inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
Jun 11, 2024 16:44:23 GMT
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Feb 17, 2020 19:41:05 GMT
As for Arrival, I can’t stress enough how stupid I think this DLC is when I put any kind of scrutiny to it. In principle, I like the idea of stopping the reapers from reaching the Alpha relay, and the whole final set piece is nice (though I’ll always maintain that Harbinger’s Dr. Claw voice is stupid and I’m glad he doesn’t say a word in ME3), but the bad guys capture Shepard and keep them alive....for what? To hand over to the reapers? Shepard’s importance to the reapers was such a weird addition to the franchise that just made no sense. There’s no reason for this immense fleet of immortal kill bots to be so concerned about any single person. They captured Shepard to expose him to the artifact. Harbinger even says "struggle if you wish your mind will be mine". The Reapers took interest in Shepard after he defeated one of their own with help from allies. So to the Reapers, Shepard is valuable to them, possibly as a potential ally. This is why they want to turn Shepard against his allies. Thing is, it's too late for that. The purpose of Saren was to aid Sovereign in retaking the relay trap. His usefulness begins and ends with that goal. If Sovereign successfully opened the dark space relay, it would no longer have any use for Saren or the geth, and everyone would die. The reapers already had a minion in Kenson, who could have successfully killed Shepard, blown the reactor and prevent the destruction of the Alpha Relay.
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
Member is Online
24,680
themikefest
15,009
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Feb 17, 2020 19:44:40 GMT
IMO, the MET story as a whole is very overrated (particularly by fans who fail to admit to the flaws that exist in ALL 3 games, including ME1). What are the flaws you say fans fail to admit to?
|
|
sjsharp2010
N7
![*](//storage.proboards.com/6576594/images/Cxe61tFipqUzASLV595U.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/6576594/images/Cxe61tFipqUzASLV595U.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/6576594/images/Cxe61tFipqUzASLV595U.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/6576594/images/Cxe61tFipqUzASLV595U.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/6576594/images/Cxe61tFipqUzASLV595U.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/6576594/images/Cxe61tFipqUzASLV595U.png)
Go Team!
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Posts: 11,214 Likes: 19,214
inherit
2309
0
19,214
sjsharp2010
Go Team!
11,214
December 2016
sjsharp2010
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
|
Post by sjsharp2010 on Feb 17, 2020 20:34:42 GMT
I don't think ME2 is an overrated game. It's worth the 97 rating it got. The SM is the most immersive and replayable mission I've encountered. I don't think one can base the merits of a game based on its ending, but, for some reason that's how it goes. ME2 had a great ending, and ME3 had an abomination as an ending, so, ME2 is remembered as great and ME3 is remembered as an abomination. To me, the ME2 ending is the best of the trilogy. And to me, ME3 is the best overall game of the trilogy. And to me, ME1 has the strongest world building and plot of the trilogy. Andromeda is better than all of them only in combat and graphics. One of the games in the trilogy does everything else better. I am not saying ME2 is a bad game or anything like that. It is a lot better than many games out there. But the game is still overrated. It had perfect scores left and right despite its many flaws. Barely anyone bothered mentioning how slow the planet scanning was on the consoles for example. That was one of the most tedious things of the entire trilogy. But no one remembers that, because there were more 'fun' flaws in the game. When the flaws turn into memes that work in a positive way for the game rather than negative, you know that it is not being judged objectively. Take the famous Garrus & Calibration meme. That's a flaw of the game. But it was made into something funny that ultimately reflects positively on ME2. The same applies for Harbinger and all its speeches. There are countless of memes surrounding ME2 that actually should be genuine criticism, but, are brushed off under the euphoria that players found themselves in. ME3 has only one such meme that worked semi-positively on the game, and that was Marauder Shields. All the rest are off the ending to basically trash the game. The developers were smart enough to incorporate the ME2 memes into ME3 as a form of satire while also solving the issues, but, barely anyone talks about that. It's always only about the ending. During the ME1 times, memes weren't really a huge thing yet, so those are minimal. Although everyone remembers those long elevator rides. IMO, the MET story as a whole is very overrated (particularly by fans who fail to admit to the flaws that exist in ALL 3 games, including ME1). It's good enough for a good set of games, but has run its course and should end where it did. The MET story as a whole is overrated because they blew it with the ending and they didn't know what to do after ME1. ME1 had the perfect internal plot and possibility for further writing to create a great and epic timeless story. But ME2 dropped the ball and it was impossible to recover from it. The main antagonist of the trilogy was the reapers. The reapers were extremely frightening and interesting in ME1. The one that represented the reapers went from being mysterious, powerful, unknowable, intimidating and eternal in ME1, to a babbling idiot caring about a single zombie and interfering every time he had a chance. The reason? That the zombie killed a reaper, despite Sovereign obviously not being the first reaper that had been killed in the past. That destroyed the whole setup of ME1, and all future potential of a coherent and powerful narritive. Not to mention the whole human baby reaper terminator thing that was never properly explained. I don't think it's overrated eithe rin fac tit's one of my favourite games not jus tof the trilogy but in my library of games I own. In fact looking forward to starting a new runof it later as I'm almost finished my latest ME1 run as I'v ejus tfinished Virmir and so only have Ilos left of the main quests. I'm looking forward to importing my current Shep into it. Let us know how it goes after you've just finished ME1. For me, ME2 feels... Disconnected. Not only from ME1, but from within itself as well. I neve rhave yet so I don't see how this tim ewould be any different.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,317
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,870
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Feb 17, 2020 21:13:48 GMT
I'm not convinced that ME1 really did offer a good setup for a series. This is the game which established the Reapers' fundamental stupidity and, worse, incoherence.
