The Ending Was Not ME3's Only Problem

Recommended Videos

Isalan

New member
Jun 9, 2008
687
0
0
Not too worried about the multiplayer (though it does suck for people who don't have a gold Xbox account, but PC here). Also, I'm pretty sure I did everything in the single player and ended up with 5000+ galactic readiness and no multiplayer played.

However, the plot holes and the quest tracking I completely agree with. The side quests (the non multiplayer training ones) were really very poor, essentially being giant galactic fetch quests, not helped by the fact that you then had to spend hours jogging round the citadel handing them in.

Oh, and never had a prob with the face thing. Always seemed a bit petty to complain when you could remake a similar, if not identical, face in the character creation in 5 mins or so.
 

Vault101

I'm in your mind fuzz
Sep 26, 2010
18,863
15
43
Scow2 said:
Suffice to say I question whether creator bias factors in to the way these conflicts play out :p Hell yeah there's creator bias. And then they justify how humans end up being better than everyone else: after all, in Mass Effect, they were awesome enough to become Specters and Council Members in less than 30 years after being discovered, then proceed to save the rest of the galaxy from three different, related threats.
this did kind of annoy me..especially how the Elcor/Volus/Hannar kind of set shoved to the sidelines

and the other races are really cool too
 

MisterShine

Him Diamond
Mar 9, 2010
1,133
0
0
Emiscary said:
1. "Galactic Readiness"
The endings barely change regardless. This might be a more serious point with the extended cut of the game.

Emiscary said:
2. The Quest Tracking
I had no issue with it.
Emiscary said:
3. Invisible Characters

4. Fuglyface Imports
Definitely unfortunate for those affected.

Emiscary said:
5. The Rachni
Mildly disappointing, sure. I don't know how much they were played up for the third one though..

Emiscary said:
6. "The Crucible"

Hey, a secret Prothean weapons plan archived on Mars! Why it wasn't mentioned until now?
Because it wasn't discovered until the time between ME2 and 3, which is directly told to you by Liara at the beginning of the game. It is further commented upon by other characters that there is a great deal still unknown in what they found on Mars.

Emiscary said:
It seemed like we were gonna have even more control over our squad's composition in the final installment... and then it came out.
Is that what it seemed like, or is that what you thought it would be like?

Emiscary said:
and some white guy who got run over by a tequila bootlegger is your muscle. Everyone else is sidelined, regardless of prior choice. Including your potential love interests.
Vega is Spanish or Hispanic, and he looks like a Rican to me. But anyway, yes it is unfortunate that some of the previous LI's got small roles, though the only ones I really feel sorry for are Jacob romancers. Ouch :(

Emiscary said:
8. So... if The Collectors had technology that could instantly seek out an immobilize entire populations...
Mordin developed a counter measure in ME2. It was probably advanced significantly between the two games. Also, the reapers probably assumed that they didn't need it.

Emiscary said:
Why the hell did it take *THE REAPERS* -y'know, the hyper-advanced biotechnological monstrosities that built a system of interstellar FTL relays- an entire game to round up and crush the human resistance?
We simply don't know how the human resistance 'did', other than they were not completely obliterated. Also we don't the time period was the game takes place in. Nor do we know human casualty numbers.

In closing: There are plenty of people who legitimately think that the only flaw worth mentioning is the ending (or, more likely, that most people think that flaw massively overshadows all the others). While its clear you don't think so, but I don't believe anyone would disagree with your right to hold that opinion. Also I broke the promise to myself I wouldn't post anymore about ME3... damn.
 

Scow2

New member
Aug 3, 2009
801
0
0
MisterShine said:
We simply don't know how the human resistance 'did', other than they were not completely obliterated. Also we don't the time period was the game takes place in. Nor do we know human casualty numbers.
FTL travel does fuck with Casuality.
 

Saviordd1

New member
Jan 2, 2011
2,455
0
0
Yeah...uh hu...alright lets do this.

1: Agree, but this was supposed to have a real impact, Casey Hudson ruined it.

2: Couldn't agree more, had no idea what the fuck to do in some cases.

3: Never ran into this, like ever, and I've played the PC AND Xbox version...

4: Agreed, bioware should get on that.

5: Yeah this was BS.

6: Listen to the dialogue, they just discovered this data in the system, this was new to everyone.

7: This is nitpicking and TO subjective for a quasi-objective list (Can't be truly objective naturally)

I liked how they made the crew actually feel like a family who's been through hell and back, they actually interacted also! I mean seriously, in ME2 I was wondering if the crew knew who else was on the goddamn team half the time.

The crew in ME3 was the best crew, since you really felt that connection that people who had been fighting next to each other for a long time would feel.

Not the static fuckers from ME1 and ME2.

8: Sooooooo the giant sentient star ships kilometers long that spew evil robot zombies and can level buildings wasn't powerful enough?

How about the fact that after a few WEEKS the reapers are invading 95% of the galaxy at once.

Or how they shatter fleets in moments.

Or level cities in blasts (Poor palaven)

Plus from ME1 vigil said this was a centuries long process, not a quick 2 week shin dig.

