What went wrong with ME3...

[QUOTE="Lulu_Lulu"][QUOTE="clyde46"] What do you mean "don't get"? Its a cop out. No big fight, no big climax, just three choices that didn't take into account anything you did in the previous games.....AznbkdX

That's what the ending came down to technically yes, but even with arbitrary numbers to base endings off of, it's still not going to change the fact that the endings may not have been that great for what they should have been. I think though that most wanted to tie up loose ends but with the way the solution was set up there was a good chance that all the endings were going to end with a general connotation to the whole entire finale.

You didn't get it.texasgoldrush

Look. Dude. You have no proof whatsoever that this is just a case of mass misunderstanding. Your criteria is based on your own esoteric conclusions, which have not been backed up by any of the writers or developers. As such, you have no basis by which to say that everyone else is wrong and you are correct.

No, ME3 is the best...why? texasgoldrush

Because Texasgoldrush said so!

...no wait. That's bullshit.

Your opinion, while just as valid as everyone else's, hangs on the belief that Mass Effect 3 was a coherent product with clear and calculated connections to the previous games' respective intent. That is out and out false. Mass Effect 2 was not leading up to that piece of shit ME3.

The severe writer disconnect between the three game destroys any credibility your diatribe might have.

I'm sorry but boiling Shepards decision down to a numerical value is Completely Stupid,Lulu_Lulu

infact everything about Shepard's skills has an arbitrary number attached to it, all that hard work trying to create a good story with good characters and decisions all went down the drain,

and you know whats sad. . . . . . "hardcore" Role Playing Gamers like it that way, they want 50 different options to craft their ideal character/story no matter how impractical/arbitrary they are. They, of all people, should've expected the ending to turn out the way it.

I honestly loved Mass Effect 3, along with the first two as well.

[QUOTE="AznbkdX"]

[QUOTE="Lulu_Lulu"] Ofcourse they did. Didn't you see your Paragon/Renegade meter change through out each game ? Because thats what your "important" decisions were for, grinding for points. Lulu_Lulu

That's what the ending came down to technically yes, but even with arbitrary numbers to base endings off of, it's still not going to change the fact that the endings may not have been that great for what they should have been. I think though that most wanted to tie up loose ends but with the way the solution was set up there was a good chance that all the endings were going to end with a general connotation to the whole entire finale.

[QUOTE="Lulu_Lulu"]
Maybe in the light of how ME3 handled it, it may seem so, but the idea of making certain results dependant on player's achieving certain values (e.g. effective military strength in ME3) is not bad in and of itself.   

Think of it this way, if you were supposed to beat some guy and his crew of 10 other guys (let's say, all of them having similar skill and strength as you), you would need some help from your friends. And depending on how many and how skilled friends you will bring to the fight, your group would have a chance to win. Sure, the way the actual fight will play out would depend on who you will bring, but the result will come down to comparison between the strength (fighting capability) of your group and the other guy's group. Maybe you would just need three really strong friends, maybe twenty weak. But your group will need to be able to produce certain "fighting output" which will be too much for the other group to handle. Otherwise, you will lose. 

And Mass Effect 3's system reflects this really well.

What it does not reflect well is how the actuall fight (scenes) plays out depending on what friends you brought as it shows same (or very similar) cutscenes for all types of choices. That part is the problem - not showing us our allies, not showing us which characters are or are not present on the battlefield depending on our previous choices.

But the idea of making the victory (or certain types of victories) dependant on certain strength of Shepard's (galaxy's) forces is completely allright (at least IMO). Because to an extent, everyone both in videogames and in real life is replacable by somebody with equal or similar skill / strength.  

infact everything about Shepard's skills has an arbitrary number attached to it, all that hard work trying to create a good story with good characters and decisions all went down the drain,SciFiRPGfan

The values in Mass Effects may be arbitrary from outsider's perspective (what does certain value mean in terms of gameplay, why increasing skill to certain level increases its output by certain percentage,...), but they are definitely not without some kind of inner system and logic. As such they represent Bioware's idea of Shepard gaining experience and improving his / her skills as a combatant and as a leader / negotiator.

Besides, out of all types of complaints about ME3 on all sorts of boards (from /v/ to hold the line), the numbers (values, RPG mechanics) are the least common. Not that it makes your complaint any less valid, but maybe you are seeing causations where there aren't any (e.g. between the quality of ME3's ending and its inner mechanics).  

and you know whats sad. . . . . . "hardcore" Role Playing Gamers like it that way, they want 50 different options to craft their ideal character/story no matter how impractical/arbitrary they are. They, of all people, should've expected the ending to turn out the way it.