|
|
inherit
9911
0
Feb 17, 2020 21:30:01 GMT
1
momahony676
1
Feb 28, 2018 11:18:30 GMT
February 2018
momahony676
|
Post by momahony676 on Feb 17, 2020 21:30:01 GMT
I think shepards story is done and is a legacy of a trilogy which should be left alone. I want a Prothean game/dlc, escape the reapers and go to a new galaxy. Make it a game where choices matter, do you allow a city/planet to burn to get resources needed for the survival of the race! So you give falsehoods to leaders so they don't catch onto your plan etc. I would love that.
|
|
inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
Jun 11, 2024 16:44:23 GMT
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Feb 17, 2020 22:15:12 GMT
I'm not convinced that ME1 really did offer a good setup for a series. This is the game which established the Reapers' fundamental stupidity and, worse, incoherence. ME1 should've ended with them being destroyed somehow, like destroying the dark relay that sends a cataclysmic shockwave that just deletes them. I would pay to see Harbinger look at the relay about to go and say "....oh" and then nothingness.
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
Member is Online
24,680
themikefest
15,009
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Feb 17, 2020 22:28:51 GMT
The Suicide Mission has pretty big flashes of brilliance, Couple issues I had with the mission is that I didn't agree with loyalty being one of the factors in a characters death. Look at Garrus. If he's not loyal, and made 2nd fireteam leader, he dies. What that tells me is he let his unsolved issue distract him, one he had no control over at the time, leading to his death. Or if he was 1st fireteam leader, leads to the death of the one in the vent. If anything, I would have it effect the relationship between that character and Shepard. When they meet in ME3, that character has a different tone of voice towards Shepard. The other part is if the loyalty mission isn't completed, it carries over into ME3 leading to the death of a few characters, namely Lawson, Kasumi, Zaeed and Grunt. Another thing I didn't agree with is squadmates having upgrades for the SR2. I would have had it where after Horizon, armor upgrade is available. After collector ship, shield is available and after IFF, the thannix weapon is available. For me, I always have problems with the scion no matter what difficulty I play on.
|
|
inherit
1227
0
3,675
Phantom
2,661
August 2016
deathscepter
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Jade Empire
|
Post by Phantom on Feb 17, 2020 22:31:52 GMT
I'm not convinced that ME1 really did offer a good setup for a series. This is the game which established the Reapers' fundamental stupidity and, worse, incoherence. ME1 should've ended with them being destroyed somehow, like destroying the dark relay that sends a cataclysmic shockwave that just deletes them. I would pay to see Harbinger look at the relay about to go and say "....oh" and then nothingness. Well Destroying the Dark Relay that sends a cataclysmic shockwave that destroys all of the Reaper and Harbinger said, "....oh" could work into a good Mass Effect game.
|
|
sjsharp2010
N7
![*](//storage.proboards.com/6576594/images/Cxe61tFipqUzASLV595U.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/6576594/images/Cxe61tFipqUzASLV595U.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/6576594/images/Cxe61tFipqUzASLV595U.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/6576594/images/Cxe61tFipqUzASLV595U.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/6576594/images/Cxe61tFipqUzASLV595U.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/6576594/images/Cxe61tFipqUzASLV595U.png)
Go Team!
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Posts: 11,214 Likes: 19,214
inherit
2309
0
19,214
sjsharp2010
Go Team!
