Review One of the best games Bioware has ever crafted

[Dark Matter]

Putting your stupidly biased description of it aside, how is it not a valid answer? Saren and the geth were enough for the Reaper to do what needed to be done, why would the Reaper care about you or any other shmuck that wanted to team up with them?

I have no idea what Reapers cared about since i haven't played the game. My point was that you are trying to excuse one flaw of the game with another, even more retarded one. They shouldn't have included evil robotz that kill everything each 50.000 years in the first place.

Similarly FO shouldn't have included stupid creatures like rats that won't let me join them.

Fact is, it makes sense in the context of the gameworld and maintains narrative credibility. Not every game has to be designed in a way that the PC can join anyone and everyone. Don't be dumb.

 

[Volourn]

"This very much hearkens back to old school PnP playing, where all of the action took place in the theatre of the imagination"

It's as illogical a chocie as wanting to join the Master's army in FO1. it just doesn't make sense.

The Reapers want to wipe out all traces of inntelligent life. That, preusmably, includes the PC so why would an intelligent PC join them? Becauase, they're retarded. Either way, game over.

Dumb. Dumb. Dumb.

You cna very much be evil, and not join the Reapers. I think turning the Council into an all human one borderlines on being evil (if we go by modern thinking that being racist = evil). *shrug*

If you disagree, youa re obviously Hitler.


R00fles!

 

[easychord]

When did the rats become the most important enemy in Fallout? Probably about the same time that people saw a need to start denigrating the game in forums.

Other than that, I can't be bothered to even be sarcastic about Mass Effect any more.

 

[easychord]

You cna very much be evil, and not join the Reapers. I think turning the Council into an all human one borderlines on being evil (if we go by modern thinking that being racist = evil). *shrug*

What about finding a safe place to hide and abandoning duty and the rest of humanity? Going by modern standards that would make you a rugged individualist hero.

 

[Dark Matter]

When did the rats become the most important enemy in Fallout? Probably about the same time that people saw a need to start denigrating the game in forums.

Other than that, I can't be bothered to even be sarcastic about Mass Effect any more.

So now it's only necessary to be able to join the "most important enemy" in an RPG? Stop making up dumb rules because it helps your dumb argument. The point is complaining about not being able to join a faction that you can't realistically or logically join or want to join is retarded.

 

[Lumpy]

You cna very much be evil, and not join the Reapers. I think turning the Council into an all human one borderlines on being evil (if we go by modern thinking that being racist = evil). *shrug*

What about finding a safe place to hide and abandoning duty and the rest of humanity? Going by modern standards that would make you a rugged individualist hero.

You're just being silly. Of course that wasn't going to be an option.

 

[Badgermaster]

Oh come on! I didn't even play the game, but obviously the Reapers aren't interested in making allies; they even use Saren under mind-control because they just don't care.

So if you do join them you should get a "The Reapers mind control you. Game Over." screen, and I doubt anyone wants that. Come on! What's up with this new Codex fad of having to be able to join everyone, especially the nemesis? Just because it's in Arcanum and because you can game over in Fallout doesn't mean it has to be a mandatory feature in every game. Mass Effect is a popcorn ride; it doesn't need this choice to be potentially fun. RPGs aren't about choices and consequences (though they're fun and help).

I don't need to be able to join the Reapers. I just want an explanation in the sequel for why the Reapers are so incredibly low-tech for their supposed age and why they don't take the easy route to their supposed goal (which would be self-regulating without any interference on their part and wouldn't require any assistance from organics), instead choosing to take the convoluted, high-difficulty, low-percentage route to the same goal.

I can think of a few different reasons why this might be so, but I'm worried that things will be left as they are, with the Reapers making no sense at all.

 

[Volourn]

Just like you just 'couldn't 'hide' in FO.

Sorry; but the 'see no eveil, hear no evil, plugging the ears and closing the eyes strategy like a 3 year old' should not be a viable option in a RPG.

 

[Hamster]

So now it's only necessary to be able to join the "most important enemy" in an RPG? .

Stop pretending to not seeing the difference between main nemesis and a sewer rat.
Ability to join a nemesis is not a must for an rpg, but for a Bioware's "chosen one must choose one of two paths" it is expected to be there.

 

[Dark Matter]

What makes you say that? The trilogy as a whole is centered around the mystery of the reapers and the conflict with them. Bioware games always have a satisfying explanation for any mysteries provided by the game (KOTOR's star maps for example). There's no reason to think ME is gonna be any different.

I can't wait to play the sequels and find out who the story behind the Reapers.

 

[Hamster]

What makes you say that? The trilogy as a whole is centered around the mystery of the reapers and the conflict with them.
I can't wait to play the sequels and find out who the story behind the Reapers.

