Gameinformer's GOTY

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#101 Posted by texasgoldrush (9265 posts) -

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="Zophar87"]

So you're saying they needed DLC in order to fix the ending? That's unacceptable.

Zophar87

At least they fixed the ending, for free.

It's still unacceptable. We play in an industry that thinks they can fix every last thing with a patch or DLC. It's stupid, just spend a little extra time on the game instead of giving us this @#$%. BioWare released a glittering dog turd and people like you are calling it Game of the Year.

So, going back in the 90's when bugs weren't fixed unless you buy a newer version is better? And games, even classics, were buggy back then....Ultima VII and FFVI for example.
#102 Posted by Zophar87 (4351 posts) -

[QUOTE="Zophar87"]

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] At least they fixed the ending, for free.texasgoldrush

It's still unacceptable. We play in an industry that thinks they can fix every last thing with a patch or DLC. It's stupid, just spend a little extra time on the game instead of giving us this @#$%. BioWare released a glittering dog turd and people like you are calling it Game of the Year.

So, going back in the 90's when bugs weren't fixed unless you buy a newer version is better? And games, even classics, were buggy back then....Ultima VII and FFVI for example.

This isn't an issue with bugs. Also comparing ME3 to FF6 is completely ludicrous, Terra Branford had more emotional/character development in one pixel then Commander Sheppard had in three games. Face it, ME3 is living proof that the industry is going downhill.

#103 Posted by NeonNinja (17318 posts) -

Ending sucked. Choices sucked. Forced multiplayer sucked. Lore sucked. Level design sucked. One-dimensional characters sucked. Deus ex machina sucked. inb4 "you just don't get it"Zeviander

Ending- It was OK, could have been handled better

Choices- They were awesome

Multiplayer- Not necessary to beat the game

Lore- Matter of opinion

Level Design- Best in the series, and what many TPS should strive for

Characters- Hardly one-dimensional. You're just hating on it now.

Deus ex machina- Relates back to the ending, it could have been handled better. They planted the seed for it, but it still felt jarring.

#104 Posted by texasgoldrush (9265 posts) -

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="Zophar87"]

It's still unacceptable. We play in an industry that thinks they can fix every last thing with a patch or DLC. It's stupid, just spend a little extra time on the game instead of giving us this @#$%. BioWare released a glittering dog turd and people like you are calling it Game of the Year.

Zophar87

So, going back in the 90's when bugs weren't fixed unless you buy a newer version is better? And games, even classics, were buggy back then....Ultima VII and FFVI for example.

This isn't an issue with bugs. Also comparing ME3 to FF6 is completely ludicrous, Terra Branford had more emotional/character development in one pixel then Commander Sheppard had in three games. Face it, ME3 is living proof that the industry is going downhill.

and did I even comapre the games outside the bugs?.....FFVI was buggy, try to sketch an invisible enemy with Relm, or do the Vanish/Death trick on bosses. Where is the patch? Nevermind the other game I listed with its game breaking bugs. And they weren't fixed by patches. Which is worse, game makers making mistakes and fixing them, or game makers making mistakes and not fixing them? And Terra and Commander Shepard are apples and oranges.....hell Terra isn't really a protagonist.
#105 Posted by Stringerboy (7141 posts) -

Ending sucked. Choices sucked. Forced multiplayer sucked. Lore sucked. Level design sucked. One-dimensional characters sucked. Deus ex machina sucked. inb4 "you just don't get it"Zeviander

Also to add to the pile:

-Priority Earth sucked

-Kai Leng

-Terrible "sidequests"

-The opening sucked

-Only one hub world

-No planet exploration whatsoever, all you do now is shoot people.

#106 Posted by texasgoldrush (9265 posts) -

[QUOTE="Zeviander"]Ending sucked. Choices sucked. Forced multiplayer sucked. Lore sucked. Level design sucked. One-dimensional characters sucked. Deus ex machina sucked. inb4 "you just don't get it"Stringerboy

Also to add to the pile:

-Priority Earth sucked

-Kai Leng

-Terrible "sidequests"

-The opening sucked

-Only one hub world

-No planet exploration whatsoever

-Priority Earth sucked No it didn't...It didn't take the tone you wanted. -Kai Leng So, not an important character -Terrible "sidequests" So the Grissom Academy, the Ardat Yakshi Monastary, the Rachni mission, the Geth Consensus, the Ex Cerberus Scientists were terrible sidequests? Wow -The opening sucked Was fine -Only one hub world So...ME1 had one hub as well. -No planet exploration whatsoever So lets waste are time and explore while th eReapers are attacking...makes sense.
#107 Posted by CaseyWegner (70104 posts) -

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]and it will win numerous GOTYs, get over it.Zeviander
This is Gamespot bro. Get over it.

another place where the game scored very well...

#108 Posted by texasgoldrush (9265 posts) -

[QUOTE="Zeviander"][QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]and it will win numerous GOTYs, get over it.CaseyWegner

This is Gamespot bro. Get over it.

another place where the game scored very well...

Yep, and the WiiU version also got a 9
#109 Posted by Stringerboy (7141 posts) -

[QUOTE="Stringerboy"]

[QUOTE="Zeviander"]Ending sucked. Choices sucked. Forced multiplayer sucked. Lore sucked. Level design sucked. One-dimensional characters sucked. Deus ex machina sucked. inb4 "you just don't get it"texasgoldrush

Also to add to the pile:

-Priority Earth sucked

-Kai Leng

-Terrible "sidequests"

-The opening sucked

-Only one hub world

-No planet exploration whatsoever

-Priority Earth sucked No it didn't...It didn't take the tone you wanted. -Kai Leng So, not an important character -Terrible "sidequests" So the Grissom Academy, the Ardat Yakshi Monastary, the Rachni mission, the Geth Consensus, the Ex Cerberus Scientists were terrible sidequests? Wow -The opening sucked Was fine -Only one hub world So...ME1 had one hub as well. -No planet exploration whatsoever So lets waste are time and explore while th eReapers are attacking...makes sense.

