Biggest plot holes in games

Orange12345

New member
Aug 11, 2011
458
0
0
Assassin's creed 2 ending, why the hell did Ezio not kill Rodrigo? I know they wanted to keep his death in line with history but seriously they could have just made him drop the staff and escape instead of having Ezio STANDING over him and just decide not to kill the sob
 

Tomeran

New member
Nov 17, 2011
156
0
0
The "Russian can invade all of Europe at the same time"-move in the CoD series comes to mind. Particularly entertaining since the ruskies were just beaten back from American soil shortly before this attack.

But that one's probably been bashed to death.

There's the ME3 space magic ending, but if im gonna avoid subjects that's been talked to death I shouldnt touch that with a 100 foot pole.


Oh hell I dono, there are so many plot holes in the gaming industry to pick from.
 

Evil Top Hat

New member
May 21, 2011
579
0
0
bloodrayne626 said:
Not so much a plot hole, but in FarCry3
during the hallucinogenic sequence where you have to kill Hoyt,
what the hell happened to all the guards?

It just irked me a little. Not enough to be an "oh my god this game sucks because it missed a few details" moment (not like I have those, anyway), but still, what the hell?
I've heard people complaining about that section, but I was more baffled by
when you kill Vaas, and you enter that dream/drug sequence and fend off illusions of him before finally shooting him and leaving safe and victorious, despite the fact that HE FUCKING STABBED YOU. Seriously. HE STABBED YOU. Not once does the game explain how you managed to defeat Vaas or even get out of that pirate camp with a bloody knife rammed through all your vital organs. Oh yeah, and there was also that point in which you were in a helicopter that got shot out of the sky by a rocket, exploded, and crash landed, and what happens? Yep. You survive. Oh yeah, then a few moments after Vaas shoots you in the chest again before burying you under a pile of corpses. And you survive.

The only solution to the glaringly improbable story of Far Cry 3 is that he is somehow deranged, drugged up, or biased in some way that explains how he gets out of so many numerous fatal situations during cutscenes.
 

Mikeyfell

Elite Member
Aug 24, 2010
2,784
0
41
Joseph Harrison said:
Mikeyfell said:
Except you're wrong, that wasn't the first time they spoke (which is pretty obvious by the familiarity with which they speak) James has been guarding Shepard for the past six months while Shepard was in lock down. Also is it really hard to believe that in the six months between ME2 and ME3 that Anderson was promoted once or twice seeing as how he was one of the highest decorated officers in the whole alliance and a close friend with Admiral Hackett and Councilor Udina.
So you're arguing that that was stated in dialog isn't a plot hole because of something that was never stated in dialog... Seems legit.
You know James also said Cerberus was working with the Collectors during the events of Mass Effect 2. So I wouldn't cut James any slack

But I still have a problem with the Anderson thing. see in about 50% of games (Probably more) Anderson left the Alliance and there never was a "Councilor Udina"
I was under the impression that the Mass Effect games were supposed to adapt to the choices you made and not just retcon them to suit their lazy dipshit writers. So I'm going to continue to count that as a plot hole right along with if you picked Udina at the end of ME 1 (And killed the council) there are still aliens in the council even though Udina says very pointedly "Forge a new council composed of a single voice, humanity." So I'm pretty content to write Mass Effect 3 off as a plot hole ridden non-cannon mess

wintercoat said:
DeimosMasque said:
ecoho said:
snip
I always figured it was due to Shepard's Spectre seniority. Kaiden may be the higher rank in the Human military, but Shepard was a higher Spectre rank, and as Spectre rank trumps Alliance rank, Shepard was in command.
I also think it has to do with the fact that Shepard is a part of the army and Kaiden the Marines so because Shepard is in charge of the Normandy and Kaidan is "stationed" on the Normandy then Shepard is in charge of him.
A Major in the Marines is lower rank than a Commander in the navy.
I thought that was a plot hole as well, but it turns out not.
 

