51 réponses à ce sujet

[Daiyus]

I'd like the option to carry on after the credits. I'd like to think that after defeating the Reaper threat that my Shepard will still be in the Alliance/Spectres. Naturally some content should be required to be done before the finale, but onthe flip side, you could treat a few missions as "mopping up" once the main threat is defeated. There's plenty of opportunity to allow players to carry on. There's nothing stopping anyone from just redrafting once the credits roll anyway, so it wouldn't hurt anyone.

[this isnt my name]

Seems stupid to me. Look at fallout vew vegas, you kill one of the factions, it would be boring to kill Lanius and then go back to shooting ghouls. (allthough I would like his helmet on my wall).

[Malanek]

CannonLars wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...
Why should I be denied this feature just because you want it to be over? Having it doesn't affect you other than hitting "No" when it asks if you want to continue playing....after the credits.

It does actually effect everyone. It means that the dramatic licence of the writers is significantly reduced to cater for the ability to continue playing after the conclusion. How can you play if Shepard is dead? How can the writers set DLC on the citadel when the citadel can be destroyed? How can you have Quarians convincingly play a role in the DLC when the migrant fleet might be destroyed by the Geth? There are all sorts of story problems with it.

No need to be absolutely rude in opinion forums.

First off, NG+ is New Game Plus. This means you may start a NEW playthrough with bonus features. NG+ has nothing to do with playing post-story if that explains that part. I am asking if people want to have the game end with the story or allow minor missions to be added and playable after the trilogy story has shown its conclusion. Generally games don't ask if you want to play after the credits either, it just loads it when the credits finish and shows the character back in a playable environment. New Game + is great. Playing after credits can be great.

Now just because I would like them to make a true conclusion that doesn't allow months of minor missions after the focus of the trilogy should be ended along with Shepard's story, does not mean I am demanding that it be inaccessible or not included for others. I don't have a say in development, nor did I suggest that I should have weight in the decision about post game.

There should be no bitterness either way because I am well aware that if we want the story to have proper conclusion instead of leaving the ending of the Mass Effect trilogy open and full of trivial post-story exploration, then we can go to the Main Menu and use a previous save that allows play before conclusion, or start a New Game + playthrough with our previous levels and options.

And to Malanek999, you just listed a bunch of branching story options. Those did not happen in my game, therefore they have no relevance to my ME3 postgame possibility. I am aware that Shepard may live to adventure on after the ME3 story, but as far as I consider, my time with Shepard is set for a conclusion in which I no longer add small missions on to the endless postgame. The missions would only feel in place if they occur before the end, otherwise we don't have ourselves a real end.

How am I being rude? I just pointed out a bunch of limitations the writers would have to cope with to allow DLC or any other side missions to be set after the ending of ME3. I am not saying any of those things will happen, just that lots of different things could happen in ME3. I was not talking about NG+ at all, in that case the story you just played through gets reset.

[xX N7 Xx]

King Zeel wrote...

Once the game ends my shepard should be done. Who in this day in age, plays rpg's and doesn't do a separate save just before the final battle?

Me 

[CannonO]

Malanek999 wrote...

CannonLars wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...
Why should I be denied this feature just because you want it to be over? Having it doesn't affect you other than hitting "No" when it asks if you want to continue playing....after the credits.

It does actually effect everyone. It means that the dramatic licence of the writers is significantly reduced to cater for the ability to continue playing after the conclusion. How can you play if Shepard is dead? How can the writers set DLC on the citadel when the citadel can be destroyed? How can you have Quarians convincingly play a role in the DLC when the migrant fleet might be destroyed by the Geth? There are all sorts of story problems with it.

No need to be absolutely rude in opinion forums.
/snip
The missions would only feel in place if they occur before the end, otherwise we don't have ourselves a real end.

How am I being rude? I just pointed out a bunch of limitations the writers would have to cope with to allow DLC or any other side missions to be set after the ending of ME3. I am not saying any of those things will happen, just that lots of different things could happen in ME3. I was not talking about NG+ at all, in that case the story you just played through gets reset.

I wasn't trying to claim that the two people I quoted were more rude than I, I meant in the discussion in general. The person before had mentioned NG+, as I quoted. And I acknowledged that many things could happen, but for my story's sake, the story will keep its dramatic and cinematic effect and end where the game's credits show the end.