- What tone? Slogging through mindless waves of enemies with no music and a bland background?

- He looks like something out of a japanese Anime, no place in Mass Effect whatsover, Harbinger should have been the main antagonist

- I'm talking about the stupid eavesdropping quests where you to have deliver random items to people. Couldn't thry think of anything better than that?

- The opening was confusing and didn't give you enough time to feel like Earth was special. Maybe if we got to walk around a bit and interact with characters it would have been better.

- ME1 had Feros, Noveria and the citadel, and ME2 had Ilium, Omega and the Citadel. Now there's only one. No excuse here.

- I agree it would have been slighty peculiar plot wise but they could have at least had SOMETHING. This was kind of what mass effect was supposed to be about anyway, exploring a galaxy.

#110 Posted by TheEroica (13826 posts) -

[QUOTE="Zeviander"][QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]and it will win numerous GOTYs, get over it.CaseyWegner

This is Gamespot bro. Get over it.

another place where the game scored very well...

Indeed... tied for highest new release score of the year. I fully expect me3 to be goty at gs.... it meets every criteria for the title goty. Well supported, much talked about, highly praised.... a true gem. Go ME3!
#111 Posted by Killzonage (408 posts) -
I loved ME2, I still need to play ME3.
#112 Posted by Mozelleple112 (6695 posts) -
[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="Zeviander"]Ending sucked. Choices sucked. Forced multiplayer sucked. Lore sucked. Level design sucked. One-dimensional characters sucked. Deus ex machina sucked. inb4 "you just don't get it"

and yet it won....maybe because you are wrong. Ending was fixed. Choices did matter. The multiplayer was a suprise. Lore was fine...all in the narrative. Level design was ok...so its not great but even GOTY's have weaknesses. Three dimensional characters with full character development. And the only Deus Ex Machina was subverted and turned on its head.

It won because this year is SO GOD DAMN MEDIOCRE.
#113 Posted by Vatusus (4807 posts) -

[QUOTE="Zeviander"]Ending sucked. Choices sucked. Forced multiplayer sucked. Lore sucked. Level design sucked. One-dimensional characters sucked. Deus ex machina sucked. inb4 "you just don't get it"texasgoldrush
and yet it won....maybe because you are wrong.

How dare you say that about a random person on the internet? He clearly knows more than all the critics that praised the game :P

now seriously, I havent played it yet but from what I read most people say the game is good besides the ending. Really? are people cr4ping all over an entire game because of the ending? Again, even though I havent seen it yet I'm absolutely sure people are overreacting about it. If the game deserves Goty by itself I dont see how it must be denied to it because of a bad ending. Thats idiotic and imature to say the least.

#114 Posted by SciFiRPGfan (694 posts) -

Fan vote influenced by the haters. Remember the villian vote here on Gamespot where Sephiroth was knocked out the first round by a Gears of War baddie......as much as I think Seph is overrated, that was clear hatred that drove that poll. I trust editors more than "fans".texasgoldrush

You are welcomed to trust whoever you want... as long as you won't expect others to necessarily share your opinion that is.

That Gear's guy actually had a pretty deep run in that tournament tho and Gear's community can actually be pretty active at times - one tweet from Rod Fergusson and Gears went from terribly loosing to Fallout to nearly kicking its butt within mere hours in franchise deatmatch. :) So, who's to say that it was based on "hatred" and not on love for Gears.

Personally, I am trying to avoid making some arbitrary standards or labels such as "fanboys", "haters", "drones" and whatnot (unless provoked too much :P). People have their opinions and they have their reasons. Sometimes I agree with them and sometimes I don't... regardless of whether they are random forumites, reviewers or developers. To start dismissing some groups of them though would be unjustified elitism (I have read plenty of intelligent posts and contributions as well as plenty of questionable reviews) and slippery slope (who's to say that being "this much wrong" is still okay but "that much" is not) IMO, so I disagree with that mindset.

Besides, trully inspiring games tend to have much more supporters than haters anyway. Previous Mass Effects used to do amazingly well with Mass Effect 1 winning the best story deatmatch, Mass Effect 2 placing second and loosing only to heavily promoted and campaigned Starcraft 2 in 2010's deatmatch and both Mass Effects doing pretty well in franchise deatmatch... so the franchise is / was obviously loved a lot.

For ME3 to go out so early, it might be a sign that dissatisfied people might not be just a minority. And when the they stop being a minority, the lines between what is "justified" and "unjustified criticism" start to be blurry. But, it's too early to make conclusions. Most of public polls haven't even started.

#115 Posted by texasgoldrush (9265 posts) -

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="Stringerboy"]

Also to add to the pile:

-Priority Earth sucked

-Kai Leng

-Terrible "sidequests"

-The opening sucked

-Only one hub world

-No planet exploration whatsoever

Stringerboy

-Priority Earth sucked No it didn't...It didn't take the tone you wanted. -Kai Leng So, not an important character -Terrible "sidequests" So the Grissom Academy, the Ardat Yakshi Monastary, the Rachni mission, the Geth Consensus, the Ex Cerberus Scientists were terrible sidequests? Wow -The opening sucked Was fine -Only one hub world So...ME1 had one hub as well. -No planet exploration whatsoever So lets waste are time and explore while th eReapers are attacking...makes sense.

- What tone? Slogging through mindless waves of enemies with no music and a bland background?

- He looks like something out of a japanese Anime, no place in Mass Effect whatsover, Harbinger should have been the main antagonist

- I'm talking about the stupid eavesdropping quests where you to have deliver random items to people. Couldn't thry think of anything better than that?

- The opening was confusing and didn't give you enough time to feel like Earth was special. Maybe if we got to walk around a bit and interact with characters it would have been better.

