241 réponses à ce sujet

[Adugan]

BIOWARE, HIRE THIS MAN!

[Nazular]

Loves it! Really likes that you exchanged the destroyer for Harbringer, makes a lot of sense!

[CroGamer002]

Statulos wrote...

I have no problem with the "right decissions"; I do have a problem considering that they do not even push the score close to 4000.

Me too, but here Arcian wants to fix that broken War Assets system so that you can all War Assets without Co-Op nor DLC's.

[Tovanus]

It's an improvement, but requires ret-conning the experience. The indoctrination idea allows them to keep everything in the game as part of the ending, while letting them also craft a totally new sequence.

I also notice that while it rightly dispenses with the terrible rationale given for the Reaper actions, it doesn't give an explanation to replace it. I think with all the mystery around the Reapers ultimate purpose, a new explanation is needed. Though to be fair, there are other threads devoted solely to that, where some people have come up with better explanations. I guess you could just insert that in there at some point with Harbinger.

Edit: I also fully support the idea of getting rid of the multiplayer necessity for top-end single player outcome. This is extremely well done in regards to crafting meaning to the war assets.

Modifié par Tovanus, 19 mars 2012 - 08:49 .

[Aimi]

Arcian wrote...

Nazular wrote...

Loves it! Really likes that you exchanged the destroyer for Harbringer, makes a lot of sense!

Yeah never really understood why they sent a destroyer to protect something that important when Earth is full of Reaper capital ships like Harbinger.

A Reaper destroyer is hard enough to kill on its own; a Reaper dreadnought would've stretched the limits of what could be believed.

Then again, it's hard to argue that they were all that concerned about that anyway. 

Great OP, by the way.

[Lucas Wolfen]

Nice post Arcian,

Like you my issue with the endings was how they were presented rather than the endings themselves. I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought that controling the Reapers to enforce human dominance over the galaxy should have been an option.

Hold the line!

Modifié par Lucas Wolfen, 19 mars 2012 - 09:28 .

[CroGamer002]

So, about that fixing intro?

[CroGamer002]

^Ah, OK.

[Sgt Stryker]

I don't know if this will make things too complex or not, but I had a thought about the EMS rating. My idea is to split it up into 3 different ratings - Fleet Strength, Army Strength, and Crucible Readiness. That opens up a lot of possible different combinations for the end-game scenario. For instance, if you have a lot of ground assets but very few fleets, then you can steamroll your way through the force defending the Citadel, but Harbinger will tear through to the Citadel later on. What do you think of that?

[xIxDarkWolfxIx]

Great idea Arcian! Lets hope BW are listening...

[im commander shep]

Love some of thoes ideas. Great post Arcian. Really like the idea that the effectiveness of the crucible is based on the amount of the EMS you have.
The only thing is you could never have Shepard kill Anderson. Just to sad.

[Sgt Stryker]

Arcian wrote...

^Interesting idea.

Thanks. To further expand on my idea, I suggest that the majority of assets only contribute to one type of rating. For a few examples, an asari cruiser will only contribute to Fleet Strength, a regiment of krogan warriors will only add to Ground Strength, while a brilliant scientist can only contribute to Crucible Readiness.
However, you can have some assets contribute to 2 or even all 3 categories. The Alliance Engineering Corps can add to both army strength and the Crucible, for instance. Someone has to build the darn thing, after all. Might as well have professional engineers do it.

[HalfTangible]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

I don't know if this will make things too complex or not, but I had a thought about the EMS rating. My idea is to split it up into 3 different ratings - Fleet Strength, Army Strength, and Crucible Readiness. That opens up a lot of possible different combinations for the end-game scenario. For instance, if you have a lot of ground assets but very few fleets, then you can steamroll your way through the force defending the Citadel, but Harbinger will tear through to the Citadel later on. What do you think of that?

Correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't that require a remake of pretty much the entire game? Or at least an overhaul too big for DLC?

[CroGamer002]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

I don't know if this will make things too complex or not, but I had a thought about the EMS rating. My idea is to split it up into 3 different ratings - Fleet Strength, Army Strength, and Crucible Readiness. That opens up a lot of possible different combinations for the end-game scenario. For instance, if you have a lot of ground assets but very few fleets, then you can steamroll your way through the force defending the Citadel, but Harbinger will tear through to the Citadel later on. What do you think of that?

Damn, you beat me to it.

I was thinking of that today.

Modifié par Mesina2, 20 mars 2012 - 08:46 .

[CroGamer002]

HalfTangible wrote...
Correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't that require a remake of pretty much the entire game? Or at least an overhaul too big for DLC?

Eh, no?

It would only overhaul how War Assets work and endings.

But that's about it.

Well, endings part is big one, but Bioware has to overhault that either way.

[General User]

im commander shep wrote...

Love some of thoes ideas. Great post Arcian. Really like the idea that the effectiveness of the crucible is based on the amount of the EMS you have.
The only thing is you could never have Shepard kill Anderson. Just to sad.

Oh.  I don't know.  If the player wants to stick to "human dominance" agenda I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to.

[General User]

xIxDarkWolfxIx wrote...

Great idea Arcian! Lets hope BW are listening...

I hope so too.  You know Bioware does have the "Yes,we're listening" and the "Suggested Changes" threads.  Might I suggest you post a link to the OP or maybe a copy of the ideas you particularly like? 

The more links to Arcian's Fixed Ending from many different people Bioware sees the more likely they are to take note of these amazing ideas.

[SuiteAces]

Arcian this is brilliant! You practically did BW's job for them. All they have to do is copypasta this and voila-instant awesome endings. I am a completionist when it comes to my canon Shep and the Golden Ending feels like a reward for doing every single quest in these games. I would also love for the chance to create a Shep that was lazy that loses the war in a failtastic manner just to see the Reapers win too. It's all part of the RPG experience-do I RP an ultimate winner or a lackadaisical loser-your endings would allow me to do just that.

Seeing just how awesome your endings would have been just rubs salt in the wounds on how badly BW handled the in-game ending.

Also, I hated the starkid and I'm glad your endings don't even have that little *many asterisks here.* Am I the only one who doesn't even feel bad for that kid in the beginning of the game and could care less about trying to save him? I am not unfeeling; I just felt that the whole "kid in multiple dream sequence" thing was way too forced.

[JohnnyG]

New Generation wrote...

This is the only way I can see the endings given making sense and being satisfying to watch unfold.

/agree