Announcement

**rmoxon** · 10-03-2012, 09:40

What were their reasons for Mass Effect 3 only getting an 8? So far what I have played of it is simply stunning.

**Brad** · 10-03-2012, 09:48

Maybe they played the ps3 version and marked it down on technical issues? It's edge though so who knows?

**Mr Ono** · 10-03-2012, 09:51

That's dampened my yearning to buy SSX rather than wait for the price drop. Cheers for that.

**Daragon** · 10-03-2012, 10:01

Don't forget, an edge 8 means an everything else 11!

C' · 10-03-2012, 10:33

Ever more increasingly with Edge reviews, I actually think an Edge 8 actually means that happened to be the random number they drew from the hat.

**EvilBoris** · 10-03-2012, 10:39

Originally posted by Mr Ono View Post

That's dampened my yearning to buy SSX rather than wait for the price drop. Cheers for that.

Out of 60+ critic reviews on metacritic Edge's review is the lowest score by some way.
There is one 60% and everything else is above 70.

SSX kinda needs you to have other players times to beat and friends to compete against, but they had reviewed the game long before the game was released so wouldn't of had either of those.
They are basically reviewing the world tour mode, which is a big tedious tutorial

**prinnysquad** · 10-03-2012, 10:52

There's a lot of positivity, but the complaints boil down to:

Quotage:

"In ME3, everything you do earns supplies, troops and allies that feed into a metric measuring your readiness for war. It's a setup that requires a stricter primary questline than ME 1 and 2. Whereas the first two titles would - one introductions were out of the way - hand players a selection of missions and then let them approach them in the order they saw fit, ME3 dictates its order of events. This, inevitably, makes for a much stronger sense of dissonance between the momentum of its primary plot and the myriad distractions it offers alongside it. Many RPGs are guilty of this, of course, but it's something that ME2 - which saw the BioWare team-building structure become the entire point of Shepard's mission - for the most part managed to elegantly avoid."

The shooting and dialogue trees "can't quite live up to the promise of all-out galactic war."

"Missions feel tight and boxy" despite the grander setting. "Their hub-and-spoke or plain old corridor design is definitely better suited to interiors than ME3's attempts at land battles."

One mission early is is more fatiguing than thrilling, and there's far too many instances of fire mounted turrets, piloting a mech, "and it's hard not to come away with the sense you're playing a second-rate Gears of War."

**rmoxon** · 10-03-2012, 11:28

Originally posted by prinnysquad View Post

There's a lot of positivity, but the complaints boil down to:

Quotage:

"In ME3, everything you do earns supplies, troops and allies that feed into a metric measuring your readiness for war. It's a setup that requires a stricter primary questline than ME 1 and 2. Whereas the first two titles would - one introductions were out of the way - hand players a selection of missions and then let them approach them in the order they saw fit, ME3 dictates its order of events. This, inevitably, makes for a much stronger sense of dissonance between the momentum of its primary plot and the myriad distractions it offers alongside it. Many RPGs are guilty of this, of course, but it's something that ME2 - which saw the BioWare team-building structure become the entire point of Shepard's mission - for the most part managed to elegantly avoid."

The shooting and dialogue trees "can't quite live up to the promise of all-out galactic war."

"Missions feel tight and boxy" despite the grander setting. "Their hub-and-spoke or plain old corridor design is definitely better suited to interiors than ME3's attempts at land battles."

One mission early is is more fatiguing than thrilling, and there's far too many instances of fire mounted turrets, piloting a mech, "and it's hard not to come away with the sense you're playing a second-rate Gears of War."

Thats a load of rubbish, I've played it for about 10 hours so far and I've never had any less than about 10 active missions at a time. I have to wonder if the reviewer just didn't notice they are there becuase they are not all marked on the mini map like the main quests are.

Also, the shoot is not like gears of war, the combat in Mass Effect 3 comes into its on when you use you combine your biotic powers together. The combat in this game is amazingly fun and surprisingly challenging, it's great.

**EvilBoris** · 10-03-2012, 11:56

It's a cover shooter, Mass Effect has always been a poor 3rd person shooter with RPG elements added on, but that doesn't stop it from being the superior game than Gears in my eyes.
Sure the shooting has got better, but it's still a bit pish in that respect.

The story, the styling and the settings are far more interesting for me and that totally outweighs any failings the controls or gameplay may have

**SUMIRE** · 10-03-2012, 14:08

Originally posted by EvilBoris View Post

It's a cover shooter, Mass Effect has always been a poor 3rd person shooter with RPG elements added on, but that doesn't stop it from being the superior game than Gears in my eyes.
Sure the shooting has got better, but it's still a bit pish in that respect.

The story, the styling and the settings are far more interesting for me and that totally outweighs any failings the controls or gameplay may have

Totally agree, although i'm not sure if it was the other way around, but yeah, the combat isn't the best, but the rest totally makes up for it, and then some.

**rmoxon** · 10-03-2012, 14:23

The combat was crap in mass effect 1 it was good in 2, but it's great in the third game.

Having said that it really depends what class you choose and how you go about the combat. I did find playing it as a cover based shooter to be relatively dull, but if you mix things up and use your powers a lot it's great. I hardly ever shoot anyone in it to be honest, so I can't really say I think it's a cover shooter at all.

**NW2013** · 10-03-2012, 16:05

Agree with Edge's comments on ME3 from what I've played so far (about 8 hours). They're not saying there aren't a lot of side missions but they are saying that they're more peripheral and feel like more of a distraction from the main quest. I'd also say the whole paragon/renegade thing is way too simplistic and the options are easily signposted.

Prinny, what did they say about Syndicate?

**Charlie** · 10-03-2012, 16:20

Originally posted by rmoxon View Post

Thats a load of rubbish, I've played it for about 10 hours so far and I've never had any less than about 10 active missions at a time. I have to wonder if the reviewer just didn't notice they are there becuase they are not all marked on the mini map like the main quests are.

Also, the shoot is not like gears of war, the combat in Mass Effect 3 comes into its on when you use you combine your biotic powers together. The combat in this game is amazingly fun and surprisingly challenging, it's great.

It's not rubbish. It's an opinion.

**rmoxon** · 10-03-2012, 17:14

Originally posted by Charlie View Post

It's not rubbish. It's an opinion.

You don't have to defend Edge by telling me it's just their opinion, I know it's their opinion. A pretentious, ridculous and factually wrong opinion, as per usual.

Announcement

Edge 239 - April 2012

Edge 239 - April 2012

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment