155 réponses à ce sujet

[Kanmuru]

AllThatJazz wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...


Is that confirmed? I'm not saying the endings are amazing or anything, but do we know for sure what happens if we don't bother doing any scanning or whatnot? Maybe in that case a 'default' ending is chosen based on our GAW assets and we don't get to choose at all, and it's the ending that causes most damage (not to Shep and crew, obviously, since that seems to be written in stone, but to the galaxy at large).  Some choice/being able to mitigate a bit of the damage is better than no choice at all, right? right? sigh.

Yeah, sure, why not? Ignore what's been presented and anything is possible.

Well what has been presented? Have the spoiler guys played through the game not trying to get all the GAW assets? Or have they played through trying to do as much as possible, and have therefore got ending choices (for whatever they're worth) as opposed to a default? I seriously don't know.

Normandy always gets lost, the relays always get destroyed.

You chose:

- Letting the reapers go away and stay foreveralone on the citadel to bring them back if AI ever takes over           (basicaly sheppard controls the signal for the reapers)

-Destroying the reapers forever (sheppard can survive and go back to earth like a normal person if you chose this, geth and EDI always die)

- Merge Synthetic and Organic, solving the problem the reapers were created to resolve and altering life on the       galaxy forever (sheppard always dies on this ending, EDI and geth survive)

Your war assets score determine how much earth is devastated and if the Normandy crew survives 

[xtorma]

Because he doesn't get anything out of the deal? sorry but i'll stick with the fans.

[Halo Quea]

xtorma wrote...

Because he doesn't get anything out of the deal? sorry but i'll stick with the fans.

same here.  we won't get the truth from the mags and pro-reviewers

[Elite Midget]

XX55XX wrote...

kingsims wrote...

Yea lets trust the reviewers just like Dragon Age 2. Remember how that went in our favour. The only people I trust are people who buy the game with their own money.

Oh, now, DA2 wasn't that bad, wasn't it?

Yes it was. DA2 was the complete opposite of DA:O and sales and anger reflected that after the initial hyped past and fans were like "What the hell did I just play? This is nothing like Bioware said!".

[AllThatJazz]

Rob_K1 wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...


Is that confirmed? I'm not saying the endings are amazing or anything, but do we know for sure what happens if we don't bother doing any scanning or whatnot? Maybe in that case a 'default' ending is chosen based on our GAW assets and we don't get to choose at all, and it's the ending that causes most damage (not to Shep and crew, obviously, since that seems to be written in stone, but to the galaxy at large).  Some choice/being able to mitigate a bit of the damage is better than no choice at all, right? right? sigh.

Yeah, sure, why not? Ignore what's been presented and anything is possible.

Well what has been presented? Have the spoiler guys played through the game not trying to get all the GAW assets? Or have they played through trying to do as much as possible, and have therefore got ending choices (for whatever they're worth) as opposed to a default? I seriously don't know.

Apparently Earth gets more devastated if you don't have enough assets I think, plus it can affect what happens to Shepard and the choices availiable.

But what the problem stems from is that a certain scene/sequence seems to happen no matter what.

Thanks, that's what I wanted to know. Heh, yeah I know what happens regardless of the choice (pretty much), which sucks. But in terms of how successful you are at saving the galaxy, as opposed to saving (and getting to be with) the Normandy, there is some point (and reward) to all that scanning. The greater your prep, the less messed up the galaxy is. It's just not the personal reward many people wanted. 

I dunno, I keep going backwards and forwards with this. On the one hand, yes the stuff with the Normandy is sad and stupid <_< and unnecessary; but then I also think that regardless of how attached we are to our various crewmates etc, the over-arching story was never really about them - it was always about saving the whole galaxy, not about saving Garrus or Miranda or whoever, so in that sense the endings are good and the reward for scanning planets is perfectly sufficient. But then I don't really care about the galaxy at large as much as I do about the characters, which makes the endings RUBBISH ... but the galaxy is, technically, a much more important thing to save than Shep spending post-game with her buddies, which makes the endings fine ... but then ME1 and 2 set up a player expectation that it's possible to save nearly everyone so why ME3 trample all over that? ... but then we have been told that 'victory through sacrifice' is pretty much the main theme of the game, so why are we even surprised?

GAH! *is confused*

Modifié par AllThatJazz, 03 mars 2012 - 01:50 .

[Rob_K1]

AllThatJazz wrote...


