(spoilers, more than on the bombcast at least. If you don't want to play ME3 read this tread. If you have not played the game yet but want to, run away from the internet until you finish it)

This week (March 13), the thing I feared the most happened... Jeff brought the entire crew with him in Mass Effect 3 bummer town. For every sentence of ok stuff said about ME3 this week on the bombcast there were 10 minutes conversations deconstructing every aspect that's not great about the game. Mass effect 3 is a fantastic game and I'm her to bring a counterweight to the big downer that was the bombcast these last 2 weeks.

Let's get the bad stuff out of the way first so we can discuss the good for longer

• there is a pacing problem, you get over it after 10 hours of gameplay
• no middle option in dialog, it's either ''more info'', paragon or renegade (didn't bother me since I never chose de middle option)
• the fetch quests/scanning thing is stupid
• the dream sequences are not good
• Some jank around cover sometimes
• the first few hours are to linear and not that great
• the ending isn't about your previous choices and is full of plot holes

And here's a laundry list of things that make ME3 a great game

• The combat is amazing. The controls are not has good has gears of war but it makes up for it with great variety. You do way more than just shoot dudes in this game
• Every class is a viable option this time around
• Unlike in ME2 they didn't fuck up the balance in higher difficulty levels.
• All choices I could remember and many ME3 reminded me about were addressed
• Every meaningful character from the other 2 games gets a cool story arc centered around stuff you learned in there loyalty missions or there past in general.
• The interaction you and your crew members is truly great
• Remember in the past 2 games when your squadmates didn't really ever acknowledge each other on the ship? They do now and the ship feels way more alive as a result
• There is way more than 2 guns per type and they all feel different.
• Shotguns are actually awesome now!
• High level of customization for you powers and skills
• Shepard can run better, roll out of the way and is way more agile.
• Biotic powers and power combos are satisfying has fuck
• You get call backs from every piece a DLC you purchased, even the ME1 one with the batariens
• Kaiden is very cool. I guess Ashley is to.
• The glorious sacrifice of some characters is always handheld with care
• There is so much content for characters that could be dead
• Some set piece moments are the best moments of the franchise.
• Some small character moments are some of the best moment of the franchise
• Some really funny jokes and callbacks
• Great vistas
• The progression is more organic than with ME2
• Not many people know this but YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE ALL PARAGON OR RENEGADE, the persuasion system is based on reputation not alignment
• the writing is still very good (unlike in this post)
• The music was awesome
• It's better than ME1 and ME2 (which was my 2010 GoTY)

So yeah, when I heard Brad hesitation to play the game I realized that some people listening to the podcast could be missing out on a fantastic game because Jeff didn't like it very much. Don't forget that this guy hates Red Dead Redemption with a passion so sometimes he can be ho so wrong. In the end it's about personal opinion and since no one on the crew seems to want to fight for the game and tell Jeff he's full of shit I'm going to do just that. Here's hoping Vinny, Ryan, Brad or Pattrick will have better things to say next week cause I can't take it anymore. It's way to depressing.

Do you agree with me or do you think ME3 is worst thing ever or just plain old ''meh''?

EDIT: with the third ME3 related podcast this week, we saw some change in the crew's general opinion. Ryan vinny and patrick seem more into the whole thing. Of course, it also seems like Jeff is now totally shitting on the game on the bombcast and on twitter to counteract this reaction. Oh well...

Endings aside, ME3 is a really solid addition to the franchise. They harp on it because it feels like a step backwards from ME2 in the story-telling and gameplay departments.

Mass Effect 3 is a game that is so good in areas, that it shines a light on the areas that are not good. That's the biggest issue with it, I think. Many of the complaints people have about the game probably wouldn't be big issues if the good parts weren't so good. It's like how everyone finds and points out the flaws and plot holes in hugely popular and well reviewed movies, that no one would care about in an average or decent movie.

Jeff is definitely a bummer about it, though. I just want to know if he's soiled to it because of the ending, or if the problems he brings up are really that big of a deal to him. I mean, yeah, the scanning sucks, but if I was talking about someone to the game even about the problems it has, it really wouldn't matter that much..

@pyrodactyl said:

Don't forget that this guy hates Red Dead Redemption with a passion so sometimes he can be ho so wrong. In the end it's about personal opinion and since no one on the crew seems to want to fight for the game and tell Jeff he's full of shit

... So, which is it? You just jumped from "Your opinion is wrong, so stop having it" to "It's about opinion" and back to "Stop having an opinion".

Also, it's a podcast. He's a critic. He's going to talk about what he thinks. That's why he's there.

Your definition of objective is interesting. Wrong too.

Remember, this is a group that gave Dragon Age 2 the biggest disappointment of the year despite the fact that only Vinny played the original, and only Vinny played the sequel. And it wasn't like Vinny was the only one talking about it.