[Demonhoopa]

CannonLars wrote...

 Considering this is the end of all things (as far as the trilogy part goes), do you really feel it fits to allow some missions after Shep's huge outing with the Reapers, or do you think it should settle down and Shep should be done with missions? I ask because DLC could put us back in the thick of it with enemies that may be potentially finished in the story, but the DLC is generally accessible after the credits. Do you want DLC that you can play after the big finale, or would you rather get something like ME1's BDtS where it fits into the adventure? Would it bother you if they gave you action scenes in DLC after they made it all feel final when the credits rolled? Do you want the story preserved by not allowing us to play after the credits?

Doesn't matter to me. Personally I don't play after a game ends. It just feels empty. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't leave the choice for people that like to. That won't force me to keep playing.

[GnusmasTHX]

Yeah. There should be remaining husks/heretic geth that I can go around killing forever.

[TexasToast712]

 There will always be something to shoot even after the Reapers.

[CannonO]

TexasToast712 wrote...

 There will always be something to shoot even after the Reapers.

But does that mean some movie about a cop or something should finish the plot and then show a forty-five minute scene of him giving a ticket to some guy who has illegal tail lights after the credits? That could kill the conclusion that the plot could leave you with.

I won't be able to finish the trilogy's plot and then go on all dandy like it is any of the other two games in the series and the story won't end for a while.

[sirgippy]

After reading the whole thread, I still don't get the problem. If you want to have finality after the credits, yank the power cord on the pc or something. I mean really, noone is forcing anyone to play post credits. Start a new game.

[CannonO]

sirgippy wrote...

After reading the whole thread, I still don't get the problem. If you want to have finality after the credits, yank the power cord on the pc or something. I mean really, noone is forcing anyone to play post credits. Start a new game.

I think that is common sense. But I feel that conclusion is more impressive when it concludes the scenes. If BioWare chose to implement the end as a real end for the sake of the story and emotion, it would obviously bear more cinematic weight than me pausing and selecting quit and pretending not to notice that Shepard is playing business as usual after the epic trilogy finale. I understand why it would be in ME3, but I wish they would end it at the end.

LA Noire and a scene of an insurance investigation after those credits would be absolutely terrible and in conflict with the closing message that the game sends. I don't want that equal scenario in ME3 because it can be just as detrimental. 

[MarchWaltz]

King Zeel wrote...

Once the game ends my shepard should be done. Who in this day in age, plays rpg's and doesn't do a separate save just before the final battle?

I do for backup, but I dont load up and try the different option or what not; I make another character for that.

[MrFob]

sirgippy wrote...

After reading the whole thread, I still don't get the problem. If you want to have finality after the credits, yank the power cord on the pc or something. I mean really, noone is forcing anyone to play post credits. Start a new game.

If I get the option to finish (and don't just "teleport" back to the Normandy) after the credits, I am ok with the option (though I'd never use it).
Two additional conditions though:
1. The writers cannot be constrained in the way they want to end the game by the fact that Shep has to be able to go on. If Shep dies, he dies. If Shep retires, he retires, etc. You only get this option if it would make at least a bit of sense.
2. The devs should not put any effort into the after-endgame world that they could rather put into the game itself.

If that is the case, I have no issue. Otherwise, I'd rather they just don't include the option.

Oh, BTW, no problem with NG+, that doesn't bother me at all.

[KainrycKarr]

Look, it's already a feature, it's in the game.

[KainrycKarr]

Malanek999 wrote...

CannonLars wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...
Why should I be denied this feature just because you want it to be over? Having it doesn't affect you other than hitting "No" when it asks if you want to continue playing....after the credits.

It does actually effect everyone. It means that the dramatic licence of the writers is significantly reduced to cater for the ability to continue playing after the conclusion. How can you play if Shepard is dead? How can the writers set DLC on the citadel when the citadel can be destroyed? How can you have Quarians convincingly play a role in the DLC when the migrant fleet might be destroyed by the Geth? There are all sorts of story problems with it.

No need to be absolutely rude in opinion forums.