Wow, you are speaking like you are really fascinated by this boring generic crap about evil robots destroying the world...

 

[Dark Matter]

So now it's only necessary to be able to join the "most important enemy" in an RPG? .

Stop pretending to not seeing the difference between main nemesis and a sewer rat.

I can see the difference. The point is whether or not you're able to join a faction should depend on how much sense it makes in the context of the gameworld, not based on whether it's the main badguy, the badguy's sidekick, a random critter etc. Stop basing your criticism of ME on some arbitrary bullshit you just made up because it supports your Bioware bashing agenda.

 

[Hamster]

So now it's only necessary to be able to join the "most important enemy" in an RPG? .

Stop pretending to not seeing the difference between main nemesis and a sewer rat.

I can see the difference.

:facepalm: :honourblade:

 

[Dark Matter]

So now it's only necessary to be able to join the "most important enemy" in an RPG? .

Stop pretending to not seeing the difference between main nemesis and a sewer rat.
Ability to join a nemesis is not a must for an rpg, but for a Bioware's "chosen one must choose one of two paths" it is expected to be there.

How so? I'd much rather see more interesting end game choices rather than a generic, contrived "join or fight evil guy" option. The choice of exploiting a difficult situation and allowing humanity to more or less overthrow these alien races from the council and take full control of it is far more interesting and can actually affect the next two titles. I guess a simple "join bad guy and destroy the world together" option is preferrable to your simple mind?

 

[Dark Matter]

What makes you say that? The trilogy as a whole is centered around the mystery of the reapers and the conflict with them.
I can't wait to play the sequels and find out who the story behind the Reapers.

Wow, you are speaking like you are really fascinated by this boring generic crap about evil robots destroying the world...

*shrugs* If people can find a game about an evil Hitler-like antagonist who wants to rule a world filled with his "master" race, and oppress/kill anyone who doesn't join him, deep and mature, I can find Bioware's stories enjoyable. I can understand someone who mainly just reads deep literature finding my tastes to be silly and immature, but gaming nerds attempting to criticize me for being a gaming nerd is silly.

 

[Dark Matter]

:facepalm: :honourblade:

I've already won the argument. Have fun pretending.

 

[Badgermaster]

You cna very much be evil, and not join the Reapers. I think turning the Council into an all human one borderlines on being evil (if we go by modern thinking that being racist = evil). *shrug*

I chose that route because it seemed much smarter than the alternative, namely, risking losing the battle just to save the people who were responsible for the current problem to begin with.

I didn't feel that there was anything racist or evil about it. I wonder if I was supposed to.

 

[Dark Matter]

You cna very much be evil, and not join the Reapers. I think turning the Council into an all human one borderlines on being evil (if we go by modern thinking that being racist = evil). *shrug*

I chose that route because it seemed much smarter than the alternative, namely, risking losing the battle just to save the people who were responsible for the current problem to begin with.

I didn't feel that there was anything racist or evil about it. I wonder if I was supposed to.

The action itself is not necessarily inherently evil (another examples of the moral ambiguity of ME), but it's your intentions that determine it. In the conversation with the ambassador afterwards, if you're playing an evil guy, you have a chance to reveal that you did it mainly to further humanity's agenda in terms of taking full control of the Council.

 

[Volourn]

"Ability to join a nemesis is not a must for an rpg, but for a Bioware's "chosen one must choose one of two paths" it is expected to be there."

Except ME was never about the chocie of saving or not saving the galaxy. Or the hocie joining x faction or y faction.

It was HOW you went about saving the galaxy from those (the Reapers) who wanted to destroy the galaxy including YOU.

The Reapers don't want to enslave intelligent life. They want to destroy it.


"I didn't feel that there was anything racist or evil about it. I wonder if I was supposed to."

I wasn't referring to the choice of letting the council die (or saving them) but making the council all human.



"Wow, you are speaking like you are really fascinated by this boring generic crap about evil robots destroying the world..."

What an idiot! This is why your opinion means shit. You didn't play the game. The Reapers don't wnat tod estroy the world. First off, it's a galaxy; not a world (they don't just target Earth). Secondly, they don't want to destroy the galaxy. They want to destroy all organic intelligent life. Dumb ass. HUGE DIFFERENCE!

Don't let your arrogance think human race/all intelligent organic life = galaxy

Do not ASSume that you have the brain power to understand the TRUE reaper motives!!!

 

[Badgermaster]

"I didn't feel that there was anything racist or evil about it. I wonder if I was supposed to."

I wasn't referring to the choice of letting the council die (or saving them) but making the council all human.

