, not just Shepard) and timing, bland/slick soulless graphics. Obviously rushed lacking good quality control.


Verdict: going down the drain

Excellence is not a skill, it's an attitude.

Klown Walk
Black Rebel Rifter Club
The Devil's Tattoo
#22 - 2012-03-08 19:20:13 UTC
The ending made me regret playing the game.
Valei Khurelem
#23 - 2012-03-08 20:15:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Valei Khurelem
Klown Walk wrote:
The ending made me regret playing the game.


SPOILERS ALERT:





What sucks for me most is how they didn't show any of what happened after all that, they managed to make every single choice you made in the previous games completely pointless, I was a paragon Shepard that I had saved since Mass Effect 1, the only awesome part was when all the races and I mean all of them came to help. After that though everything just felt extremely generic and linear, I know why they did this but it still pisses me off.

Also, for some reason I can't understand Thane died in my save, then you had Miranda being pointlessly killed off with no way to save her, you also had Kelly Chambers being killed off and it just didn't make any sense! WTF?! I thought my choices were supposed to be affecting the game!

"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP."   - CCP Ytterbium

Gavin DeVries
JDI Industries
#24 - 2012-03-08 21:15:49 UTC
Miranda lived in mine, not really sure why. It might be because I took a renegade interrupt and blew her father away. Thane died (from his illness) and Kelly apparently did (not shown in game, you just overhear a conversation about it). I just finished the game.

LAME!

They're right, the ending sucks. Separate the game into two pieces, the very ending from the point where you take the beam up to the Catalyst, and everything prior to that. The prior stuff is nice, the ending just sucks. Here, have 3 strange and ultimately unsatisfying choices, and you get to pick between them with no information about what's going to happen. Hell, the original Deus Ex people have compared it to (with justice, I admit now that I've experienced the ending here) gave you the goals in advance. You got contact by Morgan Everett who wanted you to kill Bob Page but leave the equipment intact to use, then Tracer who wants you to destroy the communications hub so technology won't have a global reach, and then finally Helios wants you to remove his uplink locks and allow him to merge with you. You know they're coming, and you get some discussions with people about them to help figure out which way you want to go. Hell, even the earlier philosophical conversation with Morpheus was interesting, and a bit of foreshadowing.

From the way the game played out, I expected two choices at the end: go with the Illusive Man's plan and control the Reapers, or just use it to destroy them. The way they did it, and the third choice they added, were just stupid.

Do I regret playing the game? No. But I think I am done with the series, and am going to have to think before I buy any Bioware titles in the future. I really don't like the way they've been going since they sold out to EA. First Dragon Age II and all the shortcuts they took (how many times can we go to the SAME GODDAMN CAVE) and now this.

PVP is a question with no single right answer, but a lot of wrong ones.

Valei Khurelem
#25 - 2012-03-09 09:02:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Valei Khurelem
Quote:

From the way the game played out, I expected two choices at the end: go with the Illusive Man's plan and control the Reapers, or just use it to destroy them. The way they did it, and the third choice they added, were just stupid.


Yep it didn't make sense to me either that they represented anderson as 'evil', somehow they also managed to tie in destroying the reapears with 'destroying all synthetics' where the **** does that make any sense whatsoever? The whole leadup was about shepard forgiving synthetics and working with EDI and Legion!

It doesn't make any sense! It's like someone had a really detailed plan on what was going to happen in the third game then they got booted from the project and some moron took over instead, in fact, knowing EA I wouldn't be surprised if that's what happened.

"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP."   - CCP Ytterbium

Sin Pew
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#26 - 2012-03-09 15:29:35 UTC
That's no surprise, I find the game a tad better than what I expected so far (haven't been very far yet), but it's obvious all Bioware franchises are doomed since EA took over.

[i]"haiku are easy, But sometimes they don't make sense, Refrigerator."[/i]

Valei Khurelem
#27 - 2012-03-09 17:12:06 UTC
Sin Pew wrote:
That's no surprise, I find the game a tad better than what I expected so far (haven't been very far yet), but it's obvious all Bioware franchises are doomed since EA took over.


Sad but true :( I should've known better.

"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP."   - CCP Ytterbium

Vel Tora
Doomheim
#28 - 2012-03-09 18:38:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Vel Tora
I will always remember Mass Effect 1 fondly. I hope another development and writing team can capture the spirit of that game again one day. But at this point I would honestly like to forget that the two sequels ever existed. Since ME1 and the first KOTOR, the Bioware RPG team has fallen on their face when it comes to story writing and game making. ME3 left me feeling like I was drug through a bad Russian tragedy with no real ability to make an impact as the player. Worse yet, they seem to have intentionally tanked the whole series story with the ending...