11,214
December 2016
sjsharp2010
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
|
Post by sjsharp2010 on Feb 17, 2020 22:33:22 GMT
I think shepards story is done and is a legacy of a trilogy which should be left alone. I want a Prothean game/dlc, escape the reapers and go to a new galaxy. Make it a game where choices matter, do you allow a city/planet to burn to get resources needed for the survival of the race! So you give falsehoods to leaders so they don't catch onto your plan etc. I would love that. Likewise so do I the graphic and gamepla ysti l lhold up to todays standards as far as I'm concerned ther's nóneed t oremaster or do a remake of it and tbh I dfon' tthink I'd byu i teven if they made one as I'm quite happy wi ththe rtilogy copy I have. So as lon gas I can keep playing it I don't see myself wanting t oget a remaster /remake of it. I'd rather the yfocus on movinmg forwards t nwe stories the ycan tel lthan looking backwards
|
|
inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
Jun 11, 2024 16:44:23 GMT
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Feb 17, 2020 23:02:27 GMT
The Suicide Mission has pretty big flashes of brilliance, Couple issues I had with the mission is that I didn't agree with loyalty being one of the factors in a characters death. Look at Garrus. If he's not loyal, and made 2nd fireteam leader, he dies. What that tells me is he let his unsolved issue distract him, one he had no control over at the time, leading to his death. Or if he was 1st fireteam leader, leads to the death of the one in the vent. If anything, I would have it effect the relationship between that character and Shepard. When they meet in ME3, that character has a different tone of voice towards Shepard. The other part is if the loyalty mission isn't completed, it carries over into ME3 leading to the death of a few characters, namely Lawson, Kasumi, Zaeed and Grunt. Another thing I didn't agree with is squadmates having upgrades for the SR2. I would have had it where after Horizon, armor upgrade is available. After collector ship, shield is available and after IFF, the thannix weapon is available. For me, I always have problems with the scion no matter what difficulty I play on. I agree about the loyalty mechanic. I think in ME2's case, it should have taken a page out of Dragon Age and have their disposition be altered. I think that Wrex in ME1 served as an ok template to draw from, since completing his personal quest allows you to basically bypass the dialogue check to get him to stand down. Similarly ME3 kind of had something like this with reputation for the VS. I wasn't fond of their competence being affected so greatly by whether or not their personal issue was resolved, even if they were exactly the right person to get the job done. I agree with the ship upgrades. I imagine they just wanted to give each companion more relevance in that respect. Mordin was really the only story relevant character that had something meaningful to add that would affect our ability to complete a mission. I dunno, I just thought the Praetorian was just overall a more menacing enemy type. It could traverse any part of the map a bit faster, and it absolutely melted you if it caught you out in the open. Scions had that really horrifying shockwave, but from a good vantage point, I was able to quickly beat into their lumpy heads with a Mattock. Praetorians, not so much.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2020 23:38:28 GMT
I don't think ME2 is an overrated game. It's worth the 97 rating it got. The SM is the most immersive and replayable mission I've encountered. I don't think one can base the merits of a game based on its ending, but, for some reason that's how it goes. ME2 had a great ending, and ME3 had an abomination as an ending, so, ME2 is remembered as great and ME3 is remembered as an abomination. To me, the ME2 ending is the best of the trilogy. And to me, ME3 is the best overall game of the trilogy. And to me, ME1 has the strongest world building and plot of the trilogy. Andromeda is better than all of them only in combat and graphics. One of the games in the trilogy does everything else better. I am not saying ME2 is a bad game or anything like that. It is a lot better than many games out there. But the game is still overrated. It had perfect scores left and right despite its many flaws. Barely anyone bothered mentioning how slow the planet scanning was on the consoles for example. That was one of the most tedious things of the entire trilogy. But no one remembers that, because there were more 'fun' flaws in the game. When the flaws turn into memes that work in a positive way for the game rather than negative, you know that it is not being judged objectively. Take the famous Garrus & Calibration meme. That's a flaw of the game. But it was made into something funny that ultimately reflects positively on ME2. The same applies for Harbinger and all its speeches. There are countless of memes surrounding ME2 that actually should be genuine criticism, but, are brushed off under the euphoria that players found themselves in. ME3 has only one such meme that worked semi-positively on the game, and that was Marauder Shields. All the rest are off the ending to basically trash the game. The developers were smart enough to incorporate the ME2 memes into ME3 as a form of satire while also solving the issues, but, barely anyone talks about that. It's always only about the ending. During the ME1 times, memes weren't really a huge thing yet, so those are minimal. Although everyone remembers those long elevator rides. IMO, the MET story as a whole is very overrated (particularly by fans who fail to admit to the flaws that exist in ALL 3 games, including ME1). It's good enough for a good set of games, but has run its course and should end where it did. The MET story as a whole is overrated because they blew it with the ending and they didn't know what to do after ME1. ME1 had the perfect internal plot and possibility for further writing to create a great and epic timeless story. But ME2 dropped the ball and it was impossible to recover from it. The main antagonist of the trilogy was the reapers. The reapers were extremely frightening and interesting in ME1. The one that represented the reapers went from being mysterious, powerful, unknowable, intimidating and eternal in ME1, to a babbling idiot caring about a single zombie and interfering every time he had a chance. The reason? That the zombie killed a reaper, despite Sovereign obviously not being the first reaper that had been killed in the past. That destroyed the whole setup of ME1, and all future potential of a coherent and powerful narritive. Not to mention the whole human baby reaper terminator thing that was never properly explained. I don't think it's overrated eithe rin fac tit's one of my favourite games not jus tof the trilogy but in my library of games I own. In fact looking forward to starting a new runof it later as I'm almost finished my latest ME1 run as I'v ejus tfinished Virmir and so only have Ilos left of the main quests. I'm looking forward to importing my current Shep into it. Let us know how it goes after you've just finished ME1. For me, ME2 feels... Disconnected. Not only from ME1, but from within itself as well. Sure sign of your putting ME1 on a blind pedestal. If it was such a "perfect" story, where is it's Pullitzer? It was good enough for a game but certainly not good enough for a quality novel. The thread here that lists things that don't make sense contain numerous items from ME1. There are games out there with far better story elements... just ask those people who love The Witcher series (BTW, I'm not one of them, but even I believe the story is superior to ME1's).