"To turn out the way it" what? The way it did? :? :)

Definitely not.The people who want 50 different options to craft their ideal character/story are the people who are the biggest supporters of freedom of choice. They are among the last ones who would want to see all of their choices to be streamlined into few fairly similar outcomes (e.g. vanilla ME3 ending).

Sure, having a lot of options means having a lot of variables to take into account, but on the other hand, the people who are interested in that kind of stuff usually aren't that demanding when it comes to visuals, animations, voice acting,... In fact, it's the people who were compaining about Mass Effect's graphics and stiff animations who should have expected less choices if they wanted better visuals. The way Bioware does cutscenes and conversations is of pretty high quality by RPG standards and must be fairly expensive, so of course the better they are going to look the less variety will Bioware be able to handle.   

Now for the Dialog Wheel: attaching this mechanic to a progression system interfered with the developers vision of give players meaningfull choices.If you wanted to have those special dialog options you had to commit to being either Paragon or Renegade for the entire game, any attempt to make a meaningfull choice using a combination of both Paragon and Renegade paths (like a Real Human being) dilutes the system, now leaving you with a Shepard who has zero access to special decisions later in the game. Not to mention this links everysingle decision you make in the wheel connected, in a way that doesn't make sense. Which leads to grinding and completely unrelated scenarios affecting one another. Now any Paragon/Renegade points you earn in unrelated sidemissions play a role in the much more important scenarios later in the game, simply because they use the same system. Heavy Rain and The Walking Dead never had this problem, unlike Mass Effect and its arbitrary numbers.Lulu_Lulu

[QUOTE="Lulu_Lulu"]Now for the Dialog Wheel: attaching this mechanic to a progression system interfered with the developers vision of give players meaningfull choices.If you wanted to have those special dialog options you had to commit to being either Paragon or Renegade for the entire game, any attempt to make a meaningfull choice using a combination of both Paragon and Renegade paths (like a Real Human being) dilutes the system, now leaving you with a Shepard who has zero access to special decisions later in the game. Not to mention this links everysingle decision you make in the wheel connected, in a way that doesn't make sense. Which leads to grinding and completely unrelated scenarios affecting one another. Now any Paragon/Renegade points you earn in unrelated sidemissions play a role in the much more important scenarios later in the game, simply because they use the same system. Heavy Rain and The Walking Dead never had this problem, unlike Mass Effect and its arbitrary numbers.DefconRave

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] Its funny.... Only destroy is really based off of EMS.....Control and Synthesis vary from other factors.Vaasman

Also.

People really don't get the ending, as straightforward as this ending because they don't try....or lack the intelligence. Sorry, if you cannot even locate a simple central conflict, just stop criticizing.texasgoldrush

Can you provide some evidence that people are not clear on that and that is why they hate the ending? Because it's about as simple as asking if 2+2=4. There are certainly some confusing secondary conflicts, such as the synthetics v organics conflict that becomes significant yet unresolved at the last moment (unless you take synthesis I guess.)

[QUOTE="Vaasman"]

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]Control and Synthesis don't even exist if your EMS is low, how are they not based off of it if they can't even be activated at certain scores?

Also.

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] People really don't get the ending, as straightforward as this ending because they don't try....or lack the intelligence. Sorry, if you cannot even locate a simple central conflict, just stop criticizing.texasgoldrush

Can you provide some evidence that people are not clear on that and that is why they hate the ending? Because it's about as simple as asking if 2+2=4. There are certainly some confusing secondary conflicts, such as the synthetics v organics conflict that becomes significant yet unresolved at the last moment (unless you take synthesis I guess.)

Control definitely can exist if you EMS is low, if you save the base in ME2. However, the Control and Synthesis endings do not vary on EMS, while Destroy. "The central conflict of the story is Shepard v Reapers. I'm reasonably sure that no one is confused about that, every part of the main plot of all 3 games revolves around him fighting reapers and reaper minions." So tell me, why is Shepard fighting the Reapers? "Can you provide some evidence that people are not clear on that and that is why they hate the ending? Because it's about as simple as asking if 2+2=4. There are certainly some confusing secondary conflicts, such as the synthetics v organics conflict that becomes significant yet unresolved at the last moment (unless you take synthesis I guess.)" Notice that it isn't the theme of the Destroy and Control ending because simply put, ME3 isn't really about organics vs synthetics. The central conflict is Shepard opposing the Catalyst cycle, which is the result from the Catalyst's lack of understanding of organic life. Its that simple....look at the dialogue wheel.texasgoldrush

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]No, ME3 is the best...why? Pariah_001

Because Texasgoldrush said so!

