Mass Effect 3 review thread

I posted this in the GB thread but Jeff's review is weird, he doesn't really say why it isn't as good as ME2 clearly

He's not explicit about it, but what I gleamed was that nothing mechanical or story-based is much of an improvement over Mass Effect 2 and that it should only be played if you're already invested in the world. It suffers from short dev cycle/end of console generation disease.
 
Are you serious, internet? Mass Effect 3 user score is 4.1 on metacritic??

It was funny when that happened to Modern Warfare 3, but come on.

You're forgetting it happened to Portal 2. It was inevitable given 'the Internets' current relationship with Bioware and the DLC drama.

I'm not really surprised by the critics scores, if you enjoyed Mass Effect 2 [as most reviewers clearly did] you'll adore the third game.
 
This bothers me...... which essentially means that I've got to pay for XBL in order to attain the game's best outcome. I'd have gotten the game for the PS3, but I wanted to carry over my import reviews from 1 and 2.

Dang it!

That's bullshit. I'm not opposed to the idea of having multiplayer have an influence or some sort of impact on the single player game, but to make the best ending dependent upon that is shit.
 
Are you serious, internet? Mass Effect 3 user score is 4.1 on metacritic??

It was funny when that happened to Modern Warfare 3, but come on.

Trolls will troll. I suspect it will even out eventually.

That's bullshit. I'm not opposed to the idea of having multiplayer have an influence or some sort of impact on the single player game, but to make the best ending dependent upon that is shit.

This is still not the case... There is an influence if you choose to. You can still 100% complete the game without doing MP. This has been clarified by Bioware dozens of times in the past.
 
Wow at that Eurogamer score, very nice stuff. Really can't wait until Friday now!

Nice to see that I missed the epic spoilers, wow at them bans.
 
I guess I'll give it a try, but I'm pretty sure I'm gonna be disappointed.
Reviews seems ridiculous tbh. The flaws visible in screens and videos alone should be enough to understand this is far from perfection.

Nothing is or ever will be perfection. People need to start realising or reviewers need to give a better understanding of what a 10 actually means or should mean. It's not about being perfect, it's more to do with how fully formed a package may be. Personally, I think a 10 should be held for a game changer
 
Nothing is or ever will be perfection. People need to start realising or reviewers need to give a better understand of what a 10 actually means or should mean. It's not about being perfect, it's more to do with how fully formed a package may be. Personally, I think a 10 should be held for a game changer

Personally I think the only way to get that to lose that mindset is have everyone change to a letter grade. When you see A, you don't think perfect.
 
Nothing is or ever will be perfection. People need to start realising or reviewers need to give a better understanding of what a 10 actually means or should mean. It's not about being perfect, it's more to do with how fully formed a package may be. Personally, I think a 10 should be held for a game changer

"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time."
 
No real surprises there, the scores are pretty much solely a result of the hype and media circus that surrounds the games launch - could have predicted these scores last year
Interested to see if it fairs better or worse than the general opinion of ME2, in the long run
 
Man, I've read like three reviews now and none of them have talked about the story other then perhaps two sentences giving the basic premise and another sentence saying "I liked it" or "I didn't like it"

I mean, I know you don't want to get into spoilers, but geez in a Mass Effect game I'm more interested in reading what you think of the story then what you think of the combat
 
Did any publications have someone who hadn't played any of the previous games take a look or at least touch on what the game is like for a brand new player with no imported save? That isn't me, at all, but I'm curious as to how that works out.
 
I'm sorry, I can't help but think this is another overrated crap game. Yes, I said crap. Too many people buy into the hype of games and don't look at things objectively, even compared to the rest of the franchise.
 
I'm sorry, I can't help but think this is another overrated crap game. Yes, I said crap. Too many people buy into the hype of games and don't look at things objectively, even compared to the rest of the franchise.

Well, everyone is certainly entitled to their own opinions even when they are wrong.
 
The Edge review has been up all morning:

http://www.edge-online.com/features/mass-effect-3-review

It’s a third and final chapter, then, with all that implies. It’s off-putting to new players, too busy tying up loose ends to dangle any threads of its own, and fails to stand up as its own game in the same manner as its predecessors. But it’s also a spectacular, powerfully imagined and dramatically involving final act to one of gaming’s richest sci-fi sagas. [8]
 
I'm sorry, I can't help but think this is another overrated crap game. Yes, I said crap. Too many people buy into the hype of games and don't look at things objectively, even compared to the rest of the franchise.

What about people that actually just enjoy the games and think it's a great franchise. They don't exist?
 
In these types of games Jeff/Arthur Goose usually see eye to eye with me so I'm still excited to get my copy today.

Really love the layout on the vox reviews.
 
I'm sorry, I can't help but think this is another overrated crap game. Yes, I said crap. Too many people buy into the hype of games and don't look at things objectively, even compared to the rest of the franchise.

So you're pretty much saying that you would assume the game was crap no matter what score it received from anywhere? Or would an average of, say, 7.5 prove that it wasn't crap but also wasn't overrated due to hype?
 
I'm sorry, I can't help but think this is another overrated crap game. Yes, I said crap. Too many people buy into the hype of games and don't look at things objectively, even compared to the rest of the franchise.

Haha! I was waiting for the tears.

You delivered. Thanks.
 
He's not explicit about it, but what I gleamed was that nothing mechanical or story-based is much of an improvement over Mass Effect 2 and that it should only be played if you're already invested in the world. It suffers from short dev cycle/end of console generation disease.