- ME1 had Feros, Noveria and the citadel, and ME2 had Ilium, Omega and the Citadel. Now there's only one. No excuse here.

- I agree it would have been slighty peculiar plot wise but they could have at least had SOMETHING. This was kind of what mass effect was supposed to be about anyway, exploring a galaxy.

- What tone? Slogging through mindless waves of enemies with no music and a bland background? And you didn't realize their was music in the mission, and you didn't read the logs throughout the mission expalining what happened during the Reaper occupation. Instead of an epic tone, it strikes a tragic and frightening tone. - He looks like something out of a japanese Anime, no place in Mass Effect whatsover, Harbinger should have been the main antagonist Yet he was introduced in Retribution, before ME3 by the writer that left. And yet, he is a minor villian. Harbinger? Are you kidding? - I'm talking about the stupid eavesdropping quests where you to have deliver random items to people. Couldn't thry think of anything better than that? And yet, such a small part of the game. - The opening was confusing and didn't give you enough time to feel like Earth was special. Maybe if we got to walk around a bit and interact with characters it would have been better. Not at all confusing and matches Bioware's style of fast action paced intros. ME2's intro after the Normandy sequence was worse. - ME1 had Feros, Noveria and the citadel, and ME2 had Ilium, Omega and the Citadel. Now there's only one. No excuse here Feros and Noveria? Not really significant. ME1 has only one real hub, the Citadel. Those other places are as much hubs as Aria's bunker in ME3. Nevermind the Reapers and how they shrink the galaxy. - I agree it would have been slighty peculiar plot wise but they could have at least had SOMETHING. This was kind of what mass effect was supposed to be about anyway, exploring a galaxy. and yet it becomes a massive plot hole in ME1 because you are exploring planets when they are supposed to chasing Saren in a race against time.
#116 Posted by MikeMoose (3075 posts) -

I agree with this. Game was amazing. I would like to say I don't understand all the hate it receved, but knowing peoples whiny nature it really didn't surprise me. People will cry and complain about anything.

#117 Posted by texasgoldrush (9265 posts) -

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]Fan vote influenced by the haters. Remember the villian vote here on Gamespot where Sephiroth was knocked out the first round by a Gears of War baddie......as much as I think Seph is overrated, that was clear hatred that drove that poll. I trust editors more than "fans".SciFiRPGfan


You are welcomed to trust whoever you want... as long as you won't expect others to necessarily share your opinion that is.

That Gear's guy actually had a pretty deep run in that tournament tho and Gear's community can actually be pretty active at times - one tweet from Rod Fergusson and Gears went from terribly loosing to Fallout to nearly kicking its butt within mere hours in franchise deatmatch. :) So, who's to say that it was based on "hatred" and not on love for Gears.

Personally, I am trying to avoid making some arbitrary standards or labels such as "fanboys", "haters", "drones" and whatnot (unless provoked too much :P). People have their opinions and they have their reasons. Sometimes I agree with them and sometimes I don't... regardless of whether they are random forumites, reviewers or developers. To start dismissing some groups of them though would be unjustified elitism (I have read plenty of intelligent posts and contributions as well as plenty of questionable reviews) and slippery slope (who's to say that being "this much wrong" is still okay but "that much" is not) IMO, so I disagree with that mindset.

Besides, trully inspiring games tend to have much more supporters than haters anyway. Previous Mass Effects used to do amazingly well with Mass Effect 1 winning the best story deatmatch, Mass Effect 2 placing second and loosing only to heavily promoted and campaigned Starcraft 2 in 2010's deatmatch and both Mass Effects doing pretty well in franchise deatmatch... so the franchise is / was obviously loved a lot.

For ME3 to go out so early, it might be a sign that dissatisfied people might not be just a minority. And when the they stop being a minority, the lines between what is "justified" and "unjustified criticism" start to be blurry. But, it's too early to make conclusions. Most of public polls haven't even started.

And you are saying that the Gears base is stronger than the FFVII base? Nevermind the anti Final Fantasy backlash. How does Kefka go from blowing out his first opponent and then losing to Sweet Tooth. Backlash has a lot to do with it. Can you tell me Twisted Metal has a huge fanbase, when the series isn't as hot as it used to be? This is why I don't trust internet polls or user scores on Metacritic, because haters are going to be louder than fans...look at Call of Duty.
#118 Posted by SaltyMeatballs (25155 posts) -
Not too surprising when I look at all the games I played. Disappointing ending and not as good as ME2 for me, but an immensely enjoyable game nonetheless.
#119 Posted by mems_1224 (47448 posts) -

[QUOTE="mems_1224"][QUOTE="DarkLink77"] Only by people who don't know a damn thing about science-fiction.DarkLink77

you remind me of him

Never compare me to someone who likes the garbage that is Star Trek ever again.

<3
#120 Posted by TheDidact (3981 posts) -

[QUOTE="Zeviander"]Ending sucked. Choices sucked. Forced multiplayer sucked. Lore sucked. Level design sucked. One-dimensional characters sucked. Deus ex machina sucked. inb4 "you just don't get it"Stringerboy

Also to add to the pile:

-Priority Earth sucked Didact: The atmosphere and gameplay segments were good but anybody who played ME2 should be very dissapointed with it. I expected to lose a big chunk of War Assets in the first fight alone. I expected to assign different races to different tasks like with squad mates in ME2, that didn't happen in ME3.

-Kai Leng Didact: He would have been so much more meaningfull had he been a squadmate in ME2. He should have at least shown up earlier in the game. Although I admit the scene with Thane was fantastic. p>

-Terrible "sidequests" Didact: 90% of them sucked because they were either fetch quests or recycled multiplayer maps. The Grissom and Geth missions were alright but I would have preferred loyalty missions like in ME2.

