1412 réponses à ce sujet

[Sarevok Synder]

OdanUrr wrote...

I've had a chance to look at the Coalesced and, to be honest, your choices in ME1 and ME2 really have an impact in ME3. Unfortunately, said impact is usually tied up in war assets and relegated to a codex entry, but if you take the time to read them you'll see that saving the Destiny Ascension in ME1 will gain you their support in ME3, but Alliance Forces will be diminished as a result of that decision. Pretty neat all in all.

How is having all our decisions condensed into meaningless points which have little to no effect on the preset endings, pretty neat?

[LadyBlueSweetie]

Unato wrote...

 it's nice to see some people come in and go blah blah you are wrong without actually backing up their statement with maths

anyway carry on arguging and duely ignoring this post

this is my random injection to state that I've added a second sheet into the spreedsheet that contains the list sorted by GUI ID, soon to be modified to their actualy UI Name (Krogan, Alliance Geth etc). As I said last night, I checked Asari, Geth, Quarian and Ex Cerb and they all line up. As far as I can see the c.bin isn't lying and there's no hidden asset, magical hand waving score added etc

THIS LINK CONTAINS SPOILERS

https://docs.google....MHVkLXVkTGIyenc 

THIS LINK CONTAINS SPOILERS  

Okay, this is helpful. I haven't looked it over carefully, item by item, but It appears then, that it IS possible to follow a specific path and achieve up to 8457 TMS in single player alone. I'm guessing this already accounts for some decisions that preclude each other - if you make one choice, you cannot make the other?

If these data are all correct and functioning properly in game without bugs, then yeah, I'm sorry Bioware, I was wrong. I can achieve this without MP and would appreciate an official guidebook so I can go back to ME and make all those choices. Of course, I have an Xbox, so I can do that. PS3 folks will still have a valid claim.

[byzantine horse]

Without responding to anyone in particular, let me clarify then:

I found the topic of the thread interesting, so I began reading it. I read the OP and about 5-10 pages, then i zapped through the rest. No I didn't read all 30 pages from start to beginning, that's that.

About half the posts were concerning not getting a perfect ending, intertwined with complaints, legitimate or not, that their choices didn't matter. To my understanding your choices do matter as it was percieved to be extremely hard to get the perfect ending. No it is clearly stated that it is impossible or something somewhere has been missed, but that is beside the point.

The other half actually discussed the issue. My reply was to the other half who did not. If I derail a thread of 30 pages which was derailed from the start then I apoligize and I will refrain from posting here again (perhaps I should, the BSN is a cesspit) as it was clearly all my doing.

Dimensio or whatever's the name demanded from me that I provide proof that you can achieve the perfect ending withing the confines of the singleplayer campaign. I responded that I can not (and neither can anyone else it seems) and simply stated that whether possible or not at this time to get a perfect ending, fixing your score within MP or SP to get a perfect ending which you have not deserved is not the way to go about it. I said that I didn't agree with neither Bioware for putting such a feature in MP or the people here in the thread demanding such a feature in SP. You sow what you harvest and that should ring true in a game that is all about actions and consequences.

That is all I said. If you see me, ever, claiming that it is possible to get the necesary score for a good ending then please point me to that post and I will edit it to the best of my ability. What I have said is that you get (or should get anyway) the ending you deserve with all the decisions you have taken through the games in mind. I think that if you mess up in the game you shouldn't be able to get the best ending. By saying this I was refuted by people demanding that I show them proof of being able to get a perfect ending, of which I have never claimed that I can.

But by all means, read what you wish from my posts, disicate them and pick your cherry pickings from them to invalidate my opinion. But it still stands:

It doesn't matter whether Bioware has messed up big time with MP or EMS or whatever, you should only get a perfect ending if you deserve it. The majority of the playerbase doesn't as the majority won't take all the best decisions - there are quite many decisions to make in the three games. You should not be able to fix that score in MP, or SP, or with Ios devices or anything else and thus Bioware is wrong on that account. If it is at all impossible to achieve a perfect score by only playing the three games then Bioware should be ashamed, which was my stance from the beginning.

Now I'll stop posting in this thread because it only gets me flames anyway. Not surprised considering the forum.

Modifié par byzantine horse, 14 mars 2012 - 12:48 .

[blaidfiste]

I'll do the NG+. I like multiplayer but I want to focus only on singleplayer first.

[Shiran]

jimmy_smith wrote...