You're also underestimating determination. The resistance wasn't "Holding them off" anderson says they AVOIDED the reapers where possible.

Plus its inferred that Earth was the breeding ground for husks, so they wanted people mostly alive when possible.

The only time the resistance "holds the line" is the last mission when they are holding the line for the main army to get there (A lot like the french resistance in WW2)



So some of your points are very very valid, others are just stupid.
 

ZeroMachine

New member
Oct 11, 2008
4,397
0
0
You missed the fact that there weren't nearly as many dialogue choices as in the previous two games.

Still love the game to pieces, but in retrospect, unless they add a lot of TOTALLY AWESOME OMG THIS IS GREAT stuff with DLC, ME2 will remain my favorite.
 

Joshimodo

New member
Sep 13, 2008
1,956
0
0
fireaura08 said:
I heard that the most EMS you can get in SP alone is 3717.5. I don't have XBL Gold and I don't want to fork up the money for a subscription. Thanks a ton, Bioware.
I had higher before even touching the multiplayer...
 

pure.Wasted

New member
Oct 12, 2011
281
0
0
Emiscary said:
7. Writers Playing Favorites With Squadmates

Mass Effect 1 had a relatively small party that wanted for diversity. Mass Effect 2 had a huge cast of wildly different squadmates. What's more, you had the option of gaining their loyalty by spending time with/on them- or just ignoring them completely! It seemed like we were gonna have even more control over our squad's composition in the final installment... and then it came out. Here's the rundown: Garrus & Liara are your best friends and confidants, the Virmire survivor is back, Tali shows up eventually, EDI is your tech expert... and some white guy who got run over by a tequila bootlegger is your muscle. Everyone else is sidelined, regardless of prior choice. Including your potential love interests.
Lots of valid points... but not this one. Some characters were unanimously loved (Mordin, Wrex, Garrus). Others were unanimously hated (Jacob). It comes down to statistics. There's no incentive for Bioware to create a sprawling arc for Jacob when there are three people in the world who care about seeing him again, period. Likewise, there's no reason not to give Garrus a huge role when 99% of the fanbase is in love with him. If you don't... well, I can't relate, but I can understand. Just get him killed in the suicide mission and problem solved.

As for everyone being sidelined, again, that's simply not true. Mordin, Wrex, and Legion all have sizable plot significant roles with meaningful emotional resolutions. Thane got a great resolution, Grunt's mission and growth as a character was cool, Jack's character development was fantastic. Samara's small presence was to be expected. Miranda is the only character that felt genuinely short-changed, and even so, out of the 15 or 16 squadmates we've had over the trilogy, that's pretty frickin decent.

Would I have liked for them to turn Jacob into an interesting character instead of giving up on him wholesale? Sure, better late than never. But that wasn't a reasonable expectation. It means I won't give the game 10/10, regardless of the ending, but I can still give it 9.9.
 

Phlakes

Elite Member
Mar 25, 2010
4,282
0
41
OH LOOK

A GAME HAS PROBLEMS

We totally haven't read this exact thing five million times in the first week after release.

No one rated it as objectively perfect, because that would be stupid (as stupid as calling it the worst game ever). And every single person that has touched the internet since March has had all its faults shoved down their throat enough fucking times. Just let it go.
 

Scow2

New member
Aug 3, 2009
801
0
0
pure.Wasted said:
Emiscary said:
7. Writers Playing Favorites With Squadmates

Mass Effect 1 had a relatively small party that wanted for diversity. Mass Effect 2 had a huge cast of wildly different squadmates. What's more, you had the option of gaining their loyalty by spending time with/on them- or just ignoring them completely! It seemed like we were gonna have even more control over our squad's composition in the final installment... and then it came out. Here's the rundown: Garrus & Liara are your best friends and confidants, the Virmire survivor is back, Tali shows up eventually, EDI is your tech expert... and some white guy who got run over by a tequila bootlegger is your muscle. Everyone else is sidelined, regardless of prior choice. Including your potential love interests.
Lots of valid points... but not this one. Some characters were unanimously loved (Mordin, Wrex, Garrus). Others were unanimously hated (Jacob). It comes down to statistics. There's no incentive for Bioware to create a sprawling arc for Jacob when there are three people in the world who care about seeing him again, period. Likewise, there's no reason not to give Garrus a huge role when 99% of the fanbase is in love with him. If you don't... well, I can't relate, but I can understand. Just get him killed in the suicide mission and problem solved.

As for everyone being sidelined, again, that's simply not true. Mordin, Wrex, and Legion all have sizable plot significant roles with meaningful emotional resolutions. Thane got a great resolution, Grunt's mission and growth as a character was cool, Jack's character development was fantastic. Samara's small presence was to be expected. Miranda is the only character that felt genuinely short-changed, and even so, out of the 15 or 16 squadmates we've had over the trilogy, that's pretty frickin decent.

Would I have liked for them to turn Jacob into an interesting character instead of giving up on him wholesale? Sure, better late than never. But that wasn't a reasonable expectation. It means I won't give the game 10/10, regardless of the ending, but I can still give it 9.9.
Hey, Jacob was a bro! How the heck could anyone hate him?
 