Thanks, that's what I wanted to know. Heh, yeah I know what happens regardless of the choice (pretty much), which sucks. But in terms of how successful you are at saving the galaxy, as opposed to saving (and getting to be with) the Normandy, there is some point (and reward) to all that scanning. The greater your prep, the less messed up the galaxy is. It's just not the personal reward many people wanted. 

I dunno, I keep going backwards and forwards with this. On the one hand, yes the stuff with the Normandy is sad and stupid <_< and unnecessary; but then I also think that regardless of how attached we are to our various crewmates etc, the over-arching story was never really about them - it was always about saving the whole galaxy, not about saving Garrus or Miranda or whoever, so in that sense the endings are good and the reward for scanning planets is perfectly sufficient. But then I don't really care about the galaxy at large as much as I do about the characters, which makes the endings RUBBISH ... but the galaxy is, technically, a much more important thing to save than Shep spending post-game with her buddies, which makes the endings fine ... but then ME1 and 2 set up a player expectation that it's possible to save nearly everyone so why ME3 trample all over that? ... but then we have been told that 'victory through sacrifice' is pretty much the main theme of the game, so why are we even surprised?

GAH! *is confused*

No problem and you're most welcome.

I know it's not funny, but err... I can just about imagine your head being about ready to explode.

[AllThatJazz]

Rob_K1 wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...


Thanks, that's what I wanted to know. Heh, yeah I know what happens regardless of the choice (pretty much), which sucks. But in terms of how successful you are at saving the galaxy, as opposed to saving (and getting to be with) the Normandy, there is some point (and reward) to all that scanning. The greater your prep, the less messed up the galaxy is. It's just not the personal reward many people wanted. 

I dunno, I keep going backwards and forwards with this. On the one hand, yes the stuff with the Normandy is sad and stupid <_< and unnecessary; but then I also think that regardless of how attached we are to our various crewmates etc, the over-arching story was never really about them - it was always about saving the whole galaxy, not about saving Garrus or Miranda or whoever, so in that sense the endings are good and the reward for scanning planets is perfectly sufficient. But then I don't really care about the galaxy at large as much as I do about the characters, which makes the endings RUBBISH ... but the galaxy is, technically, a much more important thing to save than Shep spending post-game with her buddies, which makes the endings fine ... but then ME1 and 2 set up a player expectation that it's possible to save nearly everyone so why ME3 trample all over that? ... but then we have been told that 'victory through sacrifice' is pretty much the main theme of the game, so why are we even surprised?

GAH! *is confused*

No problem and you're most welcome.

I know it's not funny, but err... I can just about imagine your head being about ready to explode.

 You're spot on! I feel like a computer that's been planted with a Logic Bomb .... (see TV Tropes for details)

[Rob_K1]

AllThatJazz wrote...

Rob_K1 wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...


Thanks, that's what I wanted to know. Heh, yeah I know what happens regardless of the choice (pretty much), which sucks. But in terms of how successful you are at saving the galaxy, as opposed to saving (and getting to be with) the Normandy, there is some point (and reward) to all that scanning. The greater your prep, the less messed up the galaxy is. It's just not the personal reward many people wanted. 

I dunno, I keep going backwards and forwards with this. On the one hand, yes the stuff with the Normandy is sad and stupid <_< and unnecessary; but then I also think that regardless of how attached we are to our various crewmates etc, the over-arching story was never really about them - it was always about saving the whole galaxy, not about saving Garrus or Miranda or whoever, so in that sense the endings are good and the reward for scanning planets is perfectly sufficient. But then I don't really care about the galaxy at large as much as I do about the characters, which makes the endings RUBBISH ... but the galaxy is, technically, a much more important thing to save than Shep spending post-game with her buddies, which makes the endings fine ... but then ME1 and 2 set up a player expectation that it's possible to save nearly everyone so why ME3 trample all over that? ... but then we have been told that 'victory through sacrifice' is pretty much the main theme of the game, so why are we even surprised?

GAH! *is confused*

No problem and you're most welcome.

I know it's not funny, but err... I can just about imagine your head being about ready to explode.

 You're spot on! I feel like a computer that's been planted with a Logic Bomb .... (see TV Tropes for details)

*Does a Jedi mind trick* You will forget about the endings and keep off the internet/forum until you've played the game through to completion.

Modifié par Rob_K1, 03 mars 2012 - 02:10 .

[AllThatJazz]

Rob_K1 wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...

Rob_K1 wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...