It's seem my thread that demanding bioware to remove the false info
about we can get the best ending without multiplayer is lock,already.

It seem they don't need this true to be discover.

I skimmed through this thread, and I have a question. Bioware explicitly stated that perfect ending is achievable via Single Player campaign, and the bloke even went into details explaing how and why. So what makes people think  that ending that results in complete genocide of two advanced sentient races is "perfect" ending and desirable outcome?

Modifié par Shiran, 14 mars 2012 - 12:52 .

[djspectre]

I love how people are so mad about not being able to get the 'best' ending.

The Bioware post never said it was easy to get the best ending, only that it was possible.

Further, the EMS can be completely full on single player and still get the 'best' ending.

Part of this is that you need to have literally saved every single person you ever encountered in all 3 games. This includes things most people botched like saving the Asari and all the colonists and convincing ExoGeni scientists to keep supporting the colony on Ferros. Sparing the Rachni Queen on Noveria, keeping Wrex alive, keeping Captain Kirahae (salarian on Virmire). Not killing that human gangster woman (so she appears on Omega in ME2). All this just from ME1 alone. A lot of these things are not covered in the motion comic for me2 on the ps3.

Most of those things above aren't even considered important to most players. Some immediately come back and you can help them again in ME2 (asari from Ferros, for example), and ALL of them make appearances in one form or another (in person, email, or private spectre terminal on the citadel) in ME3 and contribute to your war assets.

And lets not forget the people you meet in ME2 for the first time that contribute as well: Thane, Samara, Zaeed, Kasumi, Jacob, Miranda, Legion, Grunt, Jack. And even NPC's like the Asari bartender in Eternity, The Patriarch, the Quarian Admiralty, Conrad Verner, he Asari who had the poetry reciting Krogan boyfriend and more all have a role to play and contribute to your success or failure. Hell even Veetor and Kal'Reegar are important (how many of you got Reegar killed the first time through? *raises hand*)

Most people missed a lot of these side quests or have gaps in them which makes ME3 that much harder.

ME3 even has some more life or death moments before you even get to the end that will help bolster your ranks.

If you basically saved every single person you ever encountered, squadmate or NPC, in all 3 games, you will get the 'best' ending.

To those who say that having to play through all 3 games again to get the 'best' single player ending is b.s......

My response is this: Bioware did that on purpose to reward players who invested extraordinary amounts of time creating the 'perfect save' (because we all know people out there who are like this) by playing all 3 games with a very clear, long term goal going into Mass Effect 3. Personally, I think it's brilliant.

Modifié par djspectre, 14 mars 2012 - 12:53 .

[av196vad]

Bump, keep this thread strong.

[Tirigon]

djspectre wrote...
My response is this: Bioware did that on purpose to reward players who invested extraordinary amounts of time creating the 'perfect save' (because we all know people out there who are like this) by playing all 3 games with a very clear, long term goal going into Mass Effect 3. Personally, I think it's brilliant.

Maybe. And also screwing everyone who, for whatever reason, doesnt have the saves anymore.
Or just feels a game should be playable on its own.


But that aside - I would agree with you, if there was no multiplayer and the 50% is just all you get and thats that. But if by doing MP people can get the best score with barely any effort it ruins the "rewarding for effort in previous games" point completely.

[OdanUrr]

Reptillius wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

HolyAvenger wrote...

Nairobi is in the game, its on my list.

Very interesting. That means there are other assets hidden somewhere in the Coalesced.

If the Nairobi isn't on the list. I know it's in my game. Check to see if the Agincourt is on the list as well?

Also. eden Prime Support is on the list it is 100 points and it did affect my score when I got it.

I think the Nairobi is as the London on the list.

I'm not considering DLC for my calculations.

[tishyw]

djspectre wrote...

I love how people are so mad about not being able to get the 'best' ending.

The Bioware post never said it was easy to get the best ending, only that it was possible.

Further, the EMS can be completely full on single player and still get the 'best' ending.

Part of this is that you need to have literally saved every single person you ever encountered in all 3 games. This includes things most people botched like saving the Asari and all the colonists and convincing ExoGeni scientists to keep supporting the colony on Ferros. Sparing the Rachni Queen on Noveria, keeping Wrex alive, keeping Captain Kirahae (salarian on Virmire). Not killing that human gangster woman (so she appears on Omega in ME2). All this just from ME1 alone. A lot of these things are not covered in the motion comic for me2 on the ps3.