Terminate421

New member
Jul 21, 2010
5,773
0
0
Xaositect said:
I agree with a lot of these points. Especially the manipulative, bland as fuck multiplayer that ruins the singleplayer on its own.
I am not freaking out about it, but is it wrong to have a multiplayer that has no harmful effect at all on single player? No, its optional, its not needed but its certainly helpful.

Besides, its kinda fun, not ground breaking but certainly entertaining.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Emiscary said:
Oh yeah. If contemporary sci-fi/fantasy have taught me anything, it's this:

Human beings are automatically better (by dint of being human) than everything else in the universe. Including: everyone smarter, everyone stronger, everyone longer lived, everyone more magically adept, everyone more technologically advanced, everyone more socially adept... you get the idea.

Suffice to say I question whether creator bias factors in to the way these conflicts play out :p
Hell, doesn't this sum up Mass Effect, perfectly? It's up to Space Jesus to solve every problem in the galaxy because ponies.
 

Typhusoid

New member
Nov 20, 2008
353
0
0
1. Perhaps, but they need someway of representing numerically the way you built up forces/gather allies.
2. Didn't notice. Let's be honest, its a pretty small gripe.
3. Sounds shitty, but I never ran into this. Guess I got lucky.
4. Agreed, but again wasn't an issue for me.
5. Agreed 100%, this was really poor.
6. This is explained. Liara says the archives are vast and the only just came across the plans after the military put alot more effort into combing through them.
7. Bioware explained this choice, and to me their logic is sound. Its better to have a few well-developed characters than many shallow ones. Sure, some people will lose their favourites but hey, if you're gonna make an omelete...
8. I'm not really sure what the problem is here. I mean sure, the Reapers are built up but at they end of the day they aren't gods. And much of the flavour text in ME3 is devoted to detailing the billions of casualites of the invasion. Its made clear that we are most definitely losing. As for the guerrilla tactics thing, the very point of that is hit-and-run tactics against a superior force. Anderson makes it clear that they are barely having any effect on the Reapers.
 

Vault101

I'm in your mind fuzz
Sep 26, 2010
18,863
15
43
Caramel Frappe said:
Emiscary said:

I agree almost with every point you've made OP. Also despite importing my character from ME1 to ME2, then ME2 to ME3- I still get a ton of bullcrap from the Alliance and from the Council.

ME1 Council: "Oh saved us from the Reaper have you? We'll just ignore you completely and debate about politics that only involve the Citedal, nothing further then that."

ME2 Council: "Saved colonies from the Collectors have you? That is cool- wait you blew up a Mass Relay so the Reapers couldn't invade us?! We're stripping you of everything Shepard!!."
(Oh yeah, you need to buy the DLC to know why Shepard was grounded, because in ME3's opening he is on Earth without the player knowing what's going on and why Shepard isn't a Commander anymore.)

Such bullcrap. I may be an all out Paragon type of guy, but I felt like punching the Council at times for being completely useless. They have done nothing for me, if just giving me a title to do whatever I want around the galaxy. That's it while I have to work my butt off saving everyone.

.
I think your getting your councils mixed up

in ME2 it was more like "oh..that thing?..it was geth, there are no reapers now carry on.."

and I dont think the decision to court martial shepard in ME3 was the councils, rather alliance, beside the mass relay thing working with cerberus might have been reason enough for a court martial (and I doubt they would have really punished shepard anyway)
 

Savagezion

New member
Mar 28, 2010
2,455
0
0
Vault101 said:
Emiscary said:
NO. STOP. SHUT UP.
weve had this exact thread before

ME3 is not perfect...people know this
I dunno, the common trend is to say it was "perfect up until the last 5 minutes" or that it is just simply perfect. I agree with the OP that this game is being held in regards it doesn't deserve. Despite anyone's feelings of the ending, this game was no perfect 10 which it scored a lot of. (I know reviews don't count for much on these forums but they do count for something in the real world.) The word I see used the most often for this game is perfect even when talking about how bad the end was.

Seeing this game described as "brilliant" is pretty hilarious.
 

samaugsch

New member
Oct 13, 2010
595
0
0
Emiscary said:
Scow2 said:
8. Humans are awesome and badass. You should know that by now.
Oh yeah. If contemporary sci-fi/fantasy have taught me anything, it's this:

Human beings are automatically better (by dint of being human) than everything else in the universe. Including: everyone smarter, everyone stronger, everyone longer lived, everyone more magically adept, everyone more technologically advanced, everyone more socially adept... you get the idea.

Suffice to say I question whether creator bias factors in to the way these conflicts play out :p
At least Lovecraftian horror is there to set us straight. :p

OT: Could've sworn everyone was done talking about ME3 by now.
 

Teh Jammah

New member
Nov 13, 2010
219
0
0
Honestly I wouldn't be in any way shocked to find out that we're getting Jack/Samara/Jacob/Miranda etc as future DLC squadmates. That would be a classic EA move, although with the current backlash against the game can't see it doing well.