|
|
Ascend
N3
![*](//storage.proboards.com/6576594/images/Cxe61tFipqUzASLV595U.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/6576594/images/Cxe61tFipqUzASLV595U.png)
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 370 Likes: 492
inherit
3282
0
492
Ascend
370
February 2017
ascend
Bottom
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Ascend on Feb 18, 2020 1:34:29 GMT
I neve rhave yet so I don't see how this tim ewould be any different. You wouldn't be the first to see things differently after a couple of years. I'm not convinced that ME1 really did offer a good setup for a series. This is the game which established the Reapers' fundamental stupidity and, worse, incoherence. What is this stupidity and incoherence you're talking about? There is nothing about the reapers in ME1 that doesn't make sense. They were mysterious and presented as powerful for a reason. All nonsense came in the follow-up games. I think shepards story is done and is a legacy of a trilogy which should be left alone. I want a Prothean game/dlc, escape the reapers and go to a new galaxy. Make it a game where choices matter, do you allow a city/planet to burn to get resources needed for the survival of the race! So you give falsehoods to leaders so they don't catch onto your plan etc. I would love that. I don't think BioWare is capable of doing that anymore. ME1 should've ended with them being destroyed somehow, like destroying the dark relay that sends a cataclysmic shockwave that just deletes them. I don't think was necessary. Sovereign being a primary taste of the true evil is a fine setup. Look at Dragon Ball Z. Raditz was the perfect setup for Vegeta and Nappa, which in turn were a perfect setup for Freeza. A perfect 3 stair evil, which Mass Effect was capable of delivering but utterly failed during ME2. Sure sign of your putting ME1 on a blind pedestal. If it was such a "perfect" story, where is it's Pullitzer? There is only one game that is constantly put on a pedestal and that's ME2. I haven't really met anyone that prefers ME1 that doesn't acknowledge ME1's issues. The same goes for ME3. Finding someone that prefers ME2 that acknowledges the issues with ME2 is another story entirely. No video game has received a Pulitzer, simply because games are not acknowledged as a form of art, which in turn makes the writing for it be neglected. Video game writing is completely different than in other media, and thus it fails to be appreciated. Even the ones that approach movies, like Heavy Rain or Telltale's The Walking Dead, have to write with gameplay in mind. It was good enough for a game but certainly not good enough for a quality novel. It was as the first chapter. Tell me something. Is something like the writing in The Hunger Games so superior to Mass Effect 1? If so? How? The thread here that lists things that don't make sense contain numerous items from ME1. There are games out there with far better story elements... just ask those people who love The Witcher series (BTW, I'm not one of them, but even I believe the story is superior to ME1's). I have never played the Witcher, so, I can't judge that. ME1 sure has a lot of haters... I'll be leaving this here... whatculture.com/gaming/mass-effect-2-10-reasons-its-overrated-as-hell
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2020 2:45:09 GMT
I neve rhave yet so I don't see how this tim ewould be any different. You wouldn't be the first to see things differently after a couple of years. I'm not convinced that ME1 really did offer a good setup for a series. This is the game which established the Reapers' fundamental stupidity and, worse, incoherence. What is this stupidity and incoherence you're talking about? There is nothing about the reapers in ME1 that doesn't make sense. They were mysterious and presented as powerful for a reason. All nonsense came in the follow-up games. I think shepards story is done and is a legacy of a trilogy which should be left alone. I want a Prothean game/dlc, escape the reapers and go to a new galaxy. Make it a game where choices matter, do you allow a city/planet to burn to get resources needed for the survival of the race! So you give falsehoods to leaders so they don't catch onto your plan etc. I would love that. I don't think BioWare is capable of doing that anymore. ME1 should've ended with them being destroyed somehow, like destroying the dark relay that