Joseph Harrison

New member
Apr 5, 2010
479
0
0
Mikeyfell said:
Joseph Harrison said:
Mikeyfell said:
snip
So you're arguing that that was stated in dialog isn't a plot hole because of something that was never stated in dialog... Seems legit.
You know James also said Cerberus was working with the Collectors during the events of Mass Effect 2. So I wouldn't cut James any slack
Except it states in game that it has been half a year since ME2 and it states in game that James Vega was guarding you as well as in a comic that was released. So that is how James knew Shepard before the start of ME3 that isn't a plot hole it is about as explicitly stated as possible without breaking the show don't tell rule.

I'm not sure if what James said about Cerberus was a plot hole but that did piss me off.
ME1 Cerberus is bad
ME2 Actually no Cerberus is really cool and good and are just misunderstood
ME3 Scratch that Cerberus is bad again

Make up your damn minds Bioware

Mikeyfell said:
But I still have a problem with the Anderson thing. see in about 50% of games (Probably more) Anderson left the Alliance and there never was a "Councilor Udina"
I was under the impression that the Mass Effect games were supposed to adapt to the choices you made and not just retcon them to suit their lazy dipshit writers. So I'm going to continue to count that as a plot hole right along with if you picked Udina at the end of ME 1 (And killed the council) there are still aliens in the council even though Udina says very pointedly "Forge a new council composed of a single voice, humanity." So I'm pretty content to write Mass Effect 3 off as a plot hole ridden non-cannon mess
Except in ME3 Anderson says that he resigned as Councilor and let Udina have the job because, as shown in ME2, he hated being a Councilor. Also I'm pretty sure that the original plan was to make a new council where Humans were the leaders of the council and the other councilors were just puppets that would do what humans say. Of course its been 3 years since ME1 so you can assume that humanity has lost a lot of political clot seeing as the prevalent anti-human sentiment in ME2.
 

sXeth

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
2,636
117
68
Exius Xavarus said:
The Duke does regain his senses just before the fact, though. He wasn't in his right mind at the start, but what bothered me was the way he actually came to after you popped out from hiding. Dazed and disoriented, yes, but he was well aware you were there and who you were. Also, I'm having a hard time understanding what this "Jesus-expy" is. x_x
Jesus-expy : Prophesied messiah arrived to save the world from X (in this case, Dragon).

More or less, when he first hurls you into the dungeons for eternity without a trial, its a very private matter. Once you get back out, he'd have to move against you much more publicly and probably arouse the ire of his already fairly fractured people. Even then, he does seem to be exiling you with the expedition plan before the Greatwall gets attacked, and even that mission could be considered a suicide run (or he realizes then that you are desperately needed as the biggest defense against the Dragon just got dropped like nothing).
 

Exius Xavarus

Casually hardcore. :}
May 19, 2010
2,064
0
0
Seth Carter said:
Exius Xavarus said:
The Duke does regain his senses just before the fact, though. He wasn't in his right mind at the start, but what bothered me was the way he actually came to after you popped out from hiding. Dazed and disoriented, yes, but he was well aware you were there and who you were. Also, I'm having a hard time understanding what this "Jesus-expy" is. x_x
Jesus-expy : Prophesied messiah arrived to save the world from X (in this case, Dragon).

More or less, when he first hurls you into the dungeons for eternity without a trial, its a very private matter. Once you get back out, he'd have to move against you much more publicly and probably arouse the ire of his already fairly fractured people. Even then, he does seem to be exiling you with the expedition plan before the Greatwall gets attacked, and even that mission could be considered a suicide run (or he realizes then that you are desperately needed as the biggest defense against the Dragon just got dropped like nothing).
That would make more sense to me if the exact same thing didn't happen even if you ignored Aelinore or let the Duke continue on. =p
 

Mikeyfell

Elite Member
Aug 24, 2010
2,784
0
41
Joseph Harrison said:
Except it states in game that it has been half a year since ME2 and it states in game that James Vega was guarding you as well as in a comic that was released. So that is how James knew Shepard before the start of ME3 that isn't a plot hole it is about as explicitly stated as possible without breaking the show don't tell rule.