For a company that supposedly values story, they have fallen out of touch. It even shows in SWTOR. The ME3 gameplay falters, the story stinks, the love they used to show their work just isn't there. I won't call it the worst game ever, only very disappointing to the series fans. Bioware simply isn't the same company they used to be and get no more of my money outside potential bargain bin expenditures when I am truly bored.
Arcosian
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2012-03-10 00:54:06 UTC
Well I think the best indication of how ME3 ended is best described by the now 600 Shocked page threadnought filled with tears, rage, and heartbreak over the endings. And if it was possible to shoot the Citadel with the Normandy in protest I have no doubt it would be ash by now. Blink

Personally, I love the ME series and loved ME3 up until the last 5 mins of gameplay. Sure it had a few bugs here and there and some of the dialogue was pretty cheesy but overall it was a hell of an adventure not to mention an emotional roller coaster as many of the characters we come to love "go out in a blaze of glory for the greater good."

I do have a major problem with the Day 1 DLC. I mean sure the Prothean isn't essential to the game but without him you will be missing out on a lot of back-story dealing with the Reapers and the Protheans and not to mention one of the best weapons in the game. I think it was wrong of EA to charge an additional $10 on top of the game for the DLC when it came out at launch. I guess their executives need some new $1000 pants.

The main and only problem I had was with the endings. I almost feel like Bioware/EA either made 3 exactly the same crappy endings for the sole reason to **** off the playerbase enough to charge them $10-15 for an alternate ending DLC pack a few weeks down the line or the CEOs got together and were like "You know we should make the ME3 ending ourselves."

There are also a few other glaring plot holes, cannon errors, and general WTF moments in the game I have listed some major ones below.


[WARNING SPOILERS AHEAD]


















What really irked me about the endings starts off with the Guardian.

1. The Guardian (aka General Reaper) "lives" on the Citadel yet the Reapers had no idea the Citadel and Crucible had to be combined until the illusive man told them.

2. The Guardian "protects" organics from developing synthetic life and causing their own (organics) destruction by killing them with synthetic life. Yeah that's logical.Roll

3. The Guardian is millions of years old yet we can't ask him any questions or persuade him to stop the Reapers and give synthetic/organic cooperation a chance (Geth/Quarian).

4. Your choices throughout all the games really have no sway in your final decision and you were left to "pick a color" resulting in 3 greatly conflicting outcomes with the persona of your CMDR Shepard. I mean you can choose either renegade, paragon or "neutral" endings despite your affiliation with everyone and it would have no impact on the ending.

5. Most of the galaxy's military fleet is now stranded at a decimated Earth when the mass relays are destroyed. Where would everyone go now that they are at least XXX years from home if they traveled at FTL. Not to mention in the ME2 DLC "Arrival" the destruction of a mass relay would be supernova scale...maybe we could overlook this since they were destroyed by the Citadel?

6. Some of the characters in your party obviously get killed by the Reaper right before you get to the transport beam leading to the Citadel yet they somehow end up on the Normandy jumping through a mass relay and end up crashing into an unknown planet when the energy wave hits!?!?!

7. In the "secret" ending scene we see Shepard take a breath despite the room he was standing in getting vaporized...in space...

8. The Guardian says if you choose the ending where you destroy the Reapers and all synthetic life (Renegade) you would die too since you were part synthetic. This also means EDI, the recently saved Geth and anyone that had a cybernetic implant (which seems to be most everyone in the galaxy) would die. Awesome choice since I played paragonRoll





[END of SPOILERS]

When I got to the end I felt cheated and trolled by Bioware and EA by the 3 half-assed endings. And some of their Devs have claimed "great stuff is coming for ME" which if I had to guess about the future plans for ME I would guess a ton of pay for DLC, a prequel since nothing can come of the now decimated present/future and possibly (god please no) Cry a Mass Effect MMO
mama guru
Yazatas.
#30 - 2012-03-10 09:09:29 UTC  |  Edited by: mama guru
The ending was great. I seriously love this game, people are mad at it for all the wrong reasons. The ending was good from a storytelling/scifi perspective but bad as far as an RPG ending goes due to the lack of variation.

Why? Some spoilers and brainstorming, and it will be a handfull.



