103 réponses à ce sujet

[Alphyn]

Mass Effect was amazing. It truly did make me believe for a second that humanity can reach for the stars. I also just generally liked how I felt when I played it; really calm and laid back.

Mass Effect 2 was amazing, too. Taking on a very dark and gritty look on the ME Galaxy took away the feeling of being calm (considering that there was no "calm" music [see on-board the Normandy music]), and replaced it with a sense of never being truly safe.
The idea of a suicide mission that you, and almost everyone else with you, can die in was very interesting. The idea that you could blitz it absolutely no problem was pretty good, too.

Mass Effect 3... just looks like to me that maybe the whole concept of a suicide mission from ME2 was entirely pointless.
Lets face it, there's going to be another suicide mission in ME3, but this time... I'm just worried that whatever choices you make, you, and your team, are going to be killed indefinitely.

I'm all for a "super bad" ending (you fail, everyone dies, and the galaxy is reaped by the... well, Reapers), but it would be a really, really, REALLY bad move on BioWare's part if Shepard's team die no matter what.

I'm also worried if ME2's characters are going to come back or not. I love every one of them, and I don't want them just be cameos.

TL;DR: I don't want people on my team to die. Give me the chance to save them.

[Bishna]

I think the shepard will die no matter what and i think that is a good thing for the franchise. Shepard dying would truly bring an end to his story and allow the universe to grow from there. If Shepard is left alive then bioware would always have to refer to him in new mass effect games and i think it would take away from the universe if you always had to take in account what shepard is doing.

[Alphyn]

Bishna wrote...

I think the shepard will die no matter what and i think that is a good thing for the franchise. Shepard dying would truly bring an end to his story and allow the universe to grow from there. If Shepard is left alive then bioware would always have to refer to him in new mass effect games and i think it would take away from the universe if you always had to take in account what shepard is doing.

I understand that, but what's wrong with Shepard retiring? I mean, he's only saved the entire galaxy, like, 2 times now.

[Alphyn]

Well, this thread was great, huh?

[Archereon]

Considering that the Reapers are beyond saving from the villain decay they suffered in ME2, I really can't take this series seriously anymore. Mercs were the real villains of ME2, not the Reapers, or the collectors.

[Bishna]

Alphyn wrote...

Well, this thread was great, huh?

it was alright. But i don't think shepard retiring is a good option because he played such a huge role in shaping the universe that it would be too hard to create new stories without directly referring to him in some context. Referring to him and his actions would be fine as long as he isn't alive to tell them himself in my opinion/

[Alphyn]

Archereon wrote...

Considering that the Reapers are beyond saving from the villain decay they suffered in ME2, I really can't take this series seriously anymore. Mercs were the real villains of ME2, not the Reapers, or the collectors.

Saving the Reapers? I'm on about saving my team.

[Archereon]

Alphyn wrote...

Archereon wrote...

Considering that the Reapers are beyond saving from the villain decay they suffered in ME2, I really can't take this series seriously anymore. Mercs were the real villains of ME2, not the Reapers, or the collectors.

Saving the Reapers? I'm on about saving my team.

Don't worry, our teams from ME2 and ME1 will suspiciously vanish, giving us a whole new team that you probably won't care about loosing to work with.

Now I could sort of deal with that if the characters weren't the only thing holding ME2 up as  a complete story (it feels more like a teleivision show than a movie, and one with a weak central story to it at that), but, so long as the Reapers feel like a joke, I don't think I can take this game seriously.

Modifié par Archereon, 12 décembre 2010 - 11:14 .

[shinobi602]

Bishna wrote...

Alphyn wrote...

Well, this thread was great, huh?

it was alright. But i don't think shepard retiring is a good option because he played such a huge role in shaping the universe that it would be too hard to create new stories without directly referring to him in some context. Referring to him and his actions would be fine as long as he isn't alive to tell them himself in my opinion/

I think having only one ending where Shepard dies is a terrible choice. This is your story. WE should be able to overcome the odds and defeat the Reapers and break this millions of years cycle.

There should NOT be one canon ending. I for one don't want a doom and gloom ending, or one where Shepard and teammates die.

[Bishna]

Archereon wrote...

Considering that the Reapers are beyond saving from the villain decay they suffered in ME2, I really can't take this series seriously anymore. Mercs were the real villains of ME2, not the Reapers, or the collectors.

How were mercs the real villains? Just because you fought alot of them? If you just went around blowing the heads off of reapers the entire time they would lose any sort of impact as the techno-gods that they are. Reapers are more about controling things from afar and using mercs as puppets to carry out their master plans. They only ever show up in person if its some serious ending the universe stuff thats happening and thats what makes them so scary and mysterious.