-The opening sucked Didact: It did. Arrival set up this huge Shepard vs Batarians trial to take place on Earth, and it wasn't in the game. (being mentioned is doesn't matter). Imagine Shepard in handcuffs, the Hegemony wanting to kill Shepard right there but Andersonr and Ashley defending him, the Council Holograms trying to make sense of everything, Shepard saying the Reapers are coming and nobody believes him. And to top it all off, the Reapers invading at the climax of the trial in an ultimate moment of irony. Now that would have been great.

-Only one hub world Didact: Apparently Illium was supposed to be in the game. I guess it got cut.

-No planet exploration whatsoever, all you do now is shoot people. Didact: They did a better job with planet scanning than ME2 but I wish there was more in level exploration.

Add Javik to that. It was so underwhelming. Imagine finding a Forerunner in Halo 3 to help stop Truth and Gravemind but is hardly used in the game. In the leaked script, Javik was originally the Catalyst. We know how that changed.....
#121 Posted by texasgoldrush (9265 posts) -
[QUOTE="Stringerboy"]

[QUOTE="Zeviander"]Ending sucked. Choices sucked. Forced multiplayer sucked. Lore sucked. Level design sucked. One-dimensional characters sucked. Deus ex machina sucked. inb4 "you just don't get it"TheDidact

Also to add to the pile:

-Priority Earth sucked Didact: The atmosphere and gameplay segments were good but anybody who played ME2 should be very dissapointed with it. I expected to lose a big chunk of War Assets in the first fight alone. I expected to assign different races to different tasks like with squad mates in ME2, that didn't happen in ME3.

-Kai Leng Didact: He would have been so much more meaningfull had he been a squadmate in ME2. He should have at least shown up earlier in the game. Although I admit the scene with Thane was fantastic. p>

-Terrible "sidequests" Didact: 90% of them sucked because they were either fetch quests or recycled multiplayer maps. The Grissom and Geth missions were alright but I would have preferred loyalty missions like in ME2.

-The opening sucked Didact: It did. Arrival set up this huge Shepard vs Batarians trial to take place on Earth, and it wasn't in the game. (being mentioned is doesn't matter). Imagine Shepard in handcuffs, the Hegemony wanting to kill Shepard right there but Andersonr and Ashley defending him, the Council Holograms trying to make sense of everything, Shepard saying the Reapers are coming and nobody believes him. And to top it all off, the Reapers invading at the climax of the trial in an ultimate moment of irony. Now that would have been great.

-Only one hub world Didact: Apparently Illium was supposed to be in the game. I guess it got cut.

-No planet exploration whatsoever, all you do now is shoot people. Didact: They did a better job with planet scanning than ME2 but I wish there was more in level exploration.

Add Javik to that. It was so underwhelming. Imagine finding a Forerunner in Halo 3 to help stop Truth and Gravemind but is hardly used in the game. In the leaked script, Javik was originally the Catalyst. We know how that changed.....

Javik forms the fundmental core of the mistakes and the failure of the past cycle to defeat the Reapers, he is pretty important thematically in the narrative and helps develop Liara as a character as well. And with Javik being the Catalyst, the Reaper AI master is then even less established in the story before its reveal. You seriously want the criticism that the Reaper master comes out of nowhere to be even worse? Think about it.
#122 Posted by TheDidact (3981 posts) -
[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="TheDidact"][QUOTE="Stringerboy"]

Also to add to the pile:

-Priority Earth sucked Didact: The atmosphere and gameplay segments were good but anybody who played ME2 should be very dissapointed with it. I expected to lose a big chunk of War Assets in the first fight alone. I expected to assign different races to different tasks like with squad mates in ME2, that didn't happen in ME3.

-Kai Leng Didact: He would have been so much more meaningfull had he been a squadmate in ME2. He should have at least shown up earlier in the game. Although I admit the scene with Thane was fantastic. p>

-Terrible "sidequests" Didact: 90% of them sucked because they were either fetch quests or recycled multiplayer maps. The Grissom and Geth missions were alright but I would have preferred loyalty missions like in ME2.

-The opening sucked Didact: It did. Arrival set up this huge Shepard vs Batarians trial to take place on Earth, and it wasn't in the game. (being mentioned is doesn't matter). Imagine Shepard in handcuffs, the Hegemony wanting to kill Shepard right there but Andersonr and Ashley defending him, the Council Holograms trying to make sense of everything, Shepard saying the Reapers are coming and nobody believes him. And to top it all off, the Reapers invading at the climax of the trial in an ultimate moment of irony. Now that would have been great.

-Only one hub world Didact: Apparently Illium was supposed to be in the game. I guess it got cut.

-No planet exploration whatsoever, all you do now is shoot people. Didact: They did a better job with planet scanning than ME2 but I wish there was more in level exploration.

Add Javik to that. It was so underwhelming. Imagine finding a Forerunner in Halo 3 to help stop Truth and Gravemind but is hardly used in the game. In the leaked script, Javik was originally the Catalyst. We know how that changed.....

Javik forms the fundmental core of the mistakes and the failure of the past cycle to defeat the Reapers, he is pretty important thematically in the narrative and helps develop Liara as a character as well. And with Javik being the Catalyst, the Reaper AI master is then even less established in the story before its reveal. You seriously want the criticism that the Reaper master comes out of nowhere to be even worse? Think about it.

Javik did affect the story that way but the problem is the fact that he's $10 DLC. The Reapers didn't need to have an AI master. ME2 and the Codex say that Harbinger was the leader and first reaper and they could have kept it as such. As a theory, maybe after he's created, he goes rampant and indoctrinates others into creating more Reapers until there's a whole army. But don't get me wrong, I'm a big ME fan. ME3 is my second favorite game this year. I thought that Tuchanka and Rannoch were some of the most perfectly executed levels and story arcs this gen. Thane's part was great. So was Garrus. I actually liked Ashley :cool: I loved the openness of the Citadel. I just didn't like the lack of choices in the final mission compared to ME2.
#123 Posted by texasgoldrush (9265 posts) -
[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="TheDidact"]Add Javik to that. It was so underwhelming. Imagine finding a Forerunner in Halo 3 to help stop Truth and Gravemind but is hardly used in the game. In the leaked script, Javik was originally the Catalyst. We know how that changed.....TheDidact
Javik forms the fundmental core of the mistakes and the failure of the past cycle to defeat the Reapers, he is pretty important thematically in the narrative and helps develop Liara as a character as well. And with Javik being the Catalyst, the Reaper AI master is then even less established in the story before its reveal. You seriously want the criticism that the Reaper master comes out of nowhere to be even worse? Think about it.