sends a cataclysmic shockwave that just deletes them. I don't think was necessary. Sovereign being a primary taste of the true evil is a fine setup. Look at Dragon Ball Z. Raditz was the perfect setup for Vegeta and Nappa, which in turn were a perfect setup for Freeza. A perfect 3 stair evil, which Mass Effect was capable of delivering but utterly failed during ME2. Sure sign of your putting ME1 on a blind pedestal. If it was such a "perfect" story, where is it's Pullitzer? There is only one game that is constantly put on a pedestal and that's ME2. I haven't really met anyone that prefers ME1 that doesn't acknowledge ME1's issues. The same goes for ME3. Finding someone that prefers ME2 that acknowledges the issues with ME2 is another story entirely. No video game has received a Pulitzer, simply because games are not acknowledged as a form of art, which in turn makes the writing for it be neglected. Video game writing is completely different than in other media, and thus it fails to be appreciated. Even the ones that approach movies, like Heavy Rain or Telltale's The Walking Dead, have to write with gameplay in mind. It was good enough for a game but certainly not good enough for a quality novel. It was as the first chapter. Tell me something. Is something like the writing in The Hunger Games so superior to Mass Effect 1? If so? How? The thread here that lists things that don't make sense contain numerous items from ME1. There are games out there with far better story elements... just ask those people who love The Witcher series (BTW, I'm not one of them, but even I believe the story is superior to ME1's). I have never played the Witcher, so, I can't judge that. ME1 sure has a lot of haters... I'll be leaving this here... whatculture.com/gaming/mass-effect-2-10-reasons-its-overrated-as-hellFirst off, the dialogue blocks in ME1 do not flow naturally and they repeat themselves unnecessarily: As a small example, in talking with Pressly, Shepards asks "How did you end up assigned to the Normandy?" Pressly answers: I signed up with the Alliance as a navigator right out of school, following in my grandfather's footsteps, I guess. My first posting was on the Agincourt. We were at Elysium during the Skyllian Blitz... (line here varies depending on Shepard's background)" Then Shepard asks again: "How did you end up on the Normandy?" and Pressly replies "I got my officer's commission after Elysium. Must have made an impression on the right people. Captain asked for me when he was picking his crew."
Pressly is grey-haired and appears to be around 55 to 60 years of age. Anderson, who appears to be younger, is 46 (born 2137). Hackett, who appears much older than either of them, was born in 2134, making him a mere 49 years of age during ME1. The Skyllian Blitz occurred in 2176 and this is the battle for which War Hero Shepard receives the Star of Terra. Shepard was born in 2154, making him a mere 29 years of age. Yet, Pressly claims the Agincourt was his first posting after signing up as a navigator "right out of school." The Systems Alliance was formed in 2149, so I doubt Pressly was following in his grandfather's footsteps since the Alliance probably didn't exist while his grandfather was still of an age to serve.
We are also told in ME1 that humans can liive to be 150 in that era... yet Hackett, at 49, is portrayed as an old man. Ashley's grandfather, who served as a General during the First Contact War in 2157 was retired and shamed to a point where her father's career was short-circuited such that he never rose above Serviceman Third Class, implying that he was a young man just starting out in the Alliance when Ashley was born in 2158... and he also retired and died a few years before 2183. Doesn't sound to me like humans are living long at all.
A well written story would have at least worked out a feasible timeline. I could go on and on. The story plot also starts several totally irrelevant sub-plots and it never even remotely defines it's major antagonists. If fact, it deliberately avoids defining them as anything more than "unknowable" even in their own minds - which is a cheap cop out and ultimately why the series failed in the end to deliver a final boss antagonist that would meet the expectations of the fan base.
I'm not a "hater" of ME1. I like it as a game, but it is NOT a perfectly plotted story or even a particularly well written one.