[Alphyn]

Archereon wrote...

Don't worry, our teams from ME2 and ME1 will suspiciously vanish, giving us a whole new team that you probably won't care about loosing to work with.

[Bishna]

shinobi602 wrote...

Bishna wrote...

Alphyn wrote...

Well, this thread was great, huh?

it was alright. But i don't think shepard retiring is a good option because he played such a huge role in shaping the universe that it would be too hard to create new stories without directly referring to him in some context. Referring to him and his actions would be fine as long as he isn't alive to tell them himself in my opinion/

I think having only one ending where Shepard dies is a terrible choice. This is your story. WE should be able to overcome the odds and defeat the Reapers and break this millions of years cycle.

There should NOT be one canon ending. I for one don't want a doom and gloom ending, or one where Shepard and teammates die.

I agree that one canon ending would be stupid too, but i think all of the endings should have at least one thing in common, in my opinion shepard's story should end in his death. The impact of his death and his actions should be decided by the players however. Also i agree that killing off his entire crew would be stupid.

[Archereon]

Bishna wrote...

Archereon wrote...

Considering that the Reapers are beyond saving from the villain decay they suffered in ME2, I really can't take this series seriously anymore. Mercs were the real villains of ME2, not the Reapers, or the collectors.

How were mercs the real villains? Just because you fought alot of them? If you just went around blowing the heads off of reapers the entire time they would lose any sort of impact as the techno-gods that they are. Reapers are more about controling things from afar and using mercs as puppets to carry out their master plans. They only ever show up in person if its some serious ending the universe stuff thats happening and thats what makes them so scary and mysterious.

If we, you know, actually saw the collectors doing anything, at all, besides harvesting horizion or chilling on their staiton, the game would have felt so much more urgent.  ME1 had this great sence of suspence in its plot, things kept getting more and more urgent as you learned more.

It went from: There's this guy who wants to kill humans for his brother's death in a war with the human race

To

That guy has a ship that controls minds...And stuff...And is planning to bring back a race of super machines.

To

That guy is the pawn of a race of mind warping machine gods that descend from beyond the galaxy every 50,000 years to destroy all civilization in the galaxy.

[Bishna]

Archereon wrote...

Bishna wrote...

Archereon wrote...

Considering that the Reapers are beyond saving from the villain decay they suffered in ME2, I really can't take this series seriously anymore. Mercs were the real villains of ME2, not the Reapers, or the collectors.

How were mercs the real villains? Just because you fought alot of them? If you just went around blowing the heads off of reapers the entire time they would lose any sort of impact as the techno-gods that they are. Reapers are more about controling things from afar and using mercs as puppets to carry out their master plans. They only ever show up in person if its some serious ending the universe stuff thats happening and thats what makes them so scary and mysterious.

If we, you know, actually saw the collectors doing anything, at all, besides harvesting horizion or chilling on their staiton, the game would have felt so much more urgent.  ME1 had this great sence of suspence in its plot, things kept getting more and more urgent as you learned more.

It went from: There's this guy who wants to kill humans for his brother's death in a war with the human race

To

That guy has a ship that controls minds...And stuff...And is planning to bring back a race of super machines.

To

That guy is the pawn of a race of mind warping machine gods that descend from beyond the galaxy every 50,000 years to destroy all civilization in the galaxy.

This i agree with to a point. I think you are right in saying that ME1 helped create a better sense of urgency in its story than ME2.

[Ghost-621]

For the love, Shepard does NOT have to die for his story to end...I'm sick of these endings where the protagonist dies or makes the "ultimate sacrifice.." It would be rather anticlimatic, and Shepard has built a habit of overcoming the overwhelming, him dying in the end wouldn't really make sense.

[Moondoggie]

I think it's really too early to speculate on what the ending will be or how many endings or who will be a party member. Theres always the danger when it comes to Bioware though that they will become character happy and create a bunch of new ones and sweep the last games aside to accomodate them. I hope it doesn't happen because it makes spending so much of the last game recruiting them and gaining their loyalty and making sure they don;t die in the last mission all really pointless.

[HydroSpectrum]

Alphyn wrote...

Archereon wrote...

Don't worry, our teams from ME2 and ME1 will suspiciously vanish, giving us a whole new team that you probably won't care about loosing to work with.