Javik did affect the story that way but the problem is the fact that he's $10 DLC. The Reapers didn't need to have an AI master. ME2 and the Codex say that Harbinger was the leader and first reaper and they could have kept it as such. As a theory, maybe after he's created, he goes rampant and indoctrinates others into creating more Reapers until there's a whole army. But don't get me wrong, I'm a big ME fan. ME3 is my second favorite game this year. I thought that Tuchanka and Rannoch were some of the most perfectly executed levels and story arcs this gen. Thane's part was great. So was Garrus. I actually liked Ashley :cool: I loved the openness of the Citadel. I just didn't like the lack of choices in the final mission compared to ME2.

The Codex is based off limited knowledge and can even be wrong from later revelations. And hell, a ME2 codex entry that was cut foreshadowed the ME3 ending. The Catalyst is not even a master, its a collective consensus. It tells you this. Harbinger is also the first Reaper after the Catalyst itself. ME2's endgame choices come from good decision, stupid decision ones, not true choices. If you are smart, everyone lives, if you are an idiot, people die.
#124 Posted by SciFiRPGfan (694 posts) -

And you are saying that the Gears base is stronger than the FFVII base? Nevermind the anti Final Fantasy backlash. How does Kefka go from blowing out his first opponent and then losing to Sweet Tooth.texasgoldrush


I don't know, but some of Epic's developers have a ton of followers on Twitter, Facebook and whatnot. Do the FF7's developers have the same?

Passion for games is surely a strange thing. Sometimes a mediocrely selling game (Mass Effect 2) can destroy the public polls and sometimes a well selling franchise can underperform. But it's no less strange and random than whims and fancies of reviewers and with public polls, one can at least be sure that there are actually plenty of people who live and breathe those games (sometimes maybe too much).

Backlash has a lot to do with it. Can you tell me Twisted Metal has a huge fanbase, when the series isn't as hot as it used to be? This is why I don't trust internet polls or user scores on Metacritic, because haters are going to be louder than fans...look at Call of Duty.


However, the games whose fanbases consider them good tend to actually get out of most of problems.

Remeber Portal 2? The game was reviewbombed as well. Especially because of some expensive day 1 DLCs or something like that. Yet the game has recovered very nicely because its core fans actually cared enough and managed to outvote and "outshout" the "haters". That's dedication and passion I can respect. I have never played Portal 2, but this feat of its fanbase alone tells me that there must be something extraordinary about that game. "Something worth fighting for" like Jim Raynor would say. :)

Or, what about Mass Effect 2? Do you remember the boards some months after ME2? A lot of people wanted to complain. About Bioware abandoning their old ways, about Mass Effect being no longer RPG, about how style was prefferd at the expense of realism, etc., etc.

Yet, the term "Biodrone" was almost at its peak. Why? Because for every "hater" there were at least two or three equally dedicated "fanboys" who were willing to go out of their ways to argue with him for hours. And criticism was nearly eradicated from boards for some time. And that's another example of dedication I would respect even if I wasn't a fan of Mass Effects myself (which I am).

But not all games can do that to people. Only the ones, that truly stand out in the eyes of many people. So maybe those that can't, aren't worth being considered the best (of the year) in the first place.

Also, Call of Duty always does great at Golden Joystic Awards which is the largest and most prestigious public award (and the one that developers care the most out of public awards based on their tweets, posts and whatnot).

#125 Posted by padaporra (3432 posts) -

Well deserved.

ME3 is a fantastic game. Much better than the first ME, but not as good as the second.

#126 Posted by texasgoldrush (9265 posts) -

Well deserved.

ME3 is a fantastic game. Much better than the first ME, but not as good as the second.

padaporra
Really, the games individually are not as great as the sum of the parts. ME1 lacks the character development that the next two games will provide the characters. Part of this is due to the flawed character writing under Drew Karpyshyn. ME2 has the mid series crisis where it needs the first game to set things up and the third game to conclude its story threads, so its the least focused plotwise of the three. OXM called it the best and the worst of the series. I think ME3 gives more value to ME2, especially the mordin and tali missions. ME3 played on its own lacks the set up to have the plot deliver home, its all consquences from past choices. This is why the Wii U version is getting lower scores.
#127 Posted by Peredith (2310 posts) -

So did they explain who created the Crucible?

#128 Posted by TheEroica (13826 posts) -

So did they explain who created the Crucible?

Peredith
It was pieced together over many cycles. Basically with each harvest organics came a little closer each time to stop the cycles...
#129 Posted by Peredith (2310 posts) -

[QUOTE="Peredith"]

So did they explain who created the Crucible?

TheEroica

It was pieced together over many cycles. Basically with each harvest organics came a little closer each time to stop the cycles...

I know, but who was the original race who started it? It couldn't have been organic, because no organic knew the Catalyst existed, so who created it?

#130 Posted by texasgoldrush (9265 posts) -

[QUOTE="TheEroica"][QUOTE="Peredith"]

So did they explain who created the Crucible?

Peredith

It was pieced together over many cycles. Basically with each harvest organics came a little closer each time to stop the cycles...

I know, but who was the original race who started it? It couldn't have been organic, because no organic knew the Catalyst existed, so who created it?