Most of those things above aren't even considered important to most players. Some immediately come back and you can help them again in ME2 (asari from Ferros, for example), and ALL of them make appearances in one form or another (in person, email, or private spectre terminal on the citadel) in ME3 and contribute to your war assets.

And lets not forget the people you meet in ME2 for the first time that contribute as well: Thane, Samara, Zaeed, Kasumi, Jacob, Miranda, Legion, Grunt, Jack. And even NPC's like the Asari bartender in Eternity, The Patriarch, the Quarian Admiralty, Conrad Verner, he Asari who had the poetry reciting Krogan boyfriend and more all have a role to play and contribute to your success or failure. Hell even Veetor and Kal'Reegar are important (how many of you got Reegar killed the first time through? *raises hand*)

Most people missed a lot of these side quests or have gaps in them which makes ME3 that much harder.

ME3 even has some more life or death moments before you even get to the end that will help bolster your ranks.

If you basically saved every single person you ever encountered, squadmate or NPC, in all 3 games, you will get the 'best' ending.

To those who say that having to play through all 3 games again to get the 'best' single player ending is b.s......

My response is this: Bioware did that on purpose to reward players who invested extraordinary amounts of time creating the 'perfect save' (because we all know people out there who are like this) by playing all 3 games with a very clear, long term goal going into Mass Effect 3. Personally, I think it's brilliant.

Have a look at the assets list, even taking all this into account there are not enough assets in the SP game to get 4000 EMS.  There are a bit over  8000 assets, but once you take into account the fact that you have to loose some of them (details are spoilers so I won't put then here) then you can only get about 7,700 total assets.

[LadyBlueSweetie]

djspectre wrote...

I love how people are so mad about not being able to get the 'best' ending.

The Bioware post never said it was easy to get the best ending, only that it was possible.

Further, the EMS can be completely full on single player and still get the 'best' ending.

Part of this is that you need to have literally saved every single person you ever encountered in all 3 games. This includes things most people botched like saving the Asari and all the colonists and convincing ExoGeni scientists to keep supporting the colony on Ferros. Sparing the Rachni Queen on Noveria, keeping Wrex alive, keeping Captain Kirahae (salarian on Virmire). Not killing that human gangster woman (so she appears on Omega in ME2). All this just from ME1 alone. A lot of these things are not covered in the motion comic for me2 on the ps3.

Most of those things above aren't even considered important to most players. Some immediately come back and you can help them again in ME2 (asari from Ferros, for example), and ALL of them make appearances in one form or another (in person, email, or private spectre terminal on the citadel) in ME3 and contribute to your war assets.

And lets not forget the people you meet in ME2 for the first time that contribute as well: Thane, Samara, Zaeed, Kasumi, Jacob, Miranda, Legion, Grunt, Jack. And even NPC's like the Asari bartender in Eternity, The Patriarch, the Quarian Admiralty, Conrad Verner, he Asari who had the poetry reciting Krogan boyfriend and more all have a role to play and contribute to your success or failure. Hell even Veetor and Kal'Reegar are important (how many of you got Reegar killed the first time through? *raises hand*)

Most people missed a lot of these side quests or have gaps in them which makes ME3 that much harder.

ME3 even has some more life or death moments before you even get to the end that will help bolster your ranks.

If you basically saved every single person you ever encountered, squadmate or NPC, in all 3 games, you will get the 'best' ending.

To those who say that having to play through all 3 games again to get the 'best' single player ending is b.s......

My response is this: Bioware did that on purpose to reward players who invested extraordinary amounts of time creating the 'perfect save' (because we all know people out there who are like this) by playing all 3 games with a very clear, long term goal going into Mass Effect 3. Personally, I think it's brilliant.

Your assessment makes it sound as if an ultimate paragon can get through it on SP and achieve 4000 or higher EMS. I will have to go back and match up these data point by point, because I HAD an ultimate paragon who completed all missions except the bugged one with that salarian on Omega in ME2 and she let everyone live and she did not fare so well. Granted, she chose more renegade options in ME3 than typical of my last 2 games with her, but again, she got only 7000 TMS, so clearly I missed a lot despite saving everyone. Yes, even every last colonist on Feros. 

[jeweledleah]

Shiran wrote...

jimmy_smith wrote...

It's seem my thread that demanding bioware to remove the false info
about we can get the best ending without multiplayer is lock,already.

It seem they don't need this true to be discover.

