ARRAY(0xa0cc272c)
 
Profile for ikantspel > Reviews

Browse

ikantspel's Profile

Customer Reviews: 4
Top Reviewer Ranking: 672,352
Helpful Votes: 845




Community Features
Review Discussion Boards
Top Reviewers

Guidelines: Learn more about the ins and outs of Your Profile.

Reviews Written by
ikantspel RSS Feed (South Carolina)

Show:  
Page: 1
pixel
Mass Effect 3 - Xbox 360
Mass Effect 3 - Xbox 360
Offered by Quick Buys
Price: $9.25
191 used & new from $3.60

826 of 1,044 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars Great Trilogy.... Until the Last Hour or So, March 10, 2012
= Fun:5.0 out of 5 stars 
Be warned, this review contains some spoilers so read at your own risk. This is also a bit long winded; I apologize but, as a fan, I invested quite a bit of time in the series. Time for me to give back what they took from me.

My Real Rating: 4.5/5 until the last hour or so, at which it becomes 2/5

Game reviews can often be subjective so this review is coming from someone primarily with an RPG background who, in terms of game play, enjoyed the first game better than the second. The second wasn't terrible in terms of story but it was much less of an RPG and more of a shooter. The first thing I noticed about Mass Effect 3 is that BioWare gave us a game that gives us the best of both worlds and should be recognized for that. There are also some things here and there that I either loved or hated but these were not things that impacted the overall experience so I exclude them.

Some Observations
=================

1. Some people complain about graphics but that isn't as much as an issue for me. I am a hard line gamer who still pulls out the classics from the 80s and 90s and can generally forgive not-as-good graphics for a good story or game that is simply fun to play. Mass Effect 3 is, for the most part, both. That being said, the graphics weren't terrible and I feel that this is really a non-issue.

2. The re-design of the Normandy is great! I love the lounge (reminds me of a line from Mass Effect 2 when Shepard told Jacob that the next Normandy gets a lounge). Nice touch.

3. The writing was generally good. There were some places where I felt it was lacking but I'm saving my anger to discuss the ending. Also, character development is good, especially across the three titles; this is insanely difficult to accomplish in a game trilogy so kudos for that. There were several points in the game where a scene elicited an emotional reaction from me. In the last hour, that emotion was sheer terror that all this character development had been for nothing (see below).

4. As I mentioned, many of the RPG elements that were taken out of the second title were brought back but vastly improved. One such feature was weapon modding. While it didn't bother me like it did some people, I must still admit that modding in the first game could become rather tedious, especially for someone who feels the need to collect everything (not a good idea in the first game).

In this game, for example, suppose you mod a series of weapons with, say, a Rifle Scope I. If you pick up or purchase a Rifle Scope II, all weapons with the earlier mod are automatically updated as well as your inventory.

From the start, you can choose to upgrade weapons you are using to better weapons right away. Moreover, weapons are no longer constrained to a particular class (i,e, infiltrator, soldier, vanguard, etc) so you can enter a combat situation with the weapons that are best suited to the task. There are some weight limits that you should observe when carrying weapons that depend on class, however.

Overall, the game play is fantastic.

5. Halleluiah, planet scanning is gone! It has returned in some form but one does not need to spend large chunks of time collecting resources to upgrade weapons and ship components. Planet scanning is mainly used to collect war assets in Reaper controlled territory but even this can still get a bit tedious at times.

6. I am not a huge fan of multiplayer games, cooperative or not, so I do not feel like I am in a position to adequately critique it.

Comments on the Story
=====================

The story was great. I was on the edge of my seat digging it, that is, until the last hour minutes or so when, in my view, the totality of the trilogy came crashing to the ground. There is a huge, heated debate about the ending of the game where both sides are calling names like rather ill-behaved children. I do not intend to call names here as games, like movies, are very subjective. However, I do have some thoughts about the ending and the story. If you don't share these thoughts, great. But don't be pompous, acting like your opinion is the only one out there. And, beware of spoilers.