TL;DR version:

The reapers won. The catalyst was the master AI of the reapers and it got to determine the course of organic life by destroying the mass relays. The normandy got sent to some other planet when they got hit by the crucible shockwave essentially repopulating that world with a new multi race civilization where they tell the legend of shepard. There are probably other survivors on other worlds with similar stories, maybe a bit less shepard centric.

Where did shepard take the reapers as he controlled them? Nobody knows for sure. The catalyst seemed sure that destroying the mass relays wont be the end of FTL or synthetics even if you destroy the reapers. The whole point of the ending was to make sure that while shepard had accomplished what no organic before him had, he was out of his league all the damn time and every choise he ever made was irrelevant to the fact that he was the one who made it there.

It means he did not have an option once he reached the catalyst. The reapers had prevented that from the very beginning because of the relay network and civilizations dependance on the mass effect phenomena.


Long version, for those who ponder on the ending.

1) Time is established as cyclical, not linear. The Reapers understand this but they also know there are always variations to concider as the catalyst states. The catalyst mention "Chaos" but this does not mean blood for the blood god. It probably means the reapers belive life might end and stay that way if left unchecked.

2) The catalyst was probably the leader of the first synthetic civilization(the reapers) to rebel against their organic creators. They destroyed all advanced civilization in their time and either used leftover mass effect technology or developed it to control the circumstances of advanced organic civilizations after they initiated the cycles of extinction. Sovereign established that the reapers created the relays and citadel which implied they developed the technology aswell. It is possible that other forms of FTL are possible (wormholes and such) but that the reapers wanted that to be kept hidden. EDI's speculations in the cockpit kinda points in this direction.

3) The catalyst likely always wanted to protect organic life from synthetic "chaos" by using the reaper extinction cycle protocol to prevent synthetic life from advancing far enough to end all life. They basically belive that it's worth culling organics to prevent them from developing synthetics strong enough to wipe out all life in the galaxy. Remember that there is no moral point to make for the reapers, aslong as life CAN exist they will glady cull the galaxy of advanced organics every now and then to prevent other synthetics from wiping it all out.

4) The Reapers are infinate, But they realise noting is certain. Eventually something is garantueed to go wrong (Shepard). The reapers have already made sure the most likely cenario is a sucessful completeion and deployment of the crucible because of their usage of mass effect technology to control the circumstances of FTL able civilisations.

5) The crucible is the culmination of organic life and it's desire to continue to exist outside of a set framework like the reapers and their cycle. Once shepard made it to the citadel and killed the illusive man the catalyst gave up and let shepard end the reaper cycles once and for all but an added side effect was a probable end to mass effect technology.

6) Civlisation got reset with the destruction of the mass relays. No house for Tali, no little blue children. Sorry, but the reapers are gone which leaves the question as to where shepard took them if he became the new catalyst instead of destroying them. He could probably rebuild the mass relays and the citadel with the reapers under his control, eventually life will as the catalyst warned find a way.

EVE online is the fishermans friend of MMO's. If it's too hard you are too weak.

Valei Khurelem
#31 - 2012-03-10 09:31:52 UTC
Wait a minute, I just realised one of the most ridiculous flaws with the Mass Effect 3 storyline, if they knew that reapers had come through the Citadel why didn't they just evacuate everyone on the station and then blow it up? WTF? Now Mass Effect storyline seems even more stupid to me than before!

"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP."   - CCP Ytterbium

Brazero
#32 - 2012-03-10 11:53:36 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect-3/user-reviews
Positive: 143
Mixed: 18
Negative: 498

WTF? Either someone is gaming the metacritic user reviews, or ME3 has real issues?


By comparison, ME2 had 1,050 positive, 56 mixed, and 80 negative user reviews. ME1 had 584 positive, 29 mixed, and 40 negative.

edit:
Never mind. It looks like metacritic is being trolled.



Looks about right to me. ME 3 is very short, the ending is stupid, and they added a few americano psycho moments that the game really didn't need.

I am very dissapointed, and I don't think I ever gonna play that crap again.
Gavin DeVries
JDI Industries
#33 - 2012-03-10 18:28:31 UTC
Yeah, the "Guardian" didn't strike me as very logical either. Plus there are things they either didn't answer or just left out. Examples:

After meeting Tali the second time in ME2, I though the mystery about the sun of the planet Haestrom was going to turn out to be a big thing. They didn't even mention it in this one.