|
|
inherit
4588
0
2,909
therevanchist25
1,758
Mar 15, 2017 23:07:06 GMT
March 2017
therevanchist25
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
|
Post by therevanchist25 on Feb 18, 2020 3:09:32 GMT
You wouldn't be the first to see things differently after a couple of years. What is this stupidity and incoherence you're talking about? There is nothing about the reapers in ME1 that doesn't make sense. They were mysterious and presented as powerful for a reason. All nonsense came in the follow-up games. I don't think BioWare is capable of doing that anymore. I don't think was necessary. Sovereign being a primary taste of the true evil is a fine setup. Look at Dragon Ball Z. Raditz was the perfect setup for Vegeta and Nappa, which in turn were a perfect setup for Freeza. A perfect 3 stair evil, which Mass Effect was capable of delivering but utterly failed during ME2. There is only one game that is constantly put on a pedestal and that's ME2. I haven't really met anyone that prefers ME1 that doesn't acknowledge ME1's issues. The same goes for ME3. Finding someone that prefers ME2 that acknowledges the issues with ME2 is another story entirely. No video game has received a Pulitzer, simply because games are not acknowledged as a form of art, which in turn makes the writing for it be neglected. Video game writing is completely different than in other media, and thus it fails to be appreciated. Even the ones that approach movies, like Heavy Rain or Telltale's The Walking Dead, have to write with gameplay in mind. It was as the first chapter. Tell me something. Is something like the writing in The Hunger Games so superior to Mass Effect 1? If so? How? I have never played the Witcher, so, I can't judge that. ME1 sure has a lot of haters... I'll be leaving this here... whatculture.com/gaming/mass-effect-2-10-reasons-its-overrated-as-hellFirst off, the dialogue blocks in ME1 do not flow naturally and they repeat themselves unnecessarily: As a small example, in talking with Pressly, Shepards asks "How did you end up assigned to the Normandy?" Pressly answers: I signed up with the Alliance as a navigator right out of school, following in my grandfather's footsteps, I guess. My first posting was on the Agincourt. We were at Elysium during the Skyllian Blitz... (line here varies depending on Shepard's background)" Then Shepard asks again: "How did you end up on the Normandy?" and Pressly replies "I got my officer's commission after Elysium. Must have made an impression on the right people. Captain asked for me when he was picking his crew."
Pressly is grey-haired and appears to be around 55 to 60 years of age. Anderson, who appears to be younger, is 46 (born 2137). Hackett, who appears much older than either of them, was born in 2134, making him a mere 49 years of age during ME1. The Skyllian Blitz occurred in 2176 and this is the battle for which War Hero Shepard receives the Star of Terra. Shepard was born in 2154, making him a mere 29 years of age. Yet, Pressly claims the Agincourt was his first posting after signing up as a navigator "right out of school." The Systems Alliance was formed in 2149, so I doubt Pressly was following in his grandfather's footsteps since the Alliance probably didn't exist while his grandfather was still of an age to serve.
We are also told in ME1 that humans can line to be 150 in that era... yet Hackett, at 49, is portrayed as an old man.
A well written story would have at least worked out a feasible timeline. I could go on and on. The story plot also starts several totally irrelevant sub-plots and it never even remotely defines it's major antagonists. If fact, it deliberately avoids defining them as anything more than "unknowable" even in their own minds - which is a cheap cop out and ultimately why the series failed in the end to deliver a final boss antagonist that would meet the expectations of the fan base.
I'm not a "hater" of ME1. I like it as a game, but it is NOT a perfectly plotted story or even a particularly well written one.
That lack of a consistent timeline is just further proof of Bioware never planning out the story or setting before they began. As for the Reapers not being defined in any possible way? I'm sorry, but I don't see that as a negative. I never wanted them defined. I wanted them to truly be an unknowable Cthulhu-like enemy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2020 3:19:32 GMT
First off, the dialogue blocks in ME1 do not flow naturally and they repeat themselves unnecessarily: As a small example, in talking with Pressly, Shepards asks "How did you end up assigned to the Normandy?" Pressly answers: I signed up with the Alliance as a navigator right out of school, following in my grandfather's footsteps, I guess. My first posting was on the Agincourt. We were at Elysium during the Skyllian Blitz... (line here varies depending on Shepard's background)" Then Shepard asks again: "How did you end up on the Normandy?" and Pressly replies "I got my officer's commission after Elysium. Must have made an impression on the right people. Captain asked for me when he was picking his crew."
Pressly is grey-haired and appears to be around 55 to 60 years of age. Anderson, who appears to be younger, is 46 (born 2137). Hackett, who appears much older than either of them, was born in 2134, making him a mere 49 years of age during ME1. The Skyllian Blitz occurred in 2176 and this is the battle for which War Hero Shepard receives the Star of Terra. Shepard was born in 2154, making him a mere 29 years of age. Yet, Pressly claims the Agincourt was his first posting after signing up as a navigator "right out of school." The Systems Alliance was formed in 2149, so I doubt Pressly was following in his grandfather's footsteps since the Alliance probably didn't exist while his grandfather was still of an age to serve.
We are also told in ME1 that humans can line to be 150 in that era... yet Hackett, at 49, is portrayed as an old man.
A well written story would have at least worked out a feasible timeline. I could go on and on. The story plot also starts several totally irrelevant sub-plots and it never even remotely defines it's major antagonists. If fact, it deliberately avoids defining them as anything more than "unknowable" even in their own minds - which is a cheap cop out and ultimately why the series failed in the end to deliver a final boss antagonist that would meet the expectations of the fan base.