First off, NG+ is New Game Plus. This means you may start a NEW playthrough with bonus features. NG+ has nothing to do with playing post-story if that explains that part. I am asking if people want to have the game end with the story or allow minor missions to be added and playable after the trilogy story has shown its conclusion. Generally games don't ask if you want to play after the credits either, it just loads it when the credits finish and shows the character back in a playable environment. New Game + is great. Playing after credits can be great.

Now just because I would like them to make a true conclusion that doesn't allow months of minor missions after the focus of the trilogy should be ended along with Shepard's story, does not mean I am demanding that it be inaccessible or not included for others. I don't have a say in development, nor did I suggest that I should have weight in the decision about post game.

There should be no bitterness either way because I am well aware that if we want the story to have proper conclusion instead of leaving the ending of the Mass Effect trilogy open and full of trivial post-story exploration, then we can go to the Main Menu and use a previous save that allows play before conclusion, or start a New Game + playthrough with our previous levels and options.

And to Malanek999, you just listed a bunch of branching story options. Those did not happen in my game, therefore they have no relevance to my ME3 postgame possibility. I am aware that Shepard may live to adventure on after the ME3 story, but as far as I consider, my time with Shepard is set for a conclusion in which I no longer add small missions on to the endless postgame. The missions would only feel in place if they occur before the end, otherwise we don't have ourselves a real end.

How am I being rude? I just pointed out a bunch of limitations the writers would have to cope with to allow DLC or any other side missions to be set after the ending of ME3. I am not saying any of those things will happen, just that lots of different things could happen in ME3. I was not talking about NG+ at all, in that case the story you just played through gets reset.

You should also realize that there will be multiple endings. Obviously, the only endings that you can continue in are the ones where Shepard survives.

[CannonO]

KainrycKarr wrote...


You should also realize that there will be multiple endings. Obviously, the only endings that you can continue in are the ones where Shepard survives.

No s**t Sherlock.


 Just joking. We weren't talking about some zombie Shepard endings where we can play if he died. ME2 already dealt with No Survival-No Endgame. We understand the concept and how it could be in ME3 with a possible death.

I don't think anyone is worried about their Shepard dying and then BioWare letting you continue like that anyways...

[mopotter]

eternalnightmare13 wrote...

Personally, I think once the end credits roll for the last time - that's it. However the trend seems to be to release dlc months after a game's release and have it so that it can be played post ending of the game like ME2 and other games. So I reckon that they'll do it that way in ME3.

Personally, I'd rather have DLC that ties into the main storyline somehow and is meant to be played within the main story.

Me too.  

It would have to be something really good for me to play it after I'm finished.  Any DLC that is released after the game has been out for awhile, probably would not have the dialog that the game itself will have and since I play the game for the story and dialog first and everything else second.    

[mopotter]

CannonLars wrote...

Destroy Raiden wrote...

Well in Red dead redemption once you complete the main quest you get to go back to your farm and family it's a nice change of pace no one trying to kill me but at the same time after all that solo traveling and doing whatever you wanted settling down is surprisingly more difficult then being shot at all day. It would be nice to allow for the player to be shep with his LI living on a world the player chooses from but to also be able to get your LI and go back to merc hunting, side quests, and rescuing npcs.

Except that isn't Red Dead's post game, that is its third act. The endgame part is something I definitely don't want in ME3, but I can't say here without spoiling it.

I did say that long ago I hoped after it all ended there would be a montage of sorts showing how everyting ended up in the galaxy thanks to Shep (but not cheesy, more in the style of Watchmen's opening credit scene) and have that scene start by showing Shep and (insert love interest) together somewhere beautiful, be it at the window of a space station or dinner on a field on Earth or something (a Vesper and Bond moment like their very late night dinner in Casino Royale).

But I am open to all sorts of chances with the ending.

ME EITHER Please no.    

I wouldn't mind your montage at the end.  Seeing how the others are doing, remembering the fallen.  Yes, I could enjoy that.

[mopotter]

SomeKindaEnigma wrote...