I don't even disagree with Vinny, I just think its nonsense when they talk about something they don't know the first thing about.

Mass Effect 3 is a good game.

I didn't think the Bombcast crew was all that negative towards ME3. Granted I haven't finished the latest podcast yet, so maybe they say something in the last hour or so that totally tears the game to shreds.

Someone needs to look up 'subjective' and 'objective' again.

Here's a hint:

"the first few hours are to linear and not that great" is not an objective criticism.

You make a lot of great points. I loved how people would interact on the ship with each other, such a small feature had a huge impact. Jeff does sometimes seem to pull people down around his opinions but at they same time he is allowed to make them and I respect that. I disagree that scanning is worse than previous games, it isn't used to pad the length of the game. What really bothered me was when he was taking about Thane. There is a totally reasonable reason why he had to stay on the citadel. It was as if Jeff didn't actually talk to him about his illness. Anyway like I said its his opinions and I respectfully disagree with his few complaints about the game

The review is out there; it's a good game but not as great as Mass Effect 2.

The ending is a real bummer to most people (enough to start a charity, a conspiracy theory thread with WAY more views/replies on it that anything else on the Bioware forums, and several articles from the industry about it), so of course it's going to color how Jeff feels about the game.

If you don't feel the same way as Jeff does, why would his opinion affect you in some adverse way unless you're that impressionable. Bioware themselves have told people on twitter something along the lines of "if you like the game, don't let other people bum you out about it".

I like that the bad things are huge game breaking issues and the good things are "Shotguns are good."

@ShaggE: I'm just saying there's no debate. Everyone on the bombcast just agrees with Jeff. Even Brad who didn't play it yet seems to be preamptively bummed.

I like that the bad things are huge game breaking issues and the good things are "Shotguns are good."

I recognize that the ragging on ME3 for what I consider minor issues is very jarring, and indicative of how malleable the crew is in some ways, but after that ending I just don't care anymore.

@James_Giant_Peach: @AlisterCat:

what are you talking about? ...

I thought the issues they brought up on the bombcast were pretty much all valid. I mean, I really enjoyed ME3 (up until the ending) and thought it was at least on a par with ME2 for the majority of the time.

I love that it's all reputation now, you can be a properly 'grey' character and still have awesome stuff happen. I love that there's so many decisions that have an impact and I still think the characters are amongst my favourite in sci-fi (games, films, whatever).

That said, I'm with the Bombsquad on wanting this game to blow everything out of the water, and would have waited until winter if that's what it took.

Mass Effect 3 is possibly my favorite game of the series, with all the amazing callbacks to the previous games. Actually seeing the effects of decisions made in 1 and 2 roll around was great. The shooting is better, the dialogue with squad members is fantastic and often really funny, and the music is just as good. I personally enjoyed my time spent with the multiplayer, and I would be happy to keep playing it. That said, the ending seems to render your individual story choices useless, since everyone has the same ending choices that vary little between them. I think ME3 is amazing, but it's going to take awhile for me to either come to terms with the ending or hold onto the "Indoctrination Theory".

How many times does Jeff have to say that Mass Effect is a good game before you people stop talking about how negative his opinion is?

I am disappointed in how they talk about it. I don't take issue with the fact that they have problems with the game, but I just hate how they go on for twenty minutes about specific details that they utterly despise, and then gloss over everything great in the game with, "I mean, yeah, I liked parts of the game". Just wish there was a little more balance. Then again, that just kind of applies to their talks on games in general. They always seem to just be super negative, unless it's something indie/quirky.

@pyrodactyl said:

@James_Giant_Peach: @AlisterCat:

what are you talking about? ...

ob·jec·tive/əbˈjektiv/

You can't make objective quality judgements. Quality is always biased by personal experience and a point of reference. It is objective that I am typing on this keyboard. Whether my typing is fast or whether the keyboard is good is subjective.

@pyrodactyl: Someone stop the ME3 fanboy train!

My only gripe is that they were way too positive on ME2 when that game came out. It was a decent linear shooter with good characters and a tedious and boring mining-minigame, nothing amazing though.

@ShadowConqueror:

saying the game is good and than spending 30 minutes talking about stuff that are bad about it...

listening to last week podcast before checking the review out I almost thought he gave it 3 stars

@OllyOxenFree said:

@LordXavierBritish said:

I like that the bad things are huge game breaking issues and the good things are "Shotguns are good."

Got a chuckle out of some of those.