I'd rather he be explicit about what doesn't work then just sort of let vague ideas of industry-context influence his review in an indirect way. Don't get me wrong, 4/5's a fine score, but this was a disappointing piece of criticism from Gertsmann..hopefully he elaborates on the Bombcast.

Surprisingly enough, Sessler's review got me really excited. I enjoyed Edge's as well..they have a good team of writers.
 
Haha! I was waiting for the tears.

You delivered. Thanks.

8CV99.gif
 
Well, everyone is certainly entitled to their own opinions even when they are wrong.

What about people that actually just enjoy the games and think it's a great franchise. They don't exist?

You can love a franchise but still be objective about it. MGS is one of my all time favorite franchises, but even I will admit 5 minute installs is bullshit in MGS4.

There are glaring flaws in ME that people miss out, there are standards that have been set by the same company on the same franchise that haven't been met, but people buy into the hype.

So you're pretty much saying that you would assume the game was crap no matter what score it received from anywhere? Or would an average of, say, 7.5 prove that it wasn't crap but also wasn't overrated due to hype?

Well, my opinion differs from most, but I don't think Bioware has made a great game since KOTOR. Sure DA: O was good, ME1 was pretty ok, but everything else seems to be a rush job. Severe geometry glitches, questionable UI choices, flawed morality system (or lack a relative one in ME3), basic controls not accommodated or PC. Design choices get more and more stupid. In ME1 there is inventory management on an annoying level. Not enough room? How about you make 9000 more omni-gels. ME2? Let's tone that down to a pretty much non-existent inventory, only really in existent for med-gels and key items. ME3? Where'd it go? Animations are sub-standard for a AAA title and the rest of the presentation hasn't kept up with the times.

The ending is
ripped directly from Deus Ex: Human Revolution. You choose then and there on the fate of everyone. You choose to destroy 1 thing to save humanity, or the other to become the beast. Sure DE:HR had a few more options, but those only affect some of the details on how EXACTLY it ended.
 
There are glaring flaws in ME that people miss out, there are standards that have been set by the same company on the same franchise that haven't been met, but people buy into the hype.

That's pretty presumptuous to say about fans of ME. I can definitely tell the flaws in each game. Some things even pissed me off. Doesn't for one second take away from the overall great package that they are. Every game has flaws. Show me one game that is absolute perfection, they don't exist.

It's what the game still gives the player despite its imperfections. Despite whatever flaws ME1 and ME2 have, I still have a shit ton of fun playing them because I love the universe they built, the characters, the lore, the combat, etc. Some mediocre animations or an oddly designed inventory don't damage the game anywhere near enough to put me off from it. It's strengths far outweigh its weaknesses.
 
That's pretty presumptuous to say about fans of ME. I can definitely tell the flaws in each game. Some things even pissed me off. Doesn't for one second take away from the overall great package that they are. Every game has flaws. Show me one game that is absolute perfection, they don't exist.

It's what the game still gives the player despite its imperfections. Despite whatever flaws ME1 and ME2 have, I still have a shit ton of fun playing them because I love the universe they built, the characters, the lore, the combat, etc. Some mediocre animations or an oddly designed inventory don't damage the game anywhere near enough to put me off from it. It's strengths far outweigh its weaknesses.

Is it wrong to expect more of such a renowned franchise? Skyrim is a really fun game, doesn't make it any less of an overall mess. Gran Turismo has stolen hundreds of hours from me, doesn't mean the execution wasn't severally flawed. I spent thousands of hours on TF2, doesn't mean the game didn't launch completely broken in terms of balance.

Some companies try to get their shit together. They release a flawed gem, but polish it over title iterations or updates.

Bioware, in recent years, has shown nothing of that nature. No humility, no attempt to show they can do better. Am I saying they are the only company that does this? Of course not.
 
Yes, yes. Big budget titles like this and Call of Duty are full of 9's, 10's and in between. Heavens if they give this game below a 9.

Game industry is getting so predictable and boring.
 
I find it odd that the GT review gave the gameplay a 9.7.
The review basically says that even new combat elements are familiar from other TPSs, and brute force tactics make relying on more sophisticated abilities unnecessary.

I'm fine with praising ME for being a cinematic and engaging space opera, but I just can't see how the core gameplay could be considered such a great achievement.
 
I find it odd that the GT review gave the gameplay a 9.7.
The review basically says that even new combat elements are familiar from other TPSs, and brute force tactics make relying on more sophisticated abilities unnecessary.

I'm fine with praising ME for being a cinematic and engaging space opera, but I just can't see how the core gameplay could be considered such a great achievement.

There's more to gameplay than just combat.
 
Some of which said review almost calls "not too engaging" (but "compulsive thanks to rewards"... yay).

EDIT:


Oh look, I didn't resort to that argument. Maybe you shouldn't put words in my mouth.

I wasn't talking about you, I was talking generally. Sorry if it seemed that way.
 
I was kind of hoping this game would be awful (even though I loved the idea of the multiplayer since its announcement), but I can never be upset when a good game is released. Enjoy, GAF.

Now if only I could get over my OCD with the first in wondering if I should just choose one path, either Paragon or Renegade, rather than really trying to role-play... Because when you do that? The game is awful.
 
I was kind of hoping this game would be awful (even though I loved the idea of the multiplayer since its announcement), but I can never be upset when a good game is released. Enjoy, GAF.

Now if only I could get over my OCD with the first in wondering if I should just choose one path, either Paragon or Renegade, rather than really trying to role-play... Because when you do that? The game is awful.

I've really distanced myself from ME3 but I think there's a "moral gray" area you can choose, so you can feel free to play how you want to play without thinking a paragon situation can net you renegade points and vice versa.
 
Top Bottom