...no wait. That's bullshit.

[QUOTE="Pariah_001"]

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]No, ME3 is the best...why? AdrianWerner

Because Texasgoldrush said so!

...no wait. That's bullshit.

Yes it was. But the gameplay is very underwhelming if we compare it to some real competition, instead of its predecesors.Lulu_Lulu

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]Control definitely can exist if you EMS is low, if you save the base in ME2. However, the Control and Synthesis endings do not vary on EMS, while Destroy. "The central conflict of the story is Shepard v Reapers. I'm reasonably sure that no one is confused about that, every part of the main plot of all 3 games revolves around him fighting reapers and reaper minions." So tell me, why is Shepard fighting the Reapers? "Can you provide some evidence that people are not clear on that and that is why they hate the ending? Because it's about as simple as asking if 2+2=4. There are certainly some confusing secondary conflicts, such as the synthetics v organics conflict that becomes significant yet unresolved at the last moment (unless you take synthesis I guess.)" Notice that it isn't the theme of the Destroy and Control ending because simply put, ME3 isn't really about organics vs synthetics. The central conflict is Shepard opposing the Catalyst cycle, which is the result from the Catalyst's lack of understanding of organic life. Its that simple....look at the dialogue wheel.Vaasman

[QUOTE="Lulu_Lulu"]Now for the Dialog Wheel: attaching this mechanic to a progression system interfered with the developers vision of give players meaningfull choices.If you wanted to have those special dialog options you had to commit to being either Paragon or Renegade for the entire game, any attempt to make a meaningfull choice using a combination of both Paragon and Renegade paths (like a Real Human being) dilutes the system, now leaving you with a Shepard who has zero access to special decisions later in the game. Not to mention this links everysingle decision you make in the wheel connected, in a way that doesn't make sense. Which leads to grinding and completely unrelated scenarios affecting one another. Now any Paragon/Renegade points you earn in unrelated sidemissions play a role in the much more important scenarios later in the game, simply because they use the same system. Heavy Rain and The Walking Dead never had this problem, unlike Mass Effect and its arbitrary numbers.DefconRave

they already improved it, in mass effect 3 you can pick either choise and it will count towards your influence.

[QUOTE="Vaasman"]

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]Control definitely can exist if you EMS is low, if you save the base in ME2. However, the Control and Synthesis endings do not vary on EMS, while Destroy. "The central conflict of the story is Shepard v Reapers. I'm reasonably sure that no one is confused about that, every part of the main plot of all 3 games revolves around him fighting reapers and reaper minions." So tell me, why is Shepard fighting the Reapers? "Can you provide some evidence that people are not clear on that and that is why they hate the ending? Because it's about as simple as asking if 2+2=4. There are certainly some confusing secondary conflicts, such as the synthetics v organics conflict that becomes significant yet unresolved at the last moment (unless you take synthesis I guess.)" Notice that it isn't the theme of the Destroy and Control ending because simply put, ME3 isn't really about organics vs synthetics. The central conflict is Shepard opposing the Catalyst cycle, which is the result from the Catalyst's lack of understanding of organic life. Its that simple....look at the dialogue wheel.texasgoldrush

and whatever your opinion is, no one cares because you are an idiot, period.

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="Vaasman"]So much post spent to say absolutely nothing. If you can't provide any evidence that people are upset because they can't understand the conflict of the story, then just stop posting.

Krelian-co

and whatever your opinion is, no one cares because you are an idiot, period.

[QUOTE="Krelian-co"]

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] Who ever says that the ending does not match with the themes didn't get the central conflict...end of story.texasgoldrush

and whatever your opinion is, no one cares because you are an idiot, period.

yeah clearly you are super smart, everyone in this forum thinks so :lol:

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="Krelian-co"]

and whatever your opinion is, no one cares because you are an idiot, period.

Krelian-co

yeah clearly you are super smart, everyone in this forum thinks so :lol:

Christ, Texas.

Give it a rest.

Christ, Texas.

Give it a rest.

Sagem28

Yes Texas please  let it go...just let it go.