Are you farmiliar with the "Hierarchy of Cannon"?
Everything that is relevant to the top tier (The source material, the games in Mass Effect's case) Have to hold up under the scrutiny of that tier alone. Any extended universe material can draw from (Or rely entirely on) the audience's understanding of higher tiers but not the other way around. So if Bioware decided to incorporate lower tier extended universe into top tier cannon they have to make sure that people who have only experienced the source material can pick up what's going on. (And if that means an exposition dump, then it shall be so.)

I'm not sure if what James said about Cerberus was a plot hole but that did piss me off.
ME1 Cerberus is bad
ME2 Actually no Cerberus is really cool and good and are just misunderstood
ME3 Scratch that Cerberus is bad again

Make up your damn minds Bioware
That's kind of taking presentation as fact.

ME1 The Alliance says Cerberus is bad, You have no reason to think otherwise
ME2 Cerberus says Cerberus isn't as bad as the Alliance says they are, You get to make up your own mind.
ME3 Bioware says Cerberus is bad and that they've always been bad and fuck Mass Effect 2

Facts are more like
ME1 The Alliance tells you to shoot up Cerberus facilities, then grounds your ship even though you're trying to save the universe.
ME2 Cerberus brings you back to life, gives you a ship and a crew and helps you save humans that the Alliance won't lift a finger to protect. They're not giving you much of a choice and they have ulterior motives but they're not hiding it from you.
ME3 They're attacking you, killing and experimenting on human refugees, orchestrating a government coup, and generally trying to stop you from saving the universe. And according to James they were helping the Collectors abduct the humans they brought Shepard back to stop.

You see how the first two are morally grey.
and see how the third one is completely morally black and stupid too.
The one thing that Cerberus, the Alliance and Shepard agree on is that Cerberus is out to help humanity.
So Killing and experimenting on humans, Stopping Shepard from saving Earth, and helping the Collectors abduct humans are all against The Illusive Man's MO.
(And if you want to use the "TIM is indoctrinated defense" He wasn't indoctrinated during Mass Effect 2 when he was supposed to be helping the Collectors abduct humans.)

So they might have been bad guys the whole time, but all the stuff they do in ME3 is directly against everything, The only thing they stand for.




Except in ME3 Anderson says that he resigned as Councilor and let Udina have the job because, as shown in ME2, he hated being a Councilor. Also I'm pretty sure that the original plan was to make a new council where Humans were the leaders of the council and the other councilors were just puppets that would do what humans say. Of course its been 3 years since ME1 so you can assume that humanity has lost a lot of political clot seeing as the prevalent anti-human sentiment in ME2.
In the same ME2 scene when he said he hated being a councilor he also said that... oh just listen

http://youtu.be/DbNNlOiPbPk?t=5m24s

"As much as I complain I have an important job to do here."

That doesn't sound like something somebody who's willing to throw in the towel on humanity would say.

My biggest complaint is that the total script for ME 3 was about one fifth the length it should have been.
If I (For example) Picked Anderson, Killed the Council, Gave Cerberus the Collector base and Rewrote the Heretics.
My playthrough of Mass Effect 3 should have nothing in common with a game that picked Udina, saved the Council and destroyed the Heretics and the Collector base.
The way it stands now Mass Effect 3 is a hastily thrown together cash in to capitalize on all the emotional investment that was devoted to the first two games.

The stuff they did throw together wasn't even good- retconns and plot holes aside.
 

Aarowbeatsdragon

New member
Jan 27, 2012
284
0
0
TheJesus89 said:
Assassin's Creed 3

Why doesn't Desmond just go through Haytham's memories? Instead of spending 15 hours of going "WHERE IS CHARLES LEE" and not learning anything, you could have gained all the information needed by just going through Haytham's memories. Not to mention direct access to Templar secrets and what not.
They actually explain this, Its something to do with the animus, when a person conceives their child their memory's can no longer be lived, only their child's memory can be lived up until they have a child, like in AC2 when Desmond bleeding effect causes him to relive Altair's memory but when he conceives his child the camera stays with maria instead of following Altair. So not actually a plot hole but i can understand how it can be seen as one.
 

sXeth

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
2,636
117
68
Exius Xavarus said:
Seth Carter said:
Exius Xavarus said:
The Duke does regain his senses just before the fact, though. He wasn't in his right mind at the start, but what bothered me was the way he actually came to after you popped out from hiding. Dazed and disoriented, yes, but he was well aware you were there and who you were. Also, I'm having a hard time understanding what this "Jesus-expy" is. x_x
Jesus-expy : Prophesied messiah arrived to save the world from X (in this case, Dragon).