I'm not a "hater" of ME1. I like it as a game, but it is NOT a perfectly plotted story or even a particularly well written one.
That lack of a consistent timeline is just further proof of Bioware never planning out the story or setting before they began. As for the Reapers not being defined in any possible way? I'm sorry, but I don't see that as a negative. I never wanted them defined. I wanted them to truly be an unknowable Cthulhu-like enemy. You may not see it as a negative... but it IS a negative when judging how well a story is 'plotted." Ultimately, they had to define them in order to end the story... and that led to the disappointing ending to the story. They needed a solid concept in their own minds at least... and they did not have that and it shows. It cannot be said, therefore, that it has a "perfect internal plot."
|
|
inherit
4588
0
2,909
therevanchist25
1,758
Mar 15, 2017 23:07:06 GMT
March 2017
therevanchist25
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
|
Post by therevanchist25 on Feb 18, 2020 4:06:41 GMT
That lack of a consistent timeline is just further proof of Bioware never planning out the story or setting before they began. As for the Reapers not being defined in any possible way? I'm sorry, but I don't see that as a negative. I never wanted them defined. I wanted them to truly be an unknowable Cthulhu-like enemy. You may not see it as a negative... but it IS a negative when judging how well a story is 'plotted." Ultimately, they had to define them in order to end the story... and that led to the disappointing ending to the story. They needed a solid concept in their own minds at least... and they did not have that and it shows. It cannot be said, therefore, that it has a "perfect internal plot." I mean, to say any story is "perfect" is fool-hardy. NO story, idc who wrote it, is "perfect". The Lord of the Rings isn't perfect, why? Because Eagles. Theres no such thing as perfect. As for the reapers being defined. Again, you cannot tell me thats a negative. Lovecraft is proof that a lack of definition is not an automatic negative. Is it more impressive from the readers point of view when every single little detail about the universe is mapped out in painful detail first? Of course it is, again look at Lord of the Rings. A more fleshed out, detailed setting you may never find for the rest of human history. That kind of effort to go that extra mile is more "impressive" yes, but not putting forth that kind of effort is hardly a negative, because most writers don't put anywhere near that level of effort into it, for obvious reasons.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2020 10:43:55 GMT
You may not see it as a negative... but it IS a negative when judging how well a story is 'plotted." Ultimately, they had to define them in order to end the story... and that led to the disappointing ending to the story. They needed a solid concept in their own minds at least... and they did not have that and it shows. It cannot be said, therefore, that it has a "perfect internal plot." I mean, to say any story is "perfect" is fool-hardy. NO story, idc who wrote it, is "perfect". The Lord of the Rings isn't perfect, why? Because Eagles. Theres no such thing as perfect. As for the reapers being defined. Again, you cannot tell me thats a negative. Lovecraft is proof that a lack of definition is not an automatic negative. Is it more impressive from the readers point of view when every single little detail about the universe is mapped out in painful detail first? Of course it is, again look at Lord of the Rings. A more fleshed out, detailed setting you may never find for the rest of human history. That kind of effort to go that extra mile is more "impressive" yes, but not putting forth that kind of effort is hardly a negative, because most writers don't put anywhere near that level of effort into it, for obvious reasons. So then, defend your premise as it pertains to Mass Effect. How is the Reapers being "unknowable" used effectively in ME1 to build suspense.
It isn't. Instead, we are treated to a ridiculous scene of Shepard talking to an AI using lines like "You're just a machine and machines can be broken."
Indoctrination subverts Saren, turning him into a weakling in the end who can be talked into committing suicide with just a single line from Shepard.
Saren then suddenly changes for the final boss battle, in a manner not even remotely foreshadowed throughout ME1. Instead, we were shown in a vague sense, 3 different processes of "huskification" totally unrelated to what happens with Saren at the end of the game.
ME2 attempts to expand on the concept of Saren's body being taken over by repeating the process with various collector mooks becoming Harbinger throughout the game... but it too fails to really build any suspense using a now changing definition of what the Reapers were and were doing. Instead, we're treated to "baby human" Reaper in a totally changed appearance from Sovereign with this rather vague explanation as to why the difference. Just like in ME1, the change in the antagonist is dropped on the player suddenly and at the expense of weakening the pseudo-antagonist we have been fighting throughout the game. The boss battle is not against Harbinger, but a "weakened" proto-version of a Reaper made inexplicably and unnecessarily in our own image. ME3 doubles down on this "surprise" here's your new enemy by reducing TIM to suicide and dropping a child-like AI onto us at the end. The process is criticized in ME3, but it IS the same process that occurred in ME1 and ME2. It's a bad writing process. Ill-defined antagonists are generally a negative... and are certainly a negative in Mass Effect.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,317
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,870
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Feb 18, 2020 10:52:47 GMT
The problem with trying to graft Lovecraft tropes into ME is that the setting is -- or rather, pretends to be -- science fiction. In SF, people expect you to actually deliver the goods when you set up a mystery, not just wave your hands and say It Is Beyond Human Comprehension. (Honestly, I don't even see this move made in fantasy very much.)