They have an idea...remember the Prothean VI thought it was the Citadel. Its really not that contrived.....a power blast through the technology the Reapers created, using tech against them. The Prothean VI Vigil knew that the Reapers created the Citadel.
#131 Posted by locopatho (20421 posts) -
Well deserved, it's a brilliant game. I'd have a tough time choosing between ME3, Halo 4 and Ass Creed 3.
#132 Posted by Peredith (2310 posts) -

[QUOTE="Peredith"]

[QUOTE="TheEroica"] It was pieced together over many cycles. Basically with each harvest organics came a little closer each time to stop the cycles...texasgoldrush

I know, but who was the original race who started it? It couldn't have been organic, because no organic knew the Catalyst existed, so who created it?

They have an idea...remember the Prothean VI thought it was the Citadel. Its really not that contrived.....a power blast through the technology the Reapers created, using tech against them. The Prothean VI Vigil knew that the Reapers created the Citadel.

What? :? I just want know who created the Crucible, why there were options to control and synthesize, and how they knew how to interfere and manipulate a several million year old Universe ruling AI.

#133 Posted by TheEroica (13826 posts) -

[QUOTE="TheEroica"][QUOTE="Peredith"]

So did they explain who created the Crucible?

Peredith

It was pieced together over many cycles. Basically with each harvest organics came a little closer each time to stop the cycles...

I know, but who was the original race who started it? It couldn't have been organic, because no organic knew the Catalyst existed, so who created it?

Im not sure it will ever be unveiled and i dont know it needs to be... but as an invested gamer i hope we find out at some point. Perhaps it was purposely left by the catalyst to ultimately give people choice... or perhaps the citidel and crucible were designed for use by the reapers and in some capacity and organic discovered its powerin an eaelier cycle making its construction and use the only means to stop the reapers.
#134 Posted by texasgoldrush (9265 posts) -
[QUOTE="Peredith"]

[QUOTE="TheEroica"] It was pieced together over many cycles. Basically with each harvest organics came a little closer each time to stop the cycles...TheEroica

I know, but who was the original race who started it? It couldn't have been organic, because no organic knew the Catalyst existed, so who created it?

Im not sure it will ever be unveiled and i dont know it needs to be... but as an invested gamer i hope we find out at some point. Perhaps it was purposely left by the catalyst to ultimately give people choice... or perhaps the citidel and crucible were designed for use by the reapers and in some capacity and organic discovered its powerin an eaelier cycle making its construction and use the only means to stop the reapers.

The plot point I want want aswered more is the Keepers....there is a Citadel DLC incoming by the main ME3 team (Montreal did the Omega DLC), may address both these issues, but really, the team has to avoid overforeshadowing the Catalyst and Levithan came very close to doing this, if they didn't do this.
#135 Posted by biggest_loser (24086 posts) -
[QUOTE="CanYouDiglt"]And it deserves it and many many more.TheEroica
Agreed and eff those who are hoping on the hate bandwagon... every game has flaws sure, but you cant name many games this generation rhat made you care about the characters and story as much as mass effect.... thats a fact... sure by novel standards theres more to be desired but by video game standards its amazing.

The writing is cringing lol
#136 Posted by texasgoldrush (9265 posts) -

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="Peredith"]

I know, but who was the original race who started it? It couldn't have been organic, because no organic knew the Catalyst existed, so who created it?

Peredith

They have an idea...remember the Prothean VI thought it was the Citadel. Its really not that contrived.....a power blast through the technology the Reapers created, using tech against them. The Prothean VI Vigil knew that the Reapers created the Citadel.

What? :? I just want know who created the Crucible, why there were options to control and synthesize, and how they knew how to interfere and manipulate a several million year old Universe ruling AI.

It may have Control because factions in the past tried to use the Crucible to control the Reapers instead of destroy them....this is one reason why the Protheans failed...they had their own Cerberus. The trigger for synthesis is Shepard herself. This is the Catalyst's ideal solution, the solution it tried to control evolution through the relay network for. Levithan dropped a huge revelation in that it is still looking for the ideal solution, and sets up the relay network to find this solution. It turns out to be Shepard......this is when the final ending actually becomes very good.
#137 Posted by texasgoldrush (9265 posts) -
[QUOTE="TheEroica"][QUOTE="CanYouDiglt"]And it deserves it and many many more.biggest_loser
Agreed and eff those who are hoping on the hate bandwagon... every game has flaws sure, but you cant name many games this generation rhat made you care about the characters and story as much as mass effect.... thats a fact... sure by novel standards theres more to be desired but by video game standards its amazing.

The writing is cringing lol

A few spots yes, but all games are like this.
#138 Posted by TheEroica (13826 posts) -
[QUOTE="TheEroica"][QUOTE="CanYouDiglt"]And it deserves it and many many more.biggest_loser
Agreed and eff those who are hoping on the hate bandwagon... every game has flaws sure, but you cant name many games this generation rhat made you care about the characters and story as much as mass effect.... thats a fact... sure by novel standards theres more to be desired but by video game standards its amazing.

The writing is cringing lol

Its not cringing... its not trying to be a novel, its trying to be an action packed game with big moments, endearing characters and a desire to save the galaxy... why dont we all get up in arms when every jrpg releases with some of the shiitiest cliches... how does uncharted skate by on have insanely bland stories and brandon frasier type main character... you guys deflect irritation over narrative at the wrong games. Mass effect is an example of good in gaming.
#139 Posted by TheEroica (13826 posts) -
[QUOTE="TheEroica"][QUOTE="Peredith"]

I know, but who was the original race who started it? It couldn't have been organic, because no organic knew the Catalyst existed, so who created it?

texasgoldrush
Im not sure it will ever be unveiled and i dont know it needs to be... but as an invested gamer i hope we find out at some point. Perhaps it was purposely left by the catalyst to ultimately give people choice... or perhaps the citidel and crucible were designed for use by the reapers and in some capacity and organic discovered its powerin an eaelier cycle making its construction and use the only means to stop the reapers.