//[Work Hard and Still Get the Shaft]//

The first thing that really annoyed me was that I played through every mission/side quest and got most (but admittedly not all) of the war assets from the various worlds using the planet scanner (this also got tedious at times but was nowhere as bad as the scanning in ME2). The way I understand the galactic readiness rating (GRT) is as follows: it is basically a multiplier that takes your raw military strength and is used to produce an effective military strength (EMS). If you spend more time in the multiplayer (which I did not) you can, in principle, spend less time on side quests and vice-versa. Good idea, I thought, as it gives players some leeway on how to proceed.

However, when I went into the final battle, I feel that the EMS rating was rather misleading. Mine was roughly at about 3200 or so with a default GRT of 50%. The green bar was completely filled. However, my ending sucked (I'll get to this in a minute). In fact, the first time I played through, I was so shocked that I re-loaded the Citadel mission to see if I missed something. Nope, as I feared.

Now, my initial reaction was knee-jerk. I was furious that EA/BioWare made a game where, as I perceived at the time, a decent ending could not be achieved without multiplayer. I have since then been corrected. A decent ending, where Shepard presumably lives (there is still some ambiguity here), can be achieved with an EMS of 4000 or better (at least, according to sites like IGN). However, my complaint is that the game misled me about this as my EMS bar was completely filled going into the last mission. Even if you can get the good ending without playing multiplayer, much of your readiness rating depends on previous choices from earlier titles. Also, admittedly, there is a box that told me that my chances against the Reapers was even but I didn't think much of it because in Mass Effect 2, they still called it a "suicide mission" even if you made all the necessary preparations.

I should note that the supposed "good" ending includes a very brief cut scene where Shepard is still alive but appears to be in bad shape; I don't have much of an incentive to work hard to get my EMS up for a 20 second cut scene that leaves some ambiguity about Shepard's ultimate fate.

//[Past Decisions?]//

I didn't feel that all of my decisions really mattered. My feeling is that your decisions mattered mainly insofar as a character might briefly appear in the game and promise to help you but you may not ever encounter that character again in the game and a positive number would be tallied, in your favor, to your military strength. So, basically, I feel like I made decisions not to see further development of a character who was willing to fight and, possibly die, along side me but rather, to see a sum magically increase by a few hundred points.

A good example is the Rachni Queen. She appears if you save her and you are again given an option to save or let her die as she has been taken over by Reaper tech. If you let her live, she appears in a list under the war assets and that is that.

The collector base, for example, does play a role in what choices you have in the ending but I didn't really feel like my decision to destroy it made much of an impact throughout the game. This was, at least I thought, a huge decision and all it does it determine which three crappy choices will cause you to "win" if you even "win" at all. That is, the crappy choices are permuted depending on your choice to destroy or not destroy the collector base.

You also see Major Kirrahe who promises to fight by your side no matter which way the political tide turns. What is frustrating is that I expected a full scale, epic battle where all sorts of people I have rallied were fighting by my side. Literally. I don't think that this was a wrong or misleading assumption. But this isn't what I got. Perhaps my expectations here were far too high.

I understand that making a game that is custom tailored to the player is a difficult, technical task but this is how they marketed the game. I remember feeling that my ME1 decisions, with the exception of Wrex, didn't really have an impact on ME2 except for a few casual encounters with Conrad or an Asari communicating on behalf of the Rachni Queen. I really felt like I would feel the heavy weight of my major decisions from ALL three titles. Instead, there were many times when it felt like "Oh yeah, I remember doing that." The only decisions that seemed to carry sufficient weight were ones that I made in this particular game.

//[Total Annihilation/Gooification of Humanity Isn't So Bad So Long As it is Justified by a Child]//

The ending didn't make much sense to me. In fact, I felt like more alcohol would assist me in understanding it. So, to save organics from the hands of super advanced synthetics or AIs we have to brutally destroy entire species with a race of ultra-sophisticated synthetic-organic hybrids? Okay, perhaps "destroy" is a bad word; more like, gooify you and collect you as a museum exhibit of what once was. So, instead of being destroyed in the usual "the machines have revolted" sense, we will be brutally harvested by super advanced machines. Yeah.... that is a great....uh.... solution? Chaos is not necessarily a bad thing; it is found in nature. This was hard to stomach.