I skimmed through this thread, and I have a question. Bioware explicitly stated that perfect ending is achievable via Single Player campaign, and the bloke even went into details explaing how and why. So what makes people think  that ending that results in complete genocide of two advanced sentient races is "perfect" ending and desirable outcome?

its the one requiring the most assets and the only one with an extra 20 second cutscene .

at the poster who said you had to save everyone.

actualy no.  you get better results if you had killed Wrex and destroyed genophage.  still not sure if its enough.

and the point about someone doing a non-import speedrun for example (or playing a mass murdering Shepard) and then getting the "best" ending result solely through playing a lot of multiplayer, invalidates the whole idea of rewarding returning sp fans who imported their characters.

[djspectre]

byzantine horse wrote...
.....To my understanding your choices do matter as it was percieved to be extremely hard to get the perfect ending..... 

This. 

Your ending is based on a culmination of choices made in all three games. Choices you thought to be small and pointless in ME1 now suddenly have a ripple and domino effect in ME3. 

It reminds me of the Columbia space shuttle disaster. A little piece of seemingly insignifcant insulating foam created a itty bitty crack on the heat shielding. During the extremes of reentry (think Reaper invasion here), that very slight imperfection caused the complete obliteration of the shuttle and it's crew. 

How is Mass Effect 3 any different?

It's just sad that people get so upset when they can't get the ending they WANT regardless of their in-game choices. Bioware's entire schtick with this game series is that your choices have always mattered to the characters in-game and thus you shouldn't take them lightly either.....if you want the 'best' ending. 

love the nerd rage though....I seriously lol everytime I read one of these threads about how the game ended. :D:D:D

[Zalbik]

The fact that the game is reduced to a math exercise is the ultimate design failure.

[LadyBlueSweetie]

jeweledleah wrote...

its the one requiring the most assets and the only one with an extra 20 second cutscene .

at the poster who said you had to save everyone.

actualy no.  you get better results if you had killed Wrex and destroyed genophage.  still not sure if its enough.

and the point about someone doing a non-import speedrun for example (or playing a mass murdering Shepard) and then getting the "best" ending result solely through playing a lot of multiplayer, invalidates the whole idea of rewarding returning sp fans who imported their characters.

I will play through all 3 again to get that ending. I hope there will be a guidebook though, cause it would seriously help.

[jeweledleah]

djspectre wrote...

byzantine horse wrote...
.....To my understanding your choices do matter as it was percieved to be extremely hard to get the perfect ending..... 

This. 

Your ending is based on a culmination of choices made in all three games. Choices you thought to be small and pointless in ME1 now suddenly have a ripple and domino effect in ME3. 

It reminds me of the Columbia space shuttle disaster. A little piece of seemingly insignifcant insulating foam created a itty bitty crack on the heat shielding. During the extremes of reentry (think Reaper invasion here), that very slight imperfection caused the complete obliteration of the shuttle and it's crew. 

How is Mass Effect 3 any different?

It's just sad that people get so upset when they can't get the ending they WANT regardless of their in-game choices. Bioware's entire schtick with this game series is that your choices have always mattered to the characters in-game and thus you shouldn't take them lightly either.....if you want the 'best' ending. 

love the nerd rage though....I seriously lol everytime I read one of these threads about how the game ended. :D:D:D

thats' the problem.  perfect ending is NOT based on combination of your choices through all 3 games.  its based on numerical value that can be achieved through multiplayer, regardless of the choices you made through all three games.  but in single player alone to get anywhere near 4000 EMS, its not enough to just save everyone and everything.  in fact, you have to do some very specific metagaming, stick to only bare minimum of squadmates (for example, not recruiting Tali and VS, but keeping them alive, gives you 12.5 EMS points each) and you STIll may fall short.  right... choices.  we have dismissed that claim.

[djspectre]

Tirigon wrote...

djspectre wrote...
My response is this: Bioware did that on purpose to reward players who invested extraordinary amounts of time creating the 'perfect save' (because we all know people out there who are like this) by playing all 3 games with a very clear, long term goal going into Mass Effect 3. Personally, I think it's brilliant.

Maybe. And also screwing everyone who, for whatever reason, doesnt have the saves anymore.
Or just feels a game should be playable on its own.


But that aside - I would agree with you, if there was no multiplayer and the 50% is just all you get and thats that. But if by doing MP people can get the best score with barely any effort it ruins the "rewarding for effort in previous games" point completely.