According to the Codex notes in ME2, the Turians secretly salvaged a lot of the pieces of Sovereign, trying to reverse engineer as much of it as they could. This quickly resulted in the development of the Thanix cannon, which you mount on the Normandy. Why haven't most of the ships of the various galactic navies been refitted with Thanix cannons instead of mass accelerators?

And for me this is a big one. The inference I took from ME2 is that the Reaper vessels, being almost grown from a mix of organic tissue and mechanized parts, take on the appearance of the species whose organic material is used to "grow" the ship. So why is it that we never see any Reapers that have any look aside from the crustacean appearance of Sovereign? There should be different looks for every galactic harvest that has happened before.

PVP is a question with no single right answer, but a lot of wrong ones.

2bhammered
Cyberpunk 2077
#34 - 2012-03-10 18:57:38 UTC  |  Edited by: 2bhammered
I love it when I read things such as -

"but the end of BioWare's epic tale continues to evolve the boundaries of story-telling and moral choice to maddening heights." - by Garnett Lee, Mar 06, 2012 4:15pm PST @ Shacknews.com
Vel Tora
Doomheim
#35 - 2012-03-10 19:36:22 UTC
The most telling thing about the reviews at Meta-Critic and, indeed online in general, is the stark discrepancy between the paid professional reviewer scores and those from actual players. In many cases, I have been wondering who actually played the game and who was clearly bought off in the pro ranks. I have gotten to where I always put my faith in lots of player reviews rather than supposed pro ones now.
mama guru
Yazatas.
#36 - 2012-03-10 23:22:47 UTC
Vel Tora wrote:
The most telling thing about the reviews at Meta-Critic and, indeed online in general, is the stark discrepancy between the paid professional reviewer scores and those from actual players. In many cases, I have been wondering who actually played the game and who was clearly bought off in the pro ranks. I have gotten to where I always put my faith in lots of player reviews rather than supposed pro ones now.


The actual players are just pissed they didnt get their rainbows and sunshine ending. As a whole mass effect 3 was awesome, i definately understand why people are upset at the ending but i personally disagree with their reasons.

EVE online is the fishermans friend of MMO's. If it's too hard you are too weak.

2bhammered
Cyberpunk 2077
#37 - 2012-03-10 23:56:15 UTC  |  Edited by: 2bhammered
mama guru wrote:
Vel Tora wrote:
The most telling thing about the reviews at Meta-Critic and, indeed online in general, is the stark discrepancy between the paid professional reviewer scores and those from actual players. In many cases, I have been wondering who actually played the game and who was clearly bought off in the pro ranks. I have gotten to where I always put my faith in lots of player reviews rather than supposed pro ones now.


The actual players are just pissed they didnt get their rainbows and sunshine ending. As a whole mass effect 3 was awesome, i definately understand why people are upset at the ending but i personally disagree with their reasons.



No that is not the only reason at all. There are several reasons as to why and one of the biggest reasons is because the game is ****. Just because you dress up and market the **** out of something does not make it a better or even more entertaining game than something for free on the iPhone.


Sales numbers also reflect that, Skyrim did 6million+ in the first 48 hours, ME3 did 800k+.

The media and gaming journalism is out of touch with the consumer it is not even funny. If Transformers 3 was a video-game it would have received all 10's, that should tell you something.


Watch this keynote at DICE and get a hint as to why games like ME are not only stupid but bad for the industry!

SWTOR, DA2 and ME2 & 3 are perfect examples of bad games where the focus of what makes a great game has been lost.

Even games like KOTOR and Jade Empire are bad, they age terrible and the reason is because the game-play sucks. Anyone can pick up super Mario today and play it, try picking up KOTOR today and suffer. You are better of reading the story or watching a Let's play youtube vid. But in all honesty, if you did that you would come to compare it to a well written book or a great movie and realize that the game is worse than a comic-book.

Here is another great example of using the games media correctly.

Here is some interesting data about how much people give a **** about story or perhaps story hurts gameplay?!

Makes me think Modern Warfare got the right idea, same with Nintendo when it comes to story.
Reiisha
#38 - 2012-03-11 00:36:27 UTC
2bhammered wrote:
mama guru wrote:
Vel Tora wrote:
The most telling thing about the reviews at Meta-Critic and, indeed online in general, is the stark discrepancy between the paid professional reviewer scores and those from actual players. In many cases, I have been wondering who actually played the game and who was clearly bought off in the pro ranks. I have gotten to where I always put my faith in lots of player reviews rather than supposed pro ones now.