I included that one because, has everyone who played vanguard in ME2 on hardcore or insane knows: shotguns and biotic powers were useless back then

@Quarters said:

I am disappointed in how they talk about it. I don't take issue with the fact that they have problems with the game, but I just hate how they go on for twenty minutes about specific details that they utterly despise, and then gloss over everything great in the game with, "I mean, yeah, I liked parts of the game". Just wish there was a little more balance. Then again, that just kind of applies to their talks on games in general. They always seem to just be super negative, unless it's something indie/quirky.

maybe the stuff he liked is the stuff from ME2?

@CptBedlam said:

@pyrodactyl: Someone stop the ME3 fanboy train!

My only gripe is that they were way too positive on ME2 when that game came out. It was a decent linear shooter with good characters and a tedious and boring mining-minigame, nothing amazing though.

you're telling me you spent 100+ hours in a universe that was ''ok'' with ''ok'' characters and ''ok'' gameplay. I mean, you must have way to much time on your hands then...

@pyrodactyl: I said "good characters". That's easily the thing that ME does best (well, at least before steroid Vega and camel-toe EDI), along with the atmosphere and visuals. But there are many aspects that I found lacking, too. Especially the bad design of the shooter-levels (too linear, cover makes enemy encounters way too predictable) - which ME2 and 3 mostly consist of, unfortunately.

I don't see how they are ragging on the game. They say its a good game but still a bummer because that's what it is.

@Quarters said:

I am disappointed in how they talk about it. I don't take issue with the fact that they have problems with the game, but I just hate how they go on for twenty minutes about specific details that they utterly despise, and then gloss over everything great in the game with, "I mean, yeah, I liked parts of the game". Just wish there was a little more balance. Then again, that just kind of applies to their talks on games in general. They always seem to just be super negative, unless it's something indie/quirky.

Not particularly. It's just that in this case the good is stuff that was all good in ME2, perhaps made better in some cases. Nothing that groundbreaking there. That is the entire point of their conversations. I fail to see how their talks are "super negative".

Bioware built this amazing series, yet ME3 feels like an improved ME2. It's ME 2.5 with more Reapers. I personally love ME3 more than ME2, but I think Jeff was hoping for another big jump much like ME1 to ME2.

lol

@MisterSamMan: I think you're onto something. Afterall, the crew has tendency of comparing sequels and letting the difference weight on their opinion, like with Dragon Age 2 (like someone already mentioned, only Vinny had actually played the game, yet it won the most disappointing '11 category).

I think that even though few can argue against ME3 being a quality release, if only for production values, I think the game itself genre-vise is not Jeff's cup of tea. I think it was fairly obvious that he's a big fan of fighting games, dumb shooters and arcade-style gameplay in general. No offence meant with dumb shooters, just saying that Jeff likes to focus into the action itself than dialogue or lore. Remember that he was nuts about Borderlands, where the writing was done well, but focus was in action and narrative was cut very short.

Personally, I've done my best to avoid too much commenting on ME3 before I'm myself done with it, but I still like to listen my weekly podcast and it grinds my gears to listen the nitpicking. I don't take it take it too seriously, and am interested in eventually hearing Brad's and especially Vinny's own experience, seeing he doesn't get overtly critical but usually just enjoys the ride, which I try to do myself as well.

@Catfish666 said:

@MisterSamMan:

I think that even though few can argue against ME3 being a quality release, if only for production values, I think the game itself genre-vise is not Jeff's cup of tea. I think it was fairly obvious that he's a big fan of fighting games, dumb shooters and arcade-style gameplay in general. No offence meant with dumb shooters, just saying that Jeff likes to focus into the action itself than dialogue or lore. Remember that he was nuts about Borderlands, where the writing was done well, but focus was in action and narrative was cut very short.

his favorite game of 2010 was fucking mass effect 2

@Animasta

Which in contrast to ME1 improved the shooting and action.

@Catfish666 said:

@MisterSamMan: I think you're onto something. Afterall, the crew has tendency of comparing sequels and letting the difference weight on their opinion, like with Dragon Age 2 (like someone already mentioned, only Vinny had actually played the game, yet it won the most disappointing '11 category).

I think that even though few can argue against ME3 being a quality release, if only for production values, I think the game itself genre-vise is not Jeff's cup of tea. I think it was fairly obvious that he's a big fan of fighting games, dumb shooters and arcade-style gameplay in general. No offence meant with dumb shooters, just saying that Jeff likes to focus into the action itself than dialogue or lore. Remember that he was nuts about Borderlands, where the writing was done well, but focus was in action and narrative was cut very short.

I agree with your other points but saying Jeff isn't into dialogue or lore and that Mass Effect isn't his cup of tea is false. Jeff said on the same podcast that he thinks Mass Effect 2 is not only one of the greatest games of this generation but one of the greatest games ever. He clearly just had too high expectations, something that I can totally understand.

@Catfish666 said:

Which in contrast to ME1 improved the shooting and action.