The MP doesn't give you the best score, it just effectively gives you a higher one. Think of the game of darts. If you play 301 (or 501) you must get EXACTLY 301 (or 501) points. If you are down to 5 points and hit a bullseye ( worth 50 points, a better dart through by any standard), it's actually a WORSE toss in that situation. Why? Because you only needed 5 points and hitting a bullseye doesn't count because it wasn't exactly 5 points that you needed to win.

Perhaps some of this dynamic is at play here. No one has considered that it's a specific combination of assets that gets you the perfect ending...everyone is all focused on the point totals and are ASSUMING that a higher score gets you a more perfect ending. While in some scenarios it might improve your ending with a better score, it might actually hinder other scenarios (think, "too many chefs in the kitchen analogy")

Modifié par djspectre, 14 mars 2012 - 01:14 .

[Shiran]

jeweledleah wrote...

its the one requiring the most assets and the only one with an extra 20 second cutscene .

at the poster who said you had to save everyone.

actualy no.  you get better results if you had killed Wrex and destroyed genophage.  still not sure if its enough.

and the point about someone doing a non-import speedrun for example (or playing a mass murdering Shepard) and then getting the "best" ending result solely through playing a lot of multiplayer, invalidates the whole idea of rewarding returning sp fans who imported their characters.

Yes, but how does translate into "best" the non genocidal ending requires more resources than the pre req for "deep breath." Bioware clearly stated on this very forum that best ending are reachable via single player only. It seems that "deep breath" is meant to be an non-conseqnential easter egg for true completionists (e.g. people who max out both TMS and Preparedness) The fact that it only reachable by following one of the easier reachable paths confirms it.

[tishyw]

djspectre wrote...

byzantine horse wrote...
.....To my understanding your choices do matter as it was percieved to be extremely hard to get the perfect ending..... 

This. 

Your ending is based on a culmination of choices made in all three games. Choices you thought to be small and pointless in ME1 now suddenly have a ripple and domino effect in ME3. 

It reminds me of the Columbia space shuttle disaster. A little piece of seemingly insignifcant insulating foam created a itty bitty crack on the heat shielding. During the extremes of reentry (think Reaper invasion here), that very slight imperfection caused the complete obliteration of the shuttle and it's crew. 

How is Mass Effect 3 any different?

It's just sad that people get so upset when they can't get the ending they WANT regardless of their in-game choices. Bioware's entire schtick with this game series is that your choices have always mattered to the characters in-game and thus you shouldn't take them lightly either.....if you want the 'best' ending. 

love the nerd rage though....I seriously lol everytime I read one of these threads about how the game ended. :D:D:D

All of this is negated by the fact that you can get the 'breath' ending by using MP, so it's not a reward for people who've played the game just right, it's a reward for people who play MP.

[djspectre]

Zalbik wrote...

The fact that the game is reduced to a math exercise is the ultimate design failure.

All games are a math exercise. Only real arbitrary way to assign weight values for situations with multiple variables. Its the fact that people are reducing it down to a math exercise because they are pissy about how their game ended that's the failure. 

Modifié par djspectre, 14 mars 2012 - 01:20 .

[tishyw]

djspectre wrote...

The MP doesn't give you the best score, it just effectively gives you a higher one. Think of the game of darts. If you play 301 (or 501) you must get EXACTLY 301 (or 501) points. If you are down to 5 points and hit a bullseye ( worth 50 points, a better dart through by any standard), it's actually a WORSE toss in that situation. Why? Because you only needed 5 points and hitting a bullseye doesn't count because it wasn't exactly 5 points that you needed to win.

Perhaps some of this dynamic is at play here. No one has considered that it's a specific combination of assets that gets you the perfect ending...everyone is all focused on the point totals and are ASSUMING that a higher score gets you a more perfect ending. While in some scenarios it might improve your ending with a better score, it might actually hinder other scenarios (think, "too many chefs in the kitchen analogy")

No, you just need over 4000 EMS, that's all, no special secret playing guide.  You can have a crap play through with no import and if you play and as long as you play MP enough to get 4000 EMS, you get the 'breathing' scene.
SP is ham-strung to get people to play MP, that's what we're complaining about.

[Shiran]

djspectre wrote...

The MP doesn't give you the best score, it just effectively gives you a higher one. Think of the game of darts. If you play 301 (or 501) you must get EXACTLY 301 (or 501) points. If you are down to 5 points and hit a bullseye ( worth 50 points, a better dart through by any standard), it's actually a WORSE toss in that situation.