Thanks, that's what I wanted to know. Heh, yeah I know what happens regardless of the choice (pretty much), which sucks. But in terms of how successful you are at saving the galaxy, as opposed to saving (and getting to be with) the Normandy, there is some point (and reward) to all that scanning. The greater your prep, the less messed up the galaxy is. It's just not the personal reward many people wanted. 

I dunno, I keep going backwards and forwards with this. On the one hand, yes the stuff with the Normandy is sad and stupid <_< and unnecessary; but then I also think that regardless of how attached we are to our various crewmates etc, the over-arching story was never really about them - it was always about saving the whole galaxy, not about saving Garrus or Miranda or whoever, so in that sense the endings are good and the reward for scanning planets is perfectly sufficient. But then I don't really care about the galaxy at large as much as I do about the characters, which makes the endings RUBBISH ... but the galaxy is, technically, a much more important thing to save than Shep spending post-game with her buddies, which makes the endings fine ... but then ME1 and 2 set up a player expectation that it's possible to save nearly everyone so why ME3 trample all over that? ... but then we have been told that 'victory through sacrifice' is pretty much the main theme of the game, so why are we even surprised?

GAH! *is confused*

No problem and you're most welcome.

I know it's not funny, but err... I can just about imagine your head being about ready to explode.

 You're spot on! I feel like a computer that's been planted with a Logic Bomb .... (see TV Tropes for details)

*Does a Jedi mind trick* You will forget about the endings and keep off the internet until you've played the game through to completion.

*save versus magic:fail* These aren't the endings I'm looking for ... *wanders off to get a sandwich* 

Modifié par AllThatJazz, 03 mars 2012 - 02:11 .

[Demon Velsper]

So... he doesn't like the series, but he thinks this one is the best? I find that worrysome, cause that implies that the third game isn't like the other games.

I can only react to that statement same I do to people who say they don't like Dragon Age: Origins, but love Dragon Age 2.

[Multiplayer optional LOL]

EA/BW went for the most critical of critics in order to salvage their sinking ship. I can imagine the money Tom is swimming in now.

[NovemEnuma]

Yeah.

Modifié par NovemEnuma, 03 mars 2012 - 03:53 .

[LilyasAvalon]

Now see, the problem with that is, it's meant to be endingS not ending.

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

Priisus wrote...

You know whose review I'm waiting for and I can trust the guy's word whether the game is good or not?!

Yahtzee, the guy from Zero Punctuation...

Yeah, I find his view on the games is similar to mine. I've played a lot of the stuff he has and even before I watch his videos I've pretty much drawn the same conclusion. He'll hate a game, but still admit it was fun.

[KotorEffect3]

XX55XX wrote...

Who knows? Maybe we cynical folk are wrong about ME3 after all.

Yes, you are wrong.

[txgoldrush]

Corvus Metus wrote...

kingsims wrote...

Yea lets trust the reviewers just like Dragon Age 2. Remember how that went in our favour. The only people I trust are people who buy the game with their own money.

I actually enjoyed Dragon Age II more that the first.   And yes, I bought the game with my own money.

Yet many people hated it, as it was such a radical departure from the first game.  For the same reason, I enjoyed it.  I personally felt that DA:O was a generic modern role-playing game that tried desprately to embody the "old school" feeling and failed. 

Personally, before anyone trashes the game I think they should play it.  Even if they hate the endings, they might enjoy the actual game for what it is.   People are so caught up on a one minute cutscene they forget that there's about 19 hours and 59 minutes of other content which could be "goddamn perfect", as Zaeed would say.

Yep, DAO was typical Old Bioware....except other old Bioware games were good for their times, DAO is very overrated. Generic cliched predicable and even unfocused plot, one dimensional characters that are typical old school Bioware archtypes, and broken gameplay.

DA2's problem was that it was rushed out the door.

[Cobra's_back]

Kanmuru wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...


Is that confirmed? I'm not saying the endings are amazing or anything, but do we know for sure what happens if we don't bother doing any scanning or whatnot? Maybe in that case a 'default' ending is chosen based on our GAW assets and we don't get to choose at all, and it's the ending that causes most damage (not to Shep and crew, obviously, since that seems to be written in stone, but to the galaxy at large).  Some choice/being able to mitigate a bit of the damage is better than no choice at all, right? right? sigh.

Yeah, sure, why not? Ignore what's been presented and anything is possible.

Well what has been presented? Have the spoiler guys played through the game not trying to get all the GAW assets? Or have they played through trying to do as much as possible, and have therefore got ending choices (for whatever they're worth) as opposed to a default? I seriously don't know.