Note that the Bio writers don't ever seem to have considered leaving the Reapers undefined. From what they've said, the dev discussions were about how to define the Reapers, not whether to.
|
|
Ascend
N3
![*](//storage.proboards.com/6576594/images/Cxe61tFipqUzASLV595U.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/6576594/images/Cxe61tFipqUzASLV595U.png)
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 370 Likes: 492
inherit
3282
0
492
Ascend
370
February 2017
ascend
Bottom
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Ascend on Feb 18, 2020 11:12:08 GMT
I'm still waiting for an answer on this.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,624
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on Feb 18, 2020 12:23:56 GMT
I think that no one deserves a place anywhere And Luke Skywalker deserves no place in Star Wars, I guess. Have fun cashing in on that franchise. It's almost as if the folks incensed about ME2 characters not having major roles in ME3 didn't notice the ME1 characters who got sidelined for ME2... You mean Wrex and the VS? Because Garrus, Tali and Liara get a boatload of screentime. Liara got so much screentime in her DLC to rival the characters in the main game.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2020 12:32:41 GMT
I'm still waiting for an answer on this. I showed you explicitly how the plot construction in ME1 is imperfect. Since your statement is that it was a "perfect internal plot," that's all I need to do. I cannot give you express examples relating to "The Hunger Games" since I have not read that particular book. I did see the movie and from what I could tell, it at least did not present a timeline that made no sense and did not fluff itself out with a bunch of "garbage" codex entries that served no real purpose to advancing the plot and actually helped to undermine the practicality of the timeline in which the story takes place. Also, in the movie, I believe the enemy being the state/government that makes the populaces fight in the games is well defined from the start. It's not presented as being an "unknowable omnipotent" entity.
|
|
inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
Jun 11, 2024 16:44:23 GMT
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Feb 18, 2020 16:14:08 GMT
I'm not convinced that ME1 really did offer a good setup for a series. This is the game which established the Reapers' fundamental stupidity and, worse, incoherence. What is this stupidity and incoherence you're talking about? There is nothing about the reapers in ME1 that doesn't make sense. They were mysterious and presented as powerful for a reason. All nonsense came in the follow-up games. ME1 should've ended with them being destroyed somehow, like destroying the dark relay that sends a cataclysmic shockwave that just deletes them. I don't think was necessary. Sovereign being a primary taste of the true evil is a fine setup. Look at Dragon Ball Z. Raditz was the perfect setup for Vegeta and Nappa, which in turn were a perfect setup for Freeza. A perfect 3 stair evil, which Mass Effect was capable of delivering but utterly failed during ME2. Well, to be fair, there's not really much to work with to make sense of anyway. Other than the big exposition dump about the true source of the relays and Citadel and what they're designed to do, we're refused answers about their real motivation. I think that from the very beginning, any hope of getting a satisfying answer for what the reapers really are or why they do what they do was doomed, which is why I think destroying them in 1 might have just worked out better in the end.
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
Member is Online
24,680
themikefest
15,009
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Feb 18, 2020 16:20:32 GMT
I think that from the very beginning, any hope of getting a satisfying answer for what the reapers really are or why they do what they do was doomed, which is why I think destroying them in 1 might have just worked out better in the end. If they went with Hackett's ending, and there was no Leviathan dlc, the reason why the reapers did what they did would be unexplained.
|
|
inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
Jun 11, 2024 16:44:23 GMT
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Feb 18, 2020 16:27:18 GMT
I think that no one deserves a place anywhere And Luke Skywalker deserves no place in Star Wars, I guess. Have fun cashing in on that franchise. Perhaps "deserve" isn't really the right word, but in theory, the new installments could have functioned just fine without him, as well as Leia and Han, since their story arcs were totally complete at that point. Disney was simply taking the easy route and letting nostalgia serve as a buttress for the new trilogy.
|
|
inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
Jun 11, 2024 16:44:23 GMT
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Feb 18, 2020 16:29:32 GMT
I think that from the very beginning, any hope of getting a satisfying answer for what the reapers really are or why they do what they do was doomed, which is why I think destroying them in 1 might have just worked out better in the end. If they went with Hackett's ending, and there was no Leviathan dlc, the reason why the reapers did what they did would be unexplained. It's kind of tricky. On the one hand, the reapers would probably have not been ruined by a poor answer, but it also feels like a cheap cop-out to tease with a mystery, only to snatch it away. I guess the latter might be the lesser of 2 evils. At least it doesn't involve green madness.
|
|