More or less, when he first hurls you into the dungeons for eternity without a trial, its a very private matter. Once you get back out, he'd have to move against you much more publicly and probably arouse the ire of his already fairly fractured people. Even then, he does seem to be exiling you with the expedition plan before the Greatwall gets attacked, and even that mission could be considered a suicide run (or he realizes then that you are desperately needed as the biggest defense against the Dragon just got dropped like nothing).
That would make more sense to me if the exact same thing didn't happen even if you ignored Aelinore or let the Duke continue on. =p
Well yeah, that's part of the "Options kill a cohesive story" issue in gaming. It pretty much bludgeons you over the head to go talk to Aelinore, and the maid is always hanging in the lobby you have to walk through with the quest marker blinking. So they obviously had that intent but chose to leave it optional and somewhat break the narrative. (Although I still ended up with Madeleine even in the playthrough I did the Aelinore stuff).
 

Blade1130

New member
Sep 25, 2011
175
0
0
Aarowbeatsdragon said:
TheJesus89 said:
Assassin's Creed 3

Why doesn't Desmond just go through Haytham's memories? Instead of spending 15 hours of going "WHERE IS CHARLES LEE" and not learning anything, you could have gained all the information needed by just going through Haytham's memories. Not to mention direct access to Templar secrets and what not.
They actually explain this, Its something to do with the animus, when a person conceives their child their memory's can no longer be lived, only their child's memory can be lived up until they have a child, like in AC2 when Desmond bleeding effect causes him to relive Altair's memory but when he conceives his child the camera stays with maria instead of following Altair. So not actually a plot hole but i can understand how it can be seen as one.
Where do they say that? Thinking back I have no memory of that ever being said. Although I guess that makes sense if memories are being held in genetics, then once the child is conceived his father's memories would be cut off at that point. I'm just curious as to where they pointed that out.

Regardless, Desmond can look at Haytham's memories and find out where Charles Lee is, but Connor can't. Keep in mind, Desmond is just observing this, he can't actually control Connor (in the context of the story at least, gameplay takes some liberties with that). Connor can't relive his father's memories like Desmond can, and so he can't find Charles Lee that way.

As for everyone arguing about the Didact, his motivation was flimsy at best and only really works if you just consider him as a racist. The game however doesn't really explain him at all. If you look it up on Wikipedia or read the books he makes sense, but the game doesn't make that clear at all. I don't think they ever explain what the Mantel of Responsibility is within the game itself. He does have his reasons for doing everything he does, the game just doesn't make them clear. Which is still bad story telling and doesn't exempt the game from anything, I just thought that was worth mentioning.

One thing that no one mentioned that really bothered me with Halo 4 though:
What the Librarian does to the Chief so that he can beat the Didact is almost pointless. Yeah, I get that she made him immune to the Composer, but the whole "You can't beat him unless I screw with your DNA" was just ridiculous. Especially considering the final fight anyways. As Yahtzee put it, he downloads "Only one who can stop him.dll" and then it is never brought up again.

Also, (perhaps I'm misunderstanding this) didn't the Librarian say that she was somehow behind the Chief's creation? That she "planted the seeds" for his genetic code and indirectly led to the creation of his armor and augmentations? That just doesn't make any sense to me. And I thought the whole "I'm speaking to this guy knowing that his descendent in 500 years will relive his memories and hear this conversation and save the world because of it" of Assassin's Creed 2 was ridiculous foresight. And from my understanding the Librarian can't see into the future like Minerva could!