The plot point I want want aswered more is the Keepers....there is a Citadel DLC incoming by the main ME3 team (Montreal did the Omega DLC), may address both these issues, but really, the team has to avoid overforeshadowing the Catalyst and Levithan came very close to doing this, if they didn't do this.

Im down for that... the keepers have been an intriguing side story since mass effect 1.... i love that they just exist to care for the citadel... yeah id like that dlc.
#140 Posted by TheDidact (3981 posts) -
[QUOTE="TheEroica"][QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="TheEroica"] Im not sure it will ever be unveiled and i dont know it needs to be... but as an invested gamer i hope we find out at some point. Perhaps it was purposely left by the catalyst to ultimately give people choice... or perhaps the citidel and crucible were designed for use by the reapers and in some capacity and organic discovered its powerin an eaelier cycle making its construction and use the only means to stop the reapers.

The plot point I want want aswered more is the Keepers....there is a Citadel DLC incoming by the main ME3 team (Montreal did the Omega DLC), may address both these issues, but really, the team has to avoid overforeshadowing the Catalyst and Levithan came very close to doing this, if they didn't do this.

Im down for that... the keepers have been an intriguing side story since mass effect 1.... i love that they just exist to care for the citadel... yeah id like that dlc.

We need a DLC pack that consists only of awesome missions with Garrus. :cool: Heck, make Wrex a squadmate again and have him jump in on the action. :)
#141 Posted by jg4xchamp (48716 posts) -

[QUOTE="mems_1224"][QUOTE="DarkLink77"] Only by people who don't know a damn thing about science-fiction.DarkLink77

you remind me of him

Never compare me to someone who likes the garbage that is Star Trek ever again.



>Likes the Halo universe

>Acts like he has standards for science fiction universes

Ridiculous

#142 Posted by charizard1605 (58911 posts) -
[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="ms555"][QUOTE="DarkLink77"] Only by people who don't know a damn thing about science-fiction.

Well then there must be hundreds of idiots

They're not idiots. They're just completely ignorant of science fiction. Tell me, have you ever read William S. Gibson? J.G. Ballard? Robert A. Heinlein? Asimov? Arthur C. Clarke? Ursula K. LeGuin? Phillip K. Dick?

^ Word. Mass Effect as a franchise is brilliant, don't get me wrong, and a watershed moment for games (at least the first two games are), but as a science fiction story, Mass Effect does not even begin to compare to the best science fiction stories out there. In addition to the ones DarkLink named, there are so many more, like Frank Herbert, Orson Scott Card, John Ringo, Michael Crichton, Stephen Baxter... Anyone who reads true science fiction will understand how standard Mass Effect's story and lore really is. The lore and story is not the franchise's strength anyway; it is the storyTELLING that sets Mass Effect apart (again, for the first two games).
#143 Posted by Inconsistancy (8094 posts) -

[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"]

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="WTA2k5"]

I don't think Mass Effect 3 is a bad game by any means, but I also don't think that a narrative-centric game which implements one of the worst deus ex machinas in recent memory should be winning GOTY awards

texasgoldrush

wrong read my comment in this thread on how it SUBVERTS the Deus Ex Machina.

Just because you "physically" reversed it, doesn't mean you didn't do the trope. Within Greek plays, the trope's 'function' is: a "god" that serves to solve all the conflicts at the end of a story (aka, cosmic hand waving often due to poor writing/rushed work).

f = ma

ma = f

f/a = m

It doesn't matter which way you do it, it's still the same.

Wrong

Its not a Deus Ex Machina because it was established in the story way before that the Crucible and the Catalyst was the solution to the Reapers. The only twist here was the Catalyst is not what you thought it was. Remember the plot was about searching for the Catalyst.

In fact, the original draft, Javik was the Catalyst, and the Reaper master was called the Guardian, who was never foreshadowed and did come out of the blue. This is one reason why they made that character the Catalyst, to make the story far less contrived.

I'll admit, I made a mistake! I didn't grab enough of your quotes for mine to be clear.

"Never mind the ending was a classic DEM does backwards... a classic DEM has a god pulled down by a "crane" to contrivedly solve the problems of the mortals and the protagonist. In ME3, the protagonist gets the "crane" to solve the problem of the god (which causes problems of the mortals). So basically, there is no true DEM as a literary device."-you

Subverting it would require 'not using it' (the fact that you said ^ subverts DXM, is why I lazily grabbed just the one quote)

F = ma, ma = F, F/a = m, F/m = a is all the same. To subvert, present F = ma as the possible solution, and use e = mc^2 instead.

"Wait wait, stop the game, guys fix this ::developer walks into scene:: (DXM WARNING). Oh wait, there's the button. Nevermind guys, I got it (subverted).

That said, synth has no explanation in the story, is presented as a "new ability" and doesn't fit the universe at all and happens to solve all of the problems to perfection. While self-destruct/control can at least be explained as commands from a satellite and don't necessarily solve everything.

----

"-The opening sucked-someone (too lazy to find out who)

Was fine"-you

Not really, Starbrat is an undeveloped character that you're supposed to care about just because he's a kid who dies. And Earth is far too rushed to make it feel important. (I have a much larger issue with starbrat than the ending)

#144 Posted by Minishdriveby (10128 posts) -
I thought the conclusion was a let down for many reasons. The ending was actually very low on my list of complaints.
#145 Posted by Minishdriveby (10128 posts) -
[QUOTE="CanYouDiglt"]And it deserves it and many many more.TheEroica
Agreed and eff those who are hoping on the hate bandwagon... every game has flaws sure, but you cant name many games this generation rhat made you care about the characters and story as much as mass effect.... thats a fact... sure by novel standards theres more to be desired but by video game standards its amazing.