[QUOTE="Lulu_Lulu"]Now for the Dialog Wheel: attaching this mechanic to a progression system interfered with the developers vision of give players meaningfull choices.If you wanted to have those special dialog options you had to commit to being either Paragon or Renegade for the entire game, any attempt to make a meaningfull choice using a combination of both Paragon and Renegade paths (like a Real Human being) dilutes the system, now leaving you with a Shepard who has zero access to special decisions later in the game. Not to mention this links everysingle decision you make in the wheel connected, in a way that doesn't make sense. Which leads to grinding and completely unrelated scenarios affecting one another. Now any Paragon/Renegade points you earn in unrelated sidemissions play a role in the much more important scenarios later in the game, simply because they use the same system. Heavy Rain and The Walking Dead never had this problem, unlike Mass Effect and its arbitrary numbers.DefconRave

[QUOTE="Krelian-co"]

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] And I guess you're too stupid to get even a straightforward ending. The smart fans get the ending and the dumb ones don't, end of story.texasgoldrush

yeah clearly you are super smart, everyone in this forum thinks so :lol:

ME3 had a good ending for a C-list game but lets be real, its not the brilliant, perfect piece of art that Bioshock Infinite's ending is. mems_1224

No doubt Ken and his team made the ending Bioware wanted to make, an ending that had people talking about and tried to figure out. I think the problem is unlike Ken and his writers who wrote the ending to seamlessly fit with the rest of the game and probably wrote and rewrote the ending, casey and his team had no idea what the ending was going to be not to mention giving people choice turned out to be the worst game design desicion and came back to bite them in the ass. In a nut shell Bioshock s ending is amazing because they planned it clearly and ME3 ending was crap beacuse they didn't plan. 

[QUOTE="mems_1224"]ME3 had a good ending for a C-list game but lets be real, its not the brilliant, perfect piece of art that Bioshock Infinite's ending is. musalala

No doubt Ken and his team made the ending Bioware wanted to make, an ending that had people talking about and tried to figure out. I think the problem is unlike Ken and his writers who wrote the ending to seamlessly fit with the rest of the game and probably wrote and rewrote the ending, casey and his team had no idea what the ending was going to be not to mention giving people choice turned out to be the worst game design desicion and came back to bite them in the ass. In a nut shell Bioshock s ending is amazing because they planned it clearly and ME3 ending was crap beacuse they didn't plan.

Nevermind the ENTIRE STORY is a complete and utter mess, lacking in depth and full of handwave. Its not the ending that was the problem, its that the story itself reeks of lack of consistency and development hell, along with cut ideas and plots. And the entire plot is logically flawed and contrived and it had to handwave itself out of it.

And ME3's ending was actually planned from the start of its development, the script leaked months before relase prove it.

[QUOTE="musalala"]

[QUOTE="mems_1224"]ME3 had a good ending for a C-list game but lets be real, its not the brilliant, perfect piece of art that Bioshock Infinite's ending is. texasgoldrush

No doubt Ken and his team made the ending Bioware wanted to make, an ending that had people talking about and tried to figure out. I think the problem is unlike Ken and his writers who wrote the ending to seamlessly fit with the rest of the game and probably wrote and rewrote the ending, casey and his team had no idea what the ending was going to be not to mention giving people choice turned out to be the worst game design desicion and came back to bite them in the ass. In a nut shell Bioshock s ending is amazing because they planned it clearly and ME3 ending was crap beacuse they didn't plan.

Nevermind the ENTIRE STORY is a complete and utter mess, lacking in depth and full of handwave. Its not the ending that was the problem, its that the story itself reeks of lack of consistency and development hell, along with cut ideas and plots. And the entire plot is logically flawed and contrived and it had to handwave itself out of it.

And ME3's ending was actually planned from the start, the script leaked months before relase prove it.

ME3 had a good ending for a C-list game but lets be real, its not the brilliant, perfect piece of art that Bioshock Infinite's ending is. mems_1224

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]

[QUOTE="musalala"]

No doubt Ken and his team made the ending Bioware wanted to make, an ending that had people talking about and tried to figure out. I think the problem is unlike Ken and his writers who wrote the ending to seamlessly fit with the rest of the game and probably wrote and rewrote the ending, casey and his team had no idea what the ending was going to be not to mention giving people choice turned out to be the worst game design desicion and came back to bite them in the ass. In a nut shell Bioshock s ending is amazing because they planned it clearly and ME3 ending was crap beacuse they didn't plan.

mems_1224

Nevermind the ENTIRE STORY is a complete and utter mess, lacking in depth and full of handwave. Its not the ending that was the problem, its that the story itself reeks of lack of consistency and development hell, along with cut ideas and plots. And the entire plot is logically flawed and contrived and it had to handwave itself out of it.