Edit: My 117th post! Ironic considering the subject.
 

bug_of_war

New member
Nov 30, 2012
887
0
0
IronMit said:
Just to clarify...
The advantages I listed (eg. the massive tactical advantage the reapers lost) actually has nothing to do with how aware people were of the truth behind the rachni or the reapers, or considering them a threat;

2000 year delay allowing everyone to advance
reverse engineered sovereign weapons (thianx cannons)
control of relays
control of citadel
no surprise attack via centre of relay network (even though they still somehow managed to make ME3 a kind of surprise attack anyway)
3 new powerful races to contend with -humans, krogan, possibly geth
The Quarians also have the biggest baddass fleet which they only made about 1800 years after the rachni war,('cos that's when the geth chased them off their planet)

It seems the galaxy has almost tripled in strength, and the reapers have lost their surprise citadel relay attack (the one the prothean VI on Ilos highlighted and said was their undoing)

The reapers wanted to attack 2000 years ago (or maybe much earlier) because it was a good balance between the civilisations being advanced enough to be worth culling and not too difficult to fight even with their surprise citadel tactic.
They have lost so many advantages in so many area's even if 99.9999% of the galaxy weren't preparing. The only point in my list that involves preparing is the mass production of thianx cannons.

This is where we can interpret in different ways. I think we are 2x/3x more powerful (+ citadel tactic stopped- the prothean legacy that makes us the first cycle that has a chance is a cool thought) means we had a chance to fight the reapers (if shepard unites the galaxy) Other's think the crucible is still necessary

I think in the codex it tells you the translator is built into omnitool type devices. When a new species is found they are integrated into the translation devices. They go into in mass effect 1 when they talk about the extranet and the hanar speak by some sort of illuminious lights that the translator changes into audio dialogue but you see them flash anyway .
Okay, I see what you're saying. I guess in the end Bioware kind of shot themselves in the foot when it came to even just starting the first game seeing as how the backstory seems to counteract most things that happened in all 3 games (The first being the least effected obviously). I still like the series though, even with the original endings, 'plot holes' etc.
 

IronMit

New member
Jul 24, 2012
533
0
0
bug_of_war said:
Okay, I see what you're saying. I guess in the end Bioware kind of shot themselves in the foot when it came to even just starting the first game seeing as how the backstory seems to counteract most things that happened in all 3 games (The first being the least effected obviously). I still like the series though, even with the original endings, 'plot holes' etc.
It was billed as a planned trilogy but it either wasn't or it was changed.
The first one was 'least effected' because the backstory doesn't counteract anything


Everything raps up nicely in ME1. The prothean history& the reaper rumours. The little clues in the history and revelations of the rachni wars, rachni queen, the conduit, sovereign was using the rachni but failed then used saren and the geth when the prothean beacon was found. When the VI at Ilos explains everything to you, you think back to all the clues (lore, history, mini-revelations) and it all fits together. Play it a second time and you see all the clues and things you missed. ME1 is really good.

In ME2 they decided to tell you more about what the reaper's were - They made up the collectors and used cerberus to achieve this goal. It was kind of a giant filler to set up ME3. The arrival dlc was more relevant then the main campaign.
However there was all this forshadowing of dark energy also - Tali's recruitment mission. The sun on her planet is ageing prematurely at the edge of the galaxy. Apparently dark energy will destroy the galaxy and the reapers infuse advanced civilisations in the hope of solving this crisis. Humanity being their best chance this cycle. Hence why the collectors were collecting humans in a risky way, because making the human reaper was the highest priority.

The ex lead writer (ME1, ME2)said this was the original reason for the reapers...but then said 'it was one of many idea's on the table'. Pretty random..I mean making up the collectors and illusive man in ME2 is a means to an end but making up the primary motive and reason for everything on the 3rd act is bound to cause problems...and it did lol


So basically the order chaos theory used at the end of ME3 was pretty contrived.. considering the word chaos was used once by sovereign in ME1 and in a different context and i don't think it was ever mentioned again until ME3. There were 2 or 3 cut and paste forshadowing of this order-chaos theory in ME3. remember when the reaper on rannoch started talking...was pretty out of place...it looked like they added it pretty late into development.

Sorry I keep replying when you think the convo is done lol. I was really confused when ME3 finished and was trying to make it make sense to me and when it didn't... I tried to take into account every single possibility to figure out what happened and thought I would share. This is my interpretation based on the information I talked about above.