Didn't Bioware say in GI that the post-game state would be a hybrid of ME1 and ME2? As in you could choose NG+ or continue playing after the main story line ends? (So basically like ME2, but I think Casey Hudson pointed out that there would be more benefits to a NG+)

Either way, I think players should have the option for the final mission to be the end of the game (which will please the OP and people who support it) as well as the option to continue playing/completing side missions/continue romances/etc etc etc (which will please myself and others with the same viewpoint)

Chances are, continuing the romance will be in the style of ME2.  Same each time and no dialog.  Now if they had dialog that would continue after the final mission, I'd keep playing to see what dialog I had missed.  Otherwise, I'll quit.  I continued once in ME2 and was bored out of my mind.  I just started a new game.

[Malanek]

KainrycKarr wrote...
You should also realize that there will be multiple endings. Obviously, the only endings that you can continue in are the ones where Shepard survives.

It's not just the fact Shepard may be dead. There are all sorts of other variables that might not make sense. The Citadel may be destroyed. The mass relay system may be shut down. Entire species may face extinction. The Normandy might be destroyed. Cerberus may or may not be an enemy. One expects the consequences of the events unfolding in ME3 to be extremely dramatic.

Some players may only play through once or twice. Bioware do not want to be disallowing these players from playing DLC because they don't have a suitable ending. By telling the writers they have to leave the galaxy in such a state that post game DLC is playable, they are limiting the dramatic licence. It worked in ME2 because they needed to leavethe story in such a state anyway for ME3.

I believe they should be trying to get a lot more creative about how they want DLC to work for ME3. An idea I had and posted in a similar thread would be that story DLC tells events in the story from the perspective of others to events that Shepard wasn't on hand to witness. This way it can be played completely seperately or it can be triggered from within the main campaign. For example suppose the DLC was about a early game Reaper invasion of Tuchanka and you play as Wrex. If launched from the main menu you would get introduction cutscenes. However while you were playing through the main game, you could also trigger it when meeting Wrex and asking "What happened here? [play xxx DLC]"

[mopotter]

Someone somewhere mentioned continuing to finish up missions that hadn't been done during the game. I have no problem with this, and I'm sure the people who mostly like the shooting part of the game will enjoy it, I just won't be doing it.

I agree with you (Malanek999) any dlc set for after the game is over, would have way to many variables. I also like your idea for dlc which I might play.

[Scy Lancer]

Some post game character missions would be nice. Go around and rebuild earth, or the other worlds. Hang out with Garus on the Citadel or go pirate with Jack a bit. Extended story DLC would be nice. Stuff prudent to the in game story I wouldn't mind because the game has such good replay value, but I don't want 4-5 in game DLC expansions. Weapons and armor DLC should come out with in the first 6 months I think. Having a new gun come out a year later kinda sucks.

[MrFob]

CannonLars wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...


You should also realize that there will be multiple endings. Obviously, the only endings that you can continue in are the ones where Shepard survives.

No s**t Sherlock.


 Just joking. We weren't talking about some zombie Shepard endings where we can play if he died. ME2 already dealt with No Survival-No Endgame. We understand the concept and how it could be in ME3 with a possible death.

I don't think anyone is worried about their Shepard dying and then BioWare letting you continue like that anyways...

Well, actually, there is a solution right there for all the DLC buyers that don't want to start a new game.
Think about Dragon Age: Origins, how they did it.
Even if your Character died in the end, there would be a text saying something like "there are still stories to be told about the warden. Bla bla bla" and you would have a savegame where your character is at the campsite. The idea was that this would be like a flashback to the time before the final mission that would allow you to still play dlcs that could even be tied into the main story.

I could imagine something like that for ME3 if they really wanted to give the player the option. That way, we still get the definitive ending, the devs don't have to bother with a post endgame world and the player still have the option to play dlc after finishing the game. As far as I can see, everyone wins.

[moneycashgeorge]

What you are describing is not Shepard's afterlife.

You are describing his retirement. Or, if he stays in the military, his post-war career.

Afterlife is a very clearly defined word. It means after you die. It is ridiculous to say "You could play his afterlife, but only if he lives".

[Casper DM]

I don't know how the game is going to end so I don't know how tasteful it will be to be able to continue roaming around after the final mission but personally I hope they go with the grand finale and that's it.

Considering what we are going up against in the main story I don't think the usual side quests are going to cut it and if any DLC is to be released (which I hope there will be) it should be directly related to the main story and possibly alter the game later on.