... then why didn't he like this one as much then?

@Quarters said:

I am disappointed in how they talk about it. I don't take issue with the fact that they have problems with the game, but I just hate how they go on for twenty minutes about specific details that they utterly despise, and then gloss over everything great in the game with, "I mean, yeah, I liked parts of the game". Just wish there was a little more balance. Then again, that just kind of applies to their talks on games in general. They always seem to just be super negative, unless it's something indie/quirky.

I thought Jeff was extremely polite talking about it. It is a big deal in the gaming industry, Mass Effect 2 is easily one of my favorite games of this generation, it's a pinnacle of gaming. And ME3 has all the signs of being pushed out before it was done and the franchise not being respected by the publisher. I can't imagine Bethesda treating fans of Skyrim or Fallout this way and it's stunning that EA / Bioware will.

@Tumbler said:

@Quarters said:

I am disappointed in how they talk about it. I don't take issue with the fact that they have problems with the game, but I just hate how they go on for twenty minutes about specific details that they utterly despise, and then gloss over everything great in the game with, "I mean, yeah, I liked parts of the game". Just wish there was a little more balance. Then again, that just kind of applies to their talks on games in general. They always seem to just be super negative, unless it's something indie/quirky.

I can't imagine Bethesda treating fans of Fallout this way and it's stunning that EA / Bioware will.

(no mutants allowed would disagree with this)

@Tumbler said:

@Quarters said:

I am disappointed in how they talk about it. I don't take issue with the fact that they have problems with the game, but I just hate how they go on for twenty minutes about specific details that they utterly despise, and then gloss over everything great in the game with, "I mean, yeah, I liked parts of the game". Just wish there was a little more balance. Then again, that just kind of applies to their talks on games in general. They always seem to just be super negative, unless it's something indie/quirky.

I thought Jeff was extremely polite talking about it. It is a big deal in the gaming industry, Mass Effect 2 is easily one of my favorite games of this generation, it's a pinnacle of gaming. And ME3 has all the signs of being pushed out before it was done and the franchise not being respected by the publisher. I can't imagine Bethesda treating fans of Skyrim or Fallout this way and it's stunning that EA / Bioware will.

So what do you think about the game?

I'd say ''all signs'' are the ending and the fetch quests. The rest is very good. Better than ME2 even

No one stops the Bombcast Bummer Train.

I didn't listen to the whole Quick look and I'm probably not gonna listen to this podcast because I disagree with Jeff.

ME3 is the best game in the series for me, and I don't need to here him and Brad get stuff about the lore wrong and use that to rag on the games structure.

I loved me1, and couldent get thorough ME2, but i dont complain about you people, who love ME2, do i?

So the OP's trying to say that we should just shillax about the ME3 being a bummer deal?

Mass Effect 3 deserves criticism and not just because of that ending.

@LordXavierBritish said:

I like that the bad things are huge game breaking issues and the good things are "Shotguns are good."

Why are you still trolling a board for a game you'll never play?

@SonicBoyster said:

Endings aside, ME3 is a really solid addition to the franchise. They harp on it because it feels like a step backwards from ME2 in the story-telling and gameplay departments.

Hey maybe it's a disappointing game and you're just trying to justify the sixty bucks you spent, ever consider that?

@LordXavierBritish said:

I like that the bad things are huge game breaking issues and the good things are "Shotguns are good."

Why are you still trolling a board for a game you'll never play?

Jesus Christ, you people.

I'm still puzzled as to why Jeff loved ME 2 so much. Even go so far as to say it was one of the greatest games of this generation. So yes, with his expectations he'll be disappointed. He never said that the game was bad

@pyrodactyl:

Its his opinion and during the podcast, I rather hear his opinion rather than his objective criticism of the game. Hell he gave the game 4 stars despite all the misgivings he keeps touting about I think that makes his review pretty damn objective. Listening to the quick look alone you'd reckon the game would have gotten 3 stars at best.

The people who like ME3 are getting much too defensive. Its as if, having a low opinion (or lower than public consensus) is an incorrect fact, as if liking any type of entertainment is a form of science and not conforming to that means that you're wrong and need to shut up. In case you haven't noticed, every piece of content from giantbomb staff members is swimming it their personal opinions and that's what makes this site so special and personal.

They've talked shit about games I liked before and I appreciate that because I like hear the giantbomb opinion, no matter how much I disagree with it because its a different and unique perspective that I find interesting and if they do share the same as opinion as I do well damn, hip hip hooray.

My gripe with this thread is that the fans of ME3 have this tenacious defensive position on this game. They don't take criticism well and they eat every bite of shit EA excretes. I've read posts that people would buy DLC for a better ending and that is just sad, sickening and frustrating.