In Mass Effect 2, we discovered that the collectors were really Protheans who were re-purposed and it was generally agreed by Shepard and crew that this was a fate far worse than extinction. Why the change of heart? Because the presumably non-caporial being on the Citadel took the form of a child instead of Harbinger, with his guttural, bad guy-ish sounding voice? This child basically told Shepard what Harbinger told Shepard on Virmire and at various spots in Mass Effect 2. Shepard certainly didn't buy what Harbinger told him in the previous games but now it is okay because a child says it?

Seriously, I would rather fight a loosing battle against machines Terminator 2 style than have my friends and family turned into some goo where they loose all personality but their genetic structure is preserved. Because, you know, as I play, develop relationships, and think long term, my main concern should be.... preserving my bodily fluids? It almost has a Dr. Strangelove tone to it... I'm just imagining Shepard droning on about his precious bodily fluids.

Seriously, this sucked beyond measure. And by beyond measure, I mean it was serious, knee deep, disappointing, suckage. Dying at the hands of the collectors in ME2 was, in my opinion, a far more satisfying ending to the series. Fewer loose ends to tie up (which were not tied up in ME3).

//[But You Can Still "Stop" The Reapers]//

If, by stop, you mean one of three things: you control the reapers, which is very disappointing because it gives the Illusive Man credibility, you combine synthetics and organics which is equally disappointing and, frankly weird as hell, or, as some game sites misreport, you destroy all synthetics, including the Reapers (some game sites report that you just destroy the Reapers). And, unless you worked really hard, Admiral Anderson will die as will Shepard.

Then, in a sudden chance of pace, Joker apparently stops assisting the space attack to go and pick up Ashley, James, and Liara from the ground battle so that when they crash land on some Eden-like planet, there will be enough people to make babies (Note: some things may be different depending on who you saved in ME1, who your squadmates were for the last mission, etc but the idea is the same).

So let's recap: you either die or, if not, you take a breath of air badly wounded with absolutely no character resolution, you have absolutely no clue what happened to the other characters you have grown to love, and it is very likely that your spouse-to-be (or, at the least, I hoped) will have the task of making babies to repopulate humanity with little to no facial expression that seems to express the slightest bit of concern as to your fate.

I wanted to see total Reaper carnage (as opposed to total AI/synthetic carnage) and maybe a wedding or possibly a scene where you walk away with your friends in the sunset leaving behind a pile of dead reapers (yes, I know, I am a hopeless romantic). Instead, I got no character resolution and a random scene of Joker crashing on a planet that seemed to have little to do with anything.

Some people might contend I am making too much out of nothing. Possibly. But I wouldn't tolerate this kind of ending in a movie trilogy so why should I tolerate it in a game that is supposed to be story driven?

The suckage is complete and I'm not it sure can be undone. This alone does not make me want to go back and re-play the game. In fact, I would be content to stop playing before the battle of Earth and leave it be or die in ME2. I'm not even sure I can play the other titles knowing what ending lies ahead. The game and the trilogy was great but the ending completely ruined everything for me at this point.

Bottom Line
===========

Gameplay is good and refined. Ending sucks and ruins the trilogy. Even if the ending is bad (I would have preferred a bittersweet ending as mentioned earlier), character resolution is still a part of story telling!
Comment Comments (312) | Permalink | Most recent comment: Oct 1, 2013 6:15 PM PDT


General Topology (Dover Books on Mathematics)
General Topology (Dover Books on Mathematics)
by Stephen Willard
Edition: Paperback
Price: $20.20
71 used & new from $9.95

6 of 6 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars A Great Beginning Text, June 18, 2008
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
Willard's text is a great introduction to the subject, suitable for use in a graduate course. I am personally not training to be a topologist but I must say that I enjoyed this book thoroughly and walked away with a firmer appreciation of the subject than I had previously had.