Basically when ME3 was going to be made...they wanted to market it to new players...hence a one game story arc to rap it up was taken(this is why all those crucial stuff from ME1 and the lore was never mentioned- would confused new players). They thought a 'take back earth' situation would be most appealing. Everything was twisted to reach this goal..earth is the centre of attention throughout, the citadel randomly ended up over earth etc etc.
 

esperandote

New member
Feb 25, 2009
3,605
0
0
Silent Hill 3. They need heather to birth god but they keep trying to kill her. I know they need her tu feel pain and suffering and if she dies valtiels resurrects her but in that case she could just chill the hell out.
 

LongAndShort

I'm pretty good. Yourself?
May 11, 2009
2,376
0
0
imahobbit4062 said:
deadman91 said:
FUCKING THANK YOU

Seriously, I know people love to hate on anything CoD, but this is the problem that always enrages me because of fucking morons not knowing shit about Russia. For this service you have given to these forums, I am yours to command.

OT: Enslaved. I gave up playing because of how fucking moronic Trip is. She enslaves the big monkey man so she can keep him safe and reach her homestead. Once she discovers that her people are (well it appears to be) slaughtered by mechs she starts losing her shit and begins to run as far away from Monkey Man as possible. Who is her best chance at survival and who also dies if she gets too far away from.
And like that, my own army grows...
 

bug_of_war

New member
Nov 30, 2012
887
0
0
IronMit said:
It was billed as a planned trilogy but it either wasn't or it was changed.
The first one was 'least effected' because the backstory doesn't counteract anything


Everything raps up nicely in ME1. The prothean history& the reaper rumours. The little clues in the history and revelations of the rachni wars, rachni queen, the conduit, sovereign was using the rachni but failed then used saren and the geth when the prothean beacon was found. When the VI at Ilos explains everything to you, you think back to all the clues (lore, history, mini-revelations) and it all fits together. Play it a second time and you see all the clues and things you missed. ME1 is really good.

In ME2 they decided to tell you more about what the reaper's were - They made up the collectors and used cerberus to achieve this goal. It was kind of a giant filler to set up ME3. The arrival dlc was more relevant then the main campaign.
However there was all this forshadowing of dark energy also - Tali's recruitment mission. The sun on her planet is ageing prematurely at the edge of the galaxy. Apparently dark energy will destroy the galaxy and the reapers infuse advanced civilisations in the hope of solving this crisis. Humanity being their best chance this cycle. Hence why the collectors were collecting humans in a risky way, because making the human reaper was the highest priority.

The ex lead writer (ME1, ME2)said this was the original reason for the reapers...but then said 'it was one of many idea's on the table'. Pretty random..I mean making up the collectors and illusive man in ME2 is a means to an end but making up the primary motive and reason for everything on the 3rd act is bound to cause problems...and it did lol


So basically the order chaos theory used at the end of ME3 was pretty contrived.. considering the word chaos was used once by sovereign in ME1 and in a different context and i don't think it was ever mentioned again until ME3. There were 2 or 3 cut and paste forshadowing of this order-chaos theory in ME3. remember when the reaper on rannoch started talking...was pretty out of place...it looked like they added it pretty late into development.

Sorry I keep replying when you think the convo is done lol. I was really confused when ME3 finished and was trying to make it make sense to me and when it didn't... I tried to take into account every single possibility to figure out what happened and thought I would share. This is my interpretation based on the information I talked about above.

Basically when ME3 was going to be made...they wanted to market it to new players...hence a one game story arc to rap it up was taken(this is why all those crucial stuff from ME1 and the lore was never mentioned- would confused new players). They thought a 'take back earth' situation would be most appealing. Everything was twisted to reach this goal..earth is the centre of attention throughout, the citadel randomly ended up over earth etc etc.
Don't worry about continuing to reply, it's good to have a civil conversation with someone about ME3 who has an opposite view and more perspective, half the time I have people calling me an idiot, or false, or a filthy casual, or they just shout at me, hahaha. I see what you're saying about ME1, and I probably should play it again so as that I can pay more attention to detail. I understand that most people were expecting the 'Dark Energy' plot in ME3 due to the hints in the second game, but I really didn't know ANYTHING about the whole Dark Energy thing until I started reading people talking about it. Maybe it's cause I really didn't like Tali, maybe because it was too subtle for me, whatever the reason, I honestly never had the whole 'Dark Energy killing the universe' going through my mind. My assumption when playing Mass Effect 2 was that the Reapers were focusing on humans because it was a human who screwed the pooch for their plans. The Human Reaper at the end of the game just meant to me that Reapers used other species to create Reapers, and initially I did not realise that it was only the core and that it would eventually be covered in squid armour once built.