Yeah and then they threw all the good characters I cared about in Mass Effect 2 away.
#146 Posted by texasgoldrush (9265 posts) -

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="Inconsistancy"]

Just because you "physically" reversed it, doesn't mean you didn't do the trope. Within Greek plays, the trope's 'function' is: a "god" that serves to solve all the conflicts at the end of a story (aka, cosmic hand waving often due to poor writing/rushed work).

f = ma

ma = f

f/a = m

It doesn't matter which way you do it, it's still the same.

Inconsistancy

Wrong

Its not a Deus Ex Machina because it was established in the story way before that the Crucible and the Catalyst was the solution to the Reapers. The only twist here was the Catalyst is not what you thought it was. Remember the plot was about searching for the Catalyst.

In fact, the original draft, Javik was the Catalyst, and the Reaper master was called the Guardian, who was never foreshadowed and did come out of the blue. This is one reason why they made that character the Catalyst, to make the story far less contrived.

I'll admit, I made a mistake! I didn't grab enough of your quotes for mine to be clear.

"Never mind the ending was a classic DEM does backwards... a classic DEM has a god pulled down by a "crane" to contrivedly solve the problems of the mortals and the protagonist. In ME3, the protagonist gets the "crane" to solve the problem of the god (which causes problems of the mortals). So basically, there is no true DEM as a literary device."-you

Subverting it would require 'not using it' (the fact that you said ^ subverts DXM, is why I lazily grabbed just the one quote)

F = ma, ma = F, F/a = m, F/m = a is all the same. To subvert, present F = ma as the possible solution, and use e = mc^2 instead.

"Wait wait, stop the game, guys fix this ::developer walks into scene:: (DXM WARNING). Oh wait, there's the button. Nevermind guys, I got it (subverted).

That said, synth has no explanation in the story, is presented as a "new ability" and doesn't fit the universe at all and happens to solve all of the problems to perfection. While self-destruct/control can at least be explained as commands from a satellite and don't necessarily solve everything.

----

"-The opening sucked-someone (too lazy to find out who)

Was fine"-you

Not really, Starbrat is an undeveloped character that you're supposed to care about just because he's a kid who dies. And Earth is far too rushed to make it feel important. (I have a much larger issue with starbrat than the ending)

And tell me how the ending is Deus Ex Machina....its not, unless you want to make the Catalyst the protagonist. This is where the subversion comes in. The God of the Machine is powerless to solve the problem, thats the point. the game tells you this, he needs Shepard. Nevermind the fact that Levithan makes this even more of the case. Synthesis is not new. Ever heard of Saren? He was the posterboy for Synthesis who thought that organics and synthetics should combine and become perfect, with none of the weakness of either. He is to synthesis wat TIM is to Control Oh, and The Catalyst was underdeveloped in the ORIGINAL ending...he is far more fleshed out in the EC and Leviathan, or are you going to ignore this fact and keep claiming he is underdeveloped? This is the problem with ME3 deractors, they literally IGNORE clear facts that disprove their cirticisms.
#147 Posted by Ballroompirate (23279 posts) -

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="ms555"] Well then there must be hundreds of idiotscharizard1605
They're not idiots. They're just completely ignorant of science fiction. Tell me, have you ever read William S. Gibson? J.G. Ballard? Robert A. Heinlein? Asimov? Arthur C. Clarke? Ursula K. LeGuin? Phillip K. Dick?

^ Word. Mass Effect as a franchise is brilliant, don't get me wrong, and a watershed moment for games (at least the first two games are), but as a science fiction story, Mass Effect does not even begin to compare to the best science fiction stories out there. In addition to the ones DarkLink named, there are so many more, like Frank Herbert, Orson Scott Card, John Ringo, Michael Crichton, Stephen Baxter... Anyone who reads true science fiction will understand how standard Mass Effect's story and lore really is. The lore and story is not the franchise's strength anyway; it is the storyTELLING that sets Mass Effect apart (again, for the first two games).

Frank Herbert- is awesome (the only amazing writer you listed actually)

Orson Scott- Overrated

John Ringo- Sucks

John Crichton- so so, only liked his work on Jurassic Park which the novel was better than the movie

Stephen Baxter- don't care at all about him

#148 Posted by texasgoldrush (9265 posts) -
[QUOTE="TheEroica"][QUOTE="CanYouDiglt"]And it deserves it and many many more.Minishdriveby
Agreed and eff those who are hoping on the hate bandwagon... every game has flaws sure, but you cant name many games this generation rhat made you care about the characters and story as much as mass effect.... thats a fact... sure by novel standards theres more to be desired but by video game standards its amazing.

Yeah and then they threw all the good characters I cared about in Mass Effect 2 away.

Wrong Every character got its closure that was a main cast member.
#149 Posted by texasgoldrush (9265 posts) -

[QUOTE="charizard1605"][QUOTE="DarkLink77"] They're not idiots. They're just completely ignorant of science fiction. Tell me, have you ever read William S. Gibson? J.G. Ballard? Robert A. Heinlein? Asimov? Arthur C. Clarke? Ursula K. LeGuin? Phillip K. Dick?Ballroompirate

^ Word. Mass Effect as a franchise is brilliant, don't get me wrong, and a watershed moment for games (at least the first two games are), but as a science fiction story, Mass Effect does not even begin to compare to the best science fiction stories out there. In addition to the ones DarkLink named, there are so many more, like Frank Herbert, Orson Scott Card, John Ringo, Michael Crichton, Stephen Baxter... Anyone who reads true science fiction will understand how standard Mass Effect's story and lore really is. The lore and story is not the franchise's strength anyway; it is the storyTELLING that sets Mass Effect apart (again, for the first two games).

Frank Herbert- is awesome (the only amazing writer you listed actually)

Orson Scott- Overrated

John Ringo- Sucks

John Crichton- so so, only liked his work on Jurassic Park which the novel was better than the movie

Stephen Baxter- don't care at all about him

This
#150 Posted by Jankarcop (9873 posts) -

4.5 user score. noone cares how much bioware payed off reviewers (which is proven)