Normandy always gets lost, the relays always get destroyed.

You chose:

- Letting the reapers go away and stay foreveralone on the citadel to bring them back if AI ever takes over           (basicaly sheppard controls the signal for the reapers)

-Destroying the reapers forever (sheppard can survive and go back to earth like a normal person if you chose this, geth and EDI always die)

- Merge Synthetic and Organic, solving the problem the reapers were created to resolve and altering life on the       galaxy forever (sheppard always dies on this ending, EDI and geth survive)

Your war assets score determine how much earth is devastated and if the Normandy crew survives 

Thanks for explaining. I just don't see how Garrus and Tali can survive?

[I_Jedi]

Kanmuru wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...


Is that confirmed? I'm not saying the endings are amazing or anything, but do we know for sure what happens if we don't bother doing any scanning or whatnot? Maybe in that case a 'default' ending is chosen based on our GAW assets and we don't get to choose at all, and it's the ending that causes most damage (not to Shep and crew, obviously, since that seems to be written in stone, but to the galaxy at large).  Some choice/being able to mitigate a bit of the damage is better than no choice at all, right? right? sigh.

Yeah, sure, why not? Ignore what's been presented and anything is possible.

Well what has been presented? Have the spoiler guys played through the game not trying to get all the GAW assets? Or have they played through trying to do as much as possible, and have therefore got ending choices (for whatever they're worth) as opposed to a default? I seriously don't know.

Normandy always gets lost, the relays always get destroyed.

You chose:

- Letting the reapers go away and stay foreveralone on the citadel to bring them back if AI ever takes over           (basicaly sheppard controls the signal for the reapers)

-Destroying the reapers forever (sheppard can survive and go back to earth like a normal person if you chose this, geth and EDI always die)

- Merge Synthetic and Organic, solving the problem the reapers were created to resolve and altering life on the       galaxy forever (sheppard always dies on this ending, EDI and geth survive)

Your war assets score determine how much earth is devastated and if the Normandy crew survives 

If you're right about shepard surviving and returning to Earth in the detsroy ending, I can practically forgive Bioware. Are you sure that ending is what you said?

[Eterna]

Halo Quea wrote...

xtorma wrote...

Because he doesn't get anything out of the deal? sorry but i'll stick with the fans.

same here.  we won't get the truth from the mags and pro-reviewers

the 4chan trolls on metacritic will be so much better I'm sure. 

[Cobra's_back]

Elite Midget wrote...

XX55XX wrote...

kingsims wrote...

Yea lets trust the reviewers just like Dragon Age 2. Remember how that went in our favour. The only people I trust are people who buy the game with their own money.

Oh, now, DA2 wasn't that bad, wasn't it?

Yes it was. DA2 was the complete opposite of DA:O and sales and anger reflected that after the initial hyped past and fans were like "What the hell did I just play? This is nothing like Bioware said!".

Totally agree. The gameinformer mag slammed it as well. It was in their March issue for top 10 disappointments.

[stylepoints]

Priisus wrote...

You know whose review I'm waiting for and I can trust the guy's word whether the game is good or not?!

Yahtzee, the guy from Zero Punctuation...

Yahtzee is great because he lets you know what's actually wrong with games. Even if he does praise a game, a lot of time will be spent on the faults.

[Kakita Tatsumaru]

The Last Guardian wrote...
Like The Old Republic..and hated Mass Effect 1 and 2.

So anyone who liked ME1 or ME2 obviously cannot compare their tastes with him.

[delijoe]

If you actually listen to the podcast you'll see that he explains quite clearly the differences between ME3 and the previous games in the series. Basically, he said it's a better mix of shooter and rpg elements, that the level design has gotten away from the linear "space dungeons", and that the story is top notch. I've read his stuff for years and I can tell you hes not being paid off. I mean why would he in a podcast where the reviews are still embargoed and maybe a couple thousand people listen..

[Cobra's_back]

delijoe wrote...

If you actually listen to the podcast you'll see that he explains quite clearly the differences between ME3 and the previous games in the series. Basically, he said it's a better mix of shooter and rpg elements, that the level design has gotten away from the linear "space dungeons", and that the story is top notch. I've read his stuff for years and I can tell you hes not being paid off. I mean why would he in a podcast where the reviews are still embargoed and maybe a couple thousand people listen..

It is a preference. I like the "Henry the fifth" but hate "Romeo and Jolliet". Romeo and Jolliet is a dramatic tragedy. Both are considered excellent drama. No one knew they were playing the tragic drama.