I also didn't mind the direction they took with ME2 being more filler gap before ME3 as it had served a few purposes for the players. It gave us new and more interesting squad members (Kaiden, Ashley and Tali in my opinion were somewhat dull in the first game) such as Jack, Mordin, my main man Grunt, Legion, and to a certain extent Miranda. I liked the begining as it was the perfect way to make the enemy of the game look threatening. I justified the Reapers using the Collectors to attack human colonies as they (the Reapers) wanted humans out of the way due to a human halting their plans. I also enjoyed the more streamlined levels and areas were, as in ME1 I would find myself getting lost or bored in areas such as the Citadel and Feros (if Feros is where you fight the Thorian).

So yeah, I was one of the players (along with a lot of my mates) who had the Dark Energy foreshadowing blow straight over my head. So when Mass Effect 3 came around I just assumed that the Dark Energy plot (after reading about it pre release ME3) was a red herring and was ready to kick some Reaper...um, metalic backs? anyway... Mass Effect 3 focusing more on Earth made sense to me due to my inability to understand that Tali's mission hinted at a different story for the Reapers, and I reasoned their focusing on Earth was due to a human ruining their plans twice, so this was payback for being awesome at stopping ancient synthetic/organic space ships. I understood that some people were angry because they wanted to explore other planets, and Earth seemed dull to them, but I felt that really drove home the fact that just because we killed 1 Reaper, a bunch of mutated Protheans, and a baby Reaper, Humanity and the rest of the space races were hopelessly outmatched.

While I still love the series, I can see how Bioware kinda screwed the pooch when it came to Mass Effect 3 as they had built up so much hype and expanded on the universe with novels and comics. But I just got really annoyed when people started demanding a new ending and picking apart thngs, especially when some people started pointing fingers at ME2 even though weeks prior to ME3 they liked the game.
 

TheMadDoctorsCat

New member
Apr 2, 2008
1,163
0
0
Marik Bentusi said:
BioShock: Just why did Fontaine pull of his elaborate scheme with the protagonist instead of bunkering him somewhere close? It just adds a crapton of unnecessary complications not only in theory, but also practically as it turns out his creation really does backfire on him.
I'd usually just handwave it, but add to that Fontaine's already laughable Saturday Morning Mustache-Twirling Doctor Evilstein Villain Out For World Domination spiel and the fact the whole farce was really just written to allow for the character freedom plot twist, I can't help but be disgusted at the terrible writing beneath and think of the plot hole as an irredeemably deep one.
Seconded. I loved Bioshock right up until the point of the "Reveal". Then the great villain disappears and is replaced by this prat, whose plot and character come straight from a Saturday morning cartoon.
 

The_Echo

New member
Mar 18, 2009
3,253
0
0
alphamalet said:
In Persona 3
everyone is supposed to lose their memory after the final battle, and they do, but then at the very end they all get their collective memory back at the same time? Seems rather convenient
It's been a while for me, but doesn't that have something to do with
Minato using the Universe Arcana? Or, the promise they made overpowering the memory loss? The eternal bonds of friendship?
You know what, I'll just chalk it up to "JRPG plot device X."

OT: In the Sly Cooper series, Carmelita's voice changes every game, but everyone else's stays the same.

Why is this? Is there some sort of vocal disorder that may be the cause? Why does she have a different accent in Sly 2? (Personally, I prefer that one over the others.)

So many questions.

Also,
how reconstructing Clockwork even happened. He fell into a volcano; who fished him out and stuck his then-broken-now-simply-detached parts in a museum? Why does his consciousness not come back once reconstructed? How exactly did Constable Neyla combine with Clockwork? Is there a cockpit in there? Did she get some kind of cyborg surgery?