Originally Posted by DarthParametric
One of the most striking things was the amount of auto-dialogue in ME3. Playing all 3 games back-to-back, you really notice it. In ME1, everything Shepard says is chosen by the player. There are also "investigation" options to ask about specific topics in virtually all convos. In ME2 this is mostly the same, although auto-dialogue makes an appearance and there are less investigate options. There are also fewer Charm/Intimidate choices offered, mostly being replaced with interrupts. In ME3, auto-dialogue makes up the majority, and when you do get a choice it is almost invariably just 2 options. This is probably one of the more egregious missteps of ME3 IMO. They pared back so many features, but player choice in characterising Shepard was one of the hallmarks of the series. Given the direction they seem to be trending, I wonder if ME4 will be a straight out shooter.
For a while I thought I was one of the only ones who noticed that. At first it wasn't too obvious since I was caught up in the euphoria, but playing ME3 a second time really made me realize how it's basically a Gears of war clone. While there were a lot of good moments in ME3, they were overshadowed by a lot of bad things in ME3.
I agree that Mass Effect 1 had the best plot. It really made me fear the Reapers, and it gave the feeling that you are exploring the unknown when out in the Attican Traverse. Mass Effect 2 tried to continue that, but the Collecters made the Reapers simply seem a challenge. In Mass Effect 3, Reapers seemed more like stupid robots. This came from the God kid explaining how "the reapers are not interested in war".
I think they should never have explained the motives of the Reapers, keeping their history mysterious would probably have made for a better ending