And ME3's ending was actually planned from the start, the script leaked months before relase prove it.

[QUOTE="mems_1224"]ME3 had a good ending for a C-list game but lets be real, its not the brilliant, perfect piece of art that Bioshock Infinite's ending is. AdrianWerner

[QUOTE="mems_1224"][QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] No they didn't plan it clearly because bioshock Infinite went through a lot of changes and this cannot be denied.

Nevermind the ENTIRE STORY is a complete and utter mess, lacking in depth and full of handwave. Its not the ending that was the problem, its that the story itself reeks of lack of consistency and development hell, along with cut ideas and plots. And the entire plot is logically flawed and contrived and it had to handwave itself out of it.

 

And ME3's ending was actually planned from the start, the script leaked months before relase prove it.

texasgoldrush

To be honest, Mass Effect might have wonderful universe and big focus on story, but in the end it's still a game and ME3 had the best and most polished gameplay out of the whole trilogy, so it indeed is the best game of the series. AdrianWerner

Only by virtue of being the most recent. Of course the gameplay's going to be the most polished when it's the last one in the franchise. We shouldn't expect anything less.

But more functional mechanics doesn't forgive the game its trespasses. All games should have that really.

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]

[QUOTE="mems_1224"] :lol:mems_1224

[QUOTE="mems_1224"]

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] http://inanage.com/2013/04/04/my-issues-with-the-bioshock-infinite-plot/ Here are exactly the problems with Infinite's plot......its completely illogical and contrived.

texasgoldrush

Mems destroying biodrones as per usual.

Good show.

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="mems_1224"]

mems_1224

And what if I say the entire game was the ending, what now?texasgoldrush

Means you're getting desperate.

How much is EA paying you by the way?

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] And what if I say the entire game was the ending, what now?Pariah_001

Means you're getting desperate.

How much is EA paying you by the way?

What if I did? I am not saying it is. But many people are. Was not showing the results of many of your choices in the ending a problem that had to be fixed? Yes it was. However, once again, Bioware came in and fixed the problem, free of charge. That criticism is over.texasgoldrush

It's an rpg. Numerical values are the core of rpg's foundation...Even action rpgs.dreman999

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[QUOTE="AdrianWerner"]To be honest, Mass Effect might have wonderful universe and big focus on story, but in the end it's still a game and ME3 had the best and most polished gameplay out of the whole trilogy, so it indeed is the best game of the series. Pariah_001

Only by virtue of being the most recent. Of course the gameplay's going to be the most polished when it's the last one in the franchise. We shouldn't expect anything less.

But more functional mechanics doesn't forgive the game its trespasses. All games should have that really.

[QUOTE="Gargus"]

[QUOTE="Blabadon"]Playing through ME1 right now. Expecting the disappointment thanks to the internet.texasgoldrush

But ME1 is great.

ME2 is a little more streamlined and overall it improves most everything. Its at least just as good as 1 if not better. Although I missed the more 1980's scifi feel the first one had..

ME3 was god awful to me because it felt terribly rushed. You can see every returning character before they surprise you, you can see every character death coming from a mile off, the game lacked its sense of exploration because I felt like I was constantly being drug along by the game like a kid being guided by his mother holding his hand, all the side missions felt kind of flat and very uninteresting like they were forced in just because the other games had them, new characters felt generic and really uninspired like that that new mexican guy who sounds like a white doing a bad impression of a mexican by talking in his normal voice but constantly using the word "loco" in a mexican accent, and a dozen other reasons why I didnt like it.

The ending was just the capper because it personified how I felt through the entire game. I felt like it was rushed, unloved, and like it was just a meal ticket. The entire game felt like they were saying "Ok guys this is it. Lets wrap this up so we can get home in time for dexter". And thats what the ending felt like also, they were done so they rushed and got lazy. I mean the entire series is based on creating these characters, having a big expansive story to tell, having a lot of dialouge and so on but at the end they just pulled the plug on it and ran the credits.

You mean when Liara conveniently stumbled upon the Deus Ex Machina device? Or the 30 hours of fighting Cerberus troops? Or all the tieing up from Mass Effect 1 and 2, which they still managed to fvck up. There's no foreshadowing of the Catalyst or the Reapers motives, so where's the plot progression?

its always fun to see people making fun of texas and him taking the forum so seriously, and getting angry over a couple of pics, like this doesn't let him sleep at nights.