Originally Posted by Achilles
I agree. I do however think there's a difference between saying "I don't like the ending" and "the ending could have been better". I'm inclined to let the former stand (because it's someone voicing their opinion...which all of us have the right to do) whereas the latter is begging to be challenged with "how?".
Plenty of people say Nickelback's music could be better... (I don't think this cause nothing they do could ever make them any good, they suck plain and simple lol). But the great majority of the people saying that know nothing about music, can't sing and have never played an instrument. So how do they know they could be better? Because we know what music sounds good to us and what doesn't.
The question that comes to mind when people say that is "how would you make it better?" it's "how do you know it's not good?" and the answer usually is, "because I just know it is." since people people base it on a gut feeling the majority of the time.
Just because I want to understand: FPS only have to be fun, however RPGs have to have high replay value?
What is "fun" to you and what is "fun" for others?
For me personally, it's more along the intentions of what the creators were trying to go for with the particular video game they're making. The biggest no-no for me is when developers end up betraying what their game is about and what they had set out to do with the game or game series and can't justify what they ended up with.
I'll take Metroid, the series and Metroid: Other M as an example. The Metroid series most famous element is the ability for the player to explore. Exploration is a huge part of finding where you need to go and what you need to do to progress through the game. Over the years, while there have been some changes to the later games in the series, they all still had that element of exploration in them that makes a Metroid game what it is while still adding new elements that were previously an unknown to the series like the Metroid Prime games did by adding a first person view and more emphasis on story, though this story was mostly optional. Metroid Prime successfully broke some of the rules while keeping the core aspects of what made the series great in its own games.
Metroid: Other M, the last Metroid game to be released broke all of the rules but at the same time created a game that was Metroid in name only. It had ZERO exploration, zero relevance and the gameplay and feel of the entire game was completely out character for the series. It's like if you put Assassin's Creed next to Super Mario Galaxy and said AC is the sequel to SMG.
So while Metroid: Other M would have gotten a pass if it was My Space Adventure: Other M and would have been considered just another mediocre new IP, it was a Metroid game which came with it certain conditions of holding that title that it couldn't meet. Therefore Metroid: Other M is entirely a BAD Metroid game.
In terms of Mass Effect 3, my expectations weren't based on the RPG genre it says it belongs to... or at least belonged to initially, it's what the developers of the first Mass Effect said they were going to do with the three games when they set out on this ambitious project. They wanted people to play through the trilogy and get to the end and then say "wow, okay, I've gotten this ending, I wonder what other kind of ending I can get if I go back to the start and play the trilogy differently?"
When you get to the end of ME3, that drive to get you to replay the series isn't there. And sure, a lot of people will say "it's the journey, not the end that matters" but in terms of video gaming, if you have a game with alternate endings, the best way to get them to replay your game is to have those endings unreachable unless you meet certain conditions in your journey to get to that point. And when you do get to that point, you shouldn't be standing in the exact same spot, doing the exact same thing with the exact same choices but with a different final cutscene, especially now with the Internet. It needs to be the kind of ending where you could be in Earth's orbit in the final moment, or you could still be in the Citadel's nebula with an army of geth and quarians working together to take over the Reaper's programming which in turn gets you a very different set of gameplay levels to reach those alternate endings since in the second one, you would never have set foot on Earth because you were leading a strike team straight to the Citadel itself. Also, ugh *shakes head* I hate coming up with these fan fiction-esc outcomes.
The point is, I don't expect RPGs to have replay value, I expect to play a role in a larger story... however, I expected Mass Effect as a series to make me want to go back and replay the trilogy to get different outcomes. It failed to do that for me. Just like I expect Metroid to get me to explore strange alien locales and encounter mysterious ruins and creatures. Other M didn't do any of that for me, it was a straight line from start to finish and was narrated by a hormonal teen girl (I'm not going to explain that, just trust me... it was).