There is quite a bit of content ranging from subject matter and an extensive bibliography to a collection of historical notes. The exercises are suitable and doable; I have personally found that most of them range from being easy to moderately challenging but there are plenty of difficult problems as well.

It is important to note, however, that this text is primarily focused on point-set topology. There is a brief exposition of homotopy theory and the fundamental group but nothing compared to, say Munkres. But this is by no means a drawback. Willard thoroughly examines many topics that Munkres sometimes allocates to the exercises. A good example of this is net convergence, a topic that in my opinion, ought to be treated in any introductory topology course. In fact, Willard's development of nets makes for a nice, quick proof of the Tychonoff Theorem while Munkres's approach necessitates the development of a few technical lemmas.

Overall, this book is quite pleasant to read. It is also quite pleasant to purchase compared to several other introductory texts that run anywhere from 50.00-100.00. There are many nontrivial aspects to topology and this book has a way of gently nudging the reader into some of the more technical and delicate aspects of the theory. But as I mentioned before, while this book is a great introduction to point-set topology, this is not the text to read if one is searching for an introduction to algebraic or differential topology. In the latter case, Munkres or Fulton would be a good bet.


Function Theory of One Complex Variable (Graduate Studies in Mathematics, 40)
Function Theory of One Complex Variable (Graduate Studies in Mathematics, 40)
by Steven G. Krantz
Edition: Hardcover
15 used & new from $22.00

8 of 11 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars Not Bad..., May 2, 2007
This book is reasonably accessible to those who may not have had any previous exposure to complex analysis. Many parts of the text are well written and easy to read and I really enjoyed the exposition on harmonic functions. With that being said, however, there are some things that I did not particularly like.

I thought it was strange that the author discusses the Cauchy integral formula for a disk, develops more aspects of the theory, and then later comes back to deal with homotopy theory and topology insofar as integration is concerned. In this aspect, Conway's treatise on the subject is superior, in my opinion.

I also prefer Conway's proof of Mittag-Leffler's theorem which is eloquent and a good application of Runge's Theorem. Additionally, I prefer Conway's proof of the Picard theorems as well (Conway uses Montel-Caratheodory which in and of itself is interesting while Greene and Krantz use the modular function and there are a few choice spots when Krantz is a bit vague).

Finally, some of the proofs and exercises contain errors (most of them minor, some of them not so minor) and a few of the proofs are quite difficult to follow at times while Conway's book seems more readable in these areas. This comment mainly applies to the 2nd edition and it is quite conceivable that the author has remedied these errors in the 3rd edition.

Overall, this book has some value. I believe that this book, coupled with Conway's book is a good combination. There are many things that Greene and Krantz do that I prefer over Conway and vice versa although if I had to compare the two, I would prefer Conway.


Partial Differential Equations (Graduate Studies in Mathematics, Vol. 19)
Partial Differential Equations (Graduate Studies in Mathematics, Vol. 19)
by Lawrence C. Evans
Edition: Hardcover
34 used & new from $38.26

5 of 5 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars A Fine Treatise on the Subject, May 2, 2007
This is a superb exposition of a difficult, yet enriching subject. This book is intended only as a beginning text (in a relative sense) and is by no means an attempt to give an exhaustive view of many topics discussed therein.

The first few chapters discuss classical solution techniques to frequently encountered PDEs such as the heat and Laplace equation. Methods of solution are discussed including Fourier transform methods and other classical methods to obtain strong solutions and/or representation formulas. The author, from this point, focuses on weak solution techniques for second order PDEs and systems in addition to conservation laws and other nonlinear PDEs. There is also a self-contained chapter on Sobolev spaces that proves to be fairly useful.

There is a necessary mathematical maturity needed to fully benefit from this text. The reader should be relatively comfortable with standard topics from classical analysis. It would help if the reader has seen Lebesgue spaces and is familiar with basic functional analysis and operator theory although many of these topics are reviewed in the apendices.

While this book is dense and difficult at times, it has a prominent place on my bookshelf.


Page: 1