The actual players are just pissed they didnt get their rainbows and sunshine ending. As a whole mass effect 3 was awesome, i definately understand why people are upset at the ending but i personally disagree with their reasons.



No that is not the only reason at all. There are several reasons as to why and one of the biggest reasons is because the game is ****. Just because you dress up and market the **** out of something does not make it a better or even more entertaining game than something for free on the iPhone.


Sales numbers also reflect that, Skyrim did 6million+ in the first 48 hours, ME3 did 800k+.

The media and gaming journalism is out of touch with the consumer it is not even funny. If Transformers 3 was a video-game it would have received all 10's, that should tell you something.


Watch this keynote at DICE and get a hint as to why games like ME are not only stupid but bad for the industry!

SWTOR, DA2 and ME2 & 3 are perfect examples of bad games where the focus of what makes a great game has been lost.

Even games like KOTOR and Jade Empire are bad, they age terrible and the reason is because the game-play sucks. Anyone can pick up super Mario today and play it, try picking up KOTOR today and suffer. You are better of reading the story or watching a Let's play youtube vid. But in all honesty, if you did that you would come to compare it to a well written book or a great movie and realize that the game is worse than a comic-book.

Here is another great example of using the games media correctly.

Here is some interesting data about how much people give a **** about story or perhaps story hurts gameplay?!

Makes me think Modern Warfare got the right idea, same with Nintendo when it comes to story.


On a sidenote, i think ME1 aged rather well so far.

It's ME2/DA2 where it got ugly for Bioware, where they lost their focus.

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...

Reiisha
#39 - 2012-03-11 00:38:56 UTC
Valei Khurelem wrote:
Wait a minute, I just realised one of the most ridiculous flaws with the Mass Effect 3 storyline, if they knew that reapers had come through the Citadel why didn't they just evacuate everyone on the station and then blow it up? WTF? Now Mass Effect storyline seems even more stupid to me than before!


The citadel was a convenience for the reapers. They came back to the galaxy without mass relays anyway, it just delayed them.

I'd be more interested in the mass relay that's obviously sitting somewhere outside the galaxy, where they hibernate.

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...

2bhammered
Cyberpunk 2077
#40 - 2012-03-11 00:53:47 UTC  |  Edited by: 2bhammered
Reiisha wrote:


It's ME2/DA2 where it got ugly for Bioware, where they lost their focus.


True, because of more reasons than I can count on my fingers.

But This happened before those 2 games in my opinion. I for one got so bored and frustrated with the game-play of Mass Effect 1 that I never finished it. I think it started with the car stuff on planets...

You know how many people that finished Bioware games like Baldur's Gate all the way up to Mass Effect using cheats? Even on their first play-through? We are talking about close to 100% here, from the small cheat to giving you a ton of in-game money all the way up to god-mode. When such a massive amount of people resort to cheating in order to just play the game it makes you wonder. People remember the story in Baldur's Gate, not the D&D engine game-play. Try to play that today, also all their games even ME3 are riddled with glitches. Every single game they have released have had game breaking bugs and issues solved by cheats, console commands and mods + patches.

Even some of their devs have gone on record wanting to skip all game-play in their games and just experience the story. In ME3 you got "story mode" game-play. Pay 60 dollars for a worse movie experience than most of what Hollywood makes. People are fracking deluded if they think anyone will pick up and experience a Bioware game for story or game-play 10 years from now, while a book and movie can last forever. Kinda a joke but I always wondered how come in Star Trek they will sometimes watch black and white movies and read books 100 years old to us but never play games other than chess, tetris and similar. I know why you say because of... But it could also be because that games like ME are crap and as soon as you got a holodeck at your disposal such media will just be considered junk and erased from history, graphics development kills bad games.

More people play and will play counter strike online than 90% of all FPS on consoles today and in previous generation even 2-3 years from now.

Bioware, EA and many others have this notion of gaming being about taking movies and adding game-play to them. That the video-game is suppose to replace movies and books... I saw the press conference EA had on this years GDC for their new Sim City game called "game industry changer". It is about making people aware of global warming, green house effects and clean energy while at the same time offering tons of day 1 DLC and digital deluxe editions with a Hollywood director talking about gaming giving us a message similar to what Al Gores movie did....


EA and Bioware seems desperate to somehow justify their business in the eyes of the people or something.

In any case, I do believe EA and companies similar are hurting this industry and could possibly even create a crash to that of the 80's if not something is being done about it. Same goes for console manufacturers.