Perhaps some of this dynamic is at play here. No one has considered that it's a specific combination of assets that gets you the perfect ending...everyone is all focused on the point totals and are ASSUMING that a higher score gets you a more perfect ending. While in some scenarios it might improve your ending with a better score, it might actually hinder other scenarios (think, "too many chefs in the kitchen analogy")

I agree with you. It seems people are concetrating solely on their EMS number as determination of what their arbitratraly deemed to be "best" ending completely oblivious to the fact that it is NOT because getting there results in making some unforgivable decisions. It might be best ending for Terra Firma Shepard I suppose.

[KBomb]

djspectre wrote...

byzantine horse wrote...
.....To my understanding your choices do matter as it was percieved to be extremely hard to get the perfect ending..... 

This. 

Your ending is based on a culmination of choices made in all three games. Choices you thought to be small and pointless in ME1 now suddenly have a ripple and domino effect in ME3. 

It reminds me of the Columbia space shuttle disaster. A little piece of seemingly insignifcant insulating foam created a itty bitty crack on the heat shielding. During the extremes of reentry (think Reaper invasion here), that very slight imperfection caused the complete obliteration of the shuttle and it's crew. 

How is Mass Effect 3 any different?

It's just sad that people get so upset when they can't get the ending they WANT regardless of their in-game choices. Bioware's entire schtick with this game series is that your choices have always mattered to the characters in-game and thus you shouldn't take them lightly either.....if you want the 'best' ending. 

love the nerd rage though....I seriously lol everytime I read one of these threads about how the game ended. :D:D:D

 
You're in the wrong room. The ending threads are that way. <------------


You're obviously confusing a discussion about EMS and Deep Breath with those who want the endings changed.


Let me spell it out for you, since comprehension seems to be lacking. No one is complaining about the fact our choices do or do not matter. No one is wanting a super easy way to get the ending Deep Breath. No one is complaining about not getting the ending they want because it does not exist. No one is complaining that their choices were too hard or too easy in Me/ME2/ME3.



Bioware stated that you could get the best ending without MP. They stated that you could get this ending with SP only. The point of contention is not any of the strawman arguments you've presented, but the fact that due to bugs, PR error, or untruths, this is not the case. Everyone is simply trying to figure out how to rectify the situation since Bioware is keeping mum on the subject.


If I made a mistake with my choices and decisions and because of that I cannot get Deep Breath, I am fine with that. However, if in spite of my choices, I have to employ MP to get that ending, then it's a problem. If you cannot understand that because you have some soapbox ideal that everyone here wants to be handed Deep Breath on a silver platter, then you're the sad one.

[jfkgoblue]

I was kinda annoyed with the forced MP for the best ending, but really, the MP isn't terrible, could be better, but it is surprisingly addictive

[jeweledleah]

Shiran wrote...

jeweledleah wrote...

its the one requiring the most assets and the only one with an extra 20 second cutscene .

at the poster who said you had to save everyone.

actualy no.  you get better results if you had killed Wrex and destroyed genophage.  still not sure if its enough.

and the point about someone doing a non-import speedrun for example (or playing a mass murdering Shepard) and then getting the "best" ending result solely through playing a lot of multiplayer, invalidates the whole idea of rewarding returning sp fans who imported their characters.

Yes, but how does translate into "best" the non genocidal ending requires more resources than the pre req for "deep breath." Bioware clearly stated on this very forum that best ending are reachable via single player only. It seems that "deep breath" is meant to be an non-conseqnential easter egg for true completionists (e.g. people who max out both TMS and Preparedness) The fact that it only reachable by following one of the easier reachable paths confirms it.

no, actualy.  "best" non genocidal ending requires 2800 EMS.  thats it.  that's all you need.  it doesn't matter whether you saved collector base, or destroyed it, none of the choices matter.  you get 2800 - you get all 3 ending options and the earth is saved. you can skip every side mission, you can mess up your main missions.  you just need to finish the main story, get your required EMS by playing couple of MP matches... and you are completely set.

you need 4000 EMS (provided you pass a persuasion check, which I did) or 5000 (if you don't)  to get the extra cutscene.  see where I'm going with this?

and the reason why people focus on this number?  becasue its THE ONLY THING THAT ACTUALY HAS ANY AFFECT ON THE ENDING.

not your individual choices.  ONLY this number.

Modifié par jeweledleah, 14 mars 2012 - 01:24 .