Understood. Although I did feel, with the story presented to me as it was, that humanity would do a much better job in the leadership role. There was never any point in the story where the Council was presented as intelligent and competent.

I took that final route, choosing humanity to lead, as the "hardball politics/harsh pragmatism for the greater good" one. If the former Council had to die and humanity had to fill the power vacuum in order to ensure the survival of sentient life in the galaxy, so be it. What's killing a few hundred to save a few quadrillion, after all.

Outside of shooting Wrex in the face, I think those final decisions were the only RP choices in the game I enjoyed being able to make.

 

[RK47]

If the sequel doesn't bother to put Locational damage in combat, I'd just set difficulty to easy and not give a fuck. There's no need for levelling up in Mass Effect. The level up mechanics are unnecessary, but seeing that labelling something as RPG makes it sell more and makes great excuse for 'slightly weak combat' , why not eh?

 

[MetalCraze]

Except ME was never about the chocie of saving or not saving the galaxy. Or the hocie joining x faction or y faction.

yes it was about only zomg saving teh galaxy.
and there was no difference about how shepard saved it.
he just ran from the start to the end of the game, chasing saren and then omg totally not predictable twist - saren is working with the reaperz and is flying on the reaper ship. well moar reasons to save the galaxy then

The Reapers don't wnat tod estroy the world. First off, it's a galaxy; not a world (they don't just target Earth).

Volly. since when world always means earth? it could be a gameworld = galaxy. your nitpicking worth shit.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

If the sequel doesn't bother to put Locational damage in combat, I'd just set difficulty to easy and not give a fuck. There's no need for levelling up in Mass Effect. The level up mechanics are unnecessary, but seeing that labelling something as RPG makes it sell more and makes great excuse for 'slightly weak combat' , why not eh?

Eh...Mass Effect's combat system isn't where the improvements in the overall combat experience needs to be, it's more in the enemy and encounter design fields where they need to raise the bar. Mass Effect was rather blah in combat because you basically fought the same things over and over again; bipedal mooks with laser guns, with an occasional other type of robot, or acid spitting zombie/bug. And the encounters were rather poor as well. Hardly ever were you placed in a tense or interesting situation. It was mostly the "5 enemies in a 10 by 10 room" crap. Where were the desperate fights back to back against unrelenting foes? Where was the rush out of the base with the charges set to blow at any moment? Where was the alien menace picking off your allies one by one if you don't tread lightly? Where's the fight in the midst of an artillery barrage? Or where's the good old fashion giant clusterfuck battle? All Mass Effect had was the cool trench fight on the Citadel towards the end and the Mako driving through Illios to get to the portal in time.

 

[RK47]

Uh yeah popping out of a crate and unloading on the enemy's leg that was stickin out got old real quick, murrow. I played GTA San Andreas recently and noticed headshots are one hit KO except for bosses. That's great. Sure it had levelling mechanics such as stamina and more hits = more skill gains, but it does action right. I was outgunned in a couple of occasion but with good judgement and aim, I can still win as long I didn't do anything stupid. In mass effect, all I had to do is activate immunity and overload, hold the Left mouse button to win.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

Uh yeah popping out of a crate and unloading on the enemy's leg that was stickin out got old real quick, murrow.

I don't disagree...it did get old fast. But implementing headshot-able enemies wouldn't seem much of a solution to this tedium. It would just change the tedium from a stop and pop fest of legshots, to a stop and pop fest of headshots. That's why I think the fundamental problem was in encounter design. They shouldn't have made all the fights boring stop and pops; they should of put as much effort into the stuff the player shots at as they did into the stuff the player shoots with. If you throw additional encounter design elements into the mix, a once boring encounter can become fun. These additional elements would be the things that stop combat from being a duck/pop out/shoot enemy/repeat ad nauseum extravaganza. Maybe something as simple as an enemy grenadier that punishes cover campers, or enemy techs that disable your barrier powers.

A great example of this is Bioshock versus Doom. Bioshock has tons of cool toys to screw around with, and a bunch of possibilities in how you can dish out death, whereas Doom is incredibly simple with far more limited potential for difference in death dealing. Just based off of combat, you'd think Bioshock would be the clear victor in fun and entertaining combat gameplay, but throw the other part of the equation in, encounter/enemy design, and the tables turn. BioShock presents you the same small bestiary over and over in the same environment. Doom mixes things up with many enemies and environments.

TL;DFR version: Encounter design is the bottleneck factor for fun in games, not the complexity of the combat system.

GTA San Andreas

but it does action right.

Say what? The game where you click a button to lock on and then click another to spray and pray? I'm hoping we played a radically different game. Plus the general sameness of enemies and the overwhelming reliance on "surprise cockfag!" moments on missions make it less fun and more frustrating.