If it helps, the old characters that you knew and love would probably have a brief cameo - maybe when you're bringing your battalions to stop the "impending Reaper threat"?
Eh, I expect there to be multiple endings, none of them considered canon until Bioware releases a spin-off for Mass Effect where they may or may not tell how the "saviour of the galaxy" went out. The only thing I'm worried about is that the endings won't be significantly impacted upon by previous choices made in all three games. I want a reason to replay the entire franchise again; just to see the difference my gameplay could make.

[shinobi602]

Ghost-621 wrote...

For the love, Shepard does NOT have to die for his story to end...I'm sick of these endings where the protagonist dies or makes the "ultimate sacrifice.." It would be rather anticlimatic, and Shepard has built a habit of overcoming the overwhelming, him dying in the end wouldn't really make sense.

I personally agree with this. Shepard should not die, at least in my playthrough of ME3.

BUT, I still think there should not be one ending. There should be endings where he does die, and others where he doesn't.

[Alphyn]

HydroSpectrum wrote...

If it helps, the old characters that you knew and love would probably have a brief cameo - maybe when you're bringing your battalions to stop the "impending Reaper threat"?
Eh, I expect there to be multiple endings, none of them considered canon until Bioware releases a spin-off for Mass Effect where they may or may not tell how the "saviour of the galaxy" went out. The only thing I'm worried about is that the endings won't be significantly impacted upon by previous choices made in all three games. I want a reason to replay the entire franchise again; just to see the difference my gameplay could make.

I don't want them to be cameos.

I want them to fight alongside Shepard.

There's no reason why they shouldn't, and if they don't, that just makes the entire suicide mission pointless. It just means that you don't get to see a cameo of that character. <_<

What about LIs? Are they doing to be sidelined, too?

[MegaRekyyli]

I love it when everyone seems to have a good grasp about what ME3 is going to be based on the very first teaser trailer.

[Lieutenant Flashlight]

I would just like to say that I want squadmates to die. I wanted someone to die in the Suicide Mission, but I couldn't bring myself to do it because I loved them so much. Bioware better make us loose characters we know in love. I want this final story to include mandatory sacrifices(like the mandatory death on Virmire). I don't want to escape unscathed.

[Alphyn]

MegaRekyyli wrote...

I love it when everyone seems to have a good grasp about what ME3 is going to be based on the very first teaser trailer.

Did I say that?

BioWare has done this before. I don't want it to happen again.

[Dougy Fresh]

MegaRekyyli wrote...

I love it when everyone seems to have a good grasp about what ME3 is going to be based on the very first teaser trailer.

i know it makes so much sense

all we know is that the reapers are attacking earth, thats it

so naturally we speculate the worst in a game... makes so much sense

[Merlin 47]

shinobi602 wrote...

Ghost-621 wrote...

For the love, Shepard does NOT have to die for his story to end...I'm sick of these endings where the protagonist dies or makes the "ultimate sacrifice.." It would be rather anticlimatic, and Shepard has built a habit of overcoming the overwhelming, him dying in the end wouldn't really make sense.

I personally agree with this. Shepard should not die, at least in my playthrough of ME3.

BUT, I still think there should not be one ending. There should be endings where he does die, and others where he doesn't.

Hear, hear!  I'm sick and tired of all these, "Shepard needs to die at the end of ME 3" threads.  However, if there were multiple endings, then those that DO want him to die, can have that ending.  I don't want him to die be the "forced" ending for everyone.

If they want to have an ending where Shepard CAN die, fine; I don't mind that at all.  But, give the option like how it was in ME 2, where Shepard may or may not die, depending on what you do during ME 3.  But forcing Shepard's death upon EVERYONE?  No thank you.

[AdmiralCheez]

I sincerely hope that Bioware will use ME3 as an opportunity to fix the parts they goofed up in ME2. I mean, seriously, it was an awesome game, but there were places where I felt it didn't do itself justice.



I'm not sure about the squadmate/death issue quite yet, but I believe that a few ME2 squadmates shall return, albeit in non-essential roles (the game has to be winnable without them, but that doesn't mean one or two can't be recruitable), and that there will be at least one ending where Shep and most of his team make it out alive. Probably not a sunshiney-rainbows ending, but one that's happy enough.



As for the Reapers, I got what I wanted: they're a legitimate threat again. The game hasn't even started and nine million people have been wiped out in London alone (a city that, today, has 7.5 million people), with Earth's defenses crippled and no sign of response from the other races, which means either a) they've gone all turian councilor on us or they are under attack as well. They are no longer the ambiguous boogeymen they were in ME1, nor the campy, derptastic hacks they were in ME2.