23455 réponses à ce sujet

[Voodoo-j]

Which really makes me wonder, the players host the game, what do they have to actually setup hardware software on the backend? Are they really pushing a chunk of $ into it that they need to recoup, or are they just soaking up a bunch of $ and laughing on the way to the bank.

Is this why Bioware joined with EA, for multiplayer?

Modifié par Voodoo-j, 14 mai 2012 - 07:50 .

[3DandBeyond]

Voodoo-j wrote...

Which really makes me wonder, the players host the game, what do they have to actually setup hardware software on the backend? Are they really pushing a chunk of $ into it that they need to recoup, or are they just soaking up a bunch of $ and laughing on the way to the bank.

Well, when you look at what MP is, it's basically a done thing.  It can be played over and over again and because of the way it's structured, there's very little the company ever has to input.  The reason they do so is for the obvious thing-get you to want to quickly get the packs you need in order to do ok in the game.  So for that reason they do create their little events.

I've played other games where online play gives a company nothing-you don't buy anything for it and it's a part of the core game (Demon's Souls and Dark Souls) and the former (Demon's) featured a lot of involvement by the US distributor.  They didn't make money at all off of online play, but they created player involvement events that coincided with holidays or as rewards for player loyalty.  The EU release of Demon's Souls had none of that and it was a much different experience-the distributor of the EU version did nothing for players.  Which version do you think garnered kinder words and still does to this day, some years later.  People loved the US/NA distributor and cannot stand the EU one.

This is the real problem but it infects everything today.  Businesses are stupid and so profit oriented that they forget the basics.  Take care of your customers, retain the ones you have and grow your business and following by encouraging current ones to talk you up, providing unpaid for advertising.  They may make shortterm huge gains, but so many companies die because they don't take care of their customers, their fans.  Give them better than expected value and they will keep coming back for more and will ensure your longterm success and lifespan.

I don't know all that went into Bioware's decision, presumably it's getting the cash when you can, while you can on Bioware's part.  EA also probably wanted to solidify their position in the industry.  Large companies like to keep acquiring small ones that do something they don't.  EA was a sports powerhouse, but needed to solidify other areas of gaming.  It's I think kind of like wanting to be that one stop shopping place-people can get all the types of games they like to play from one company.  I just don't think Bioware could ignore the money offered and EA has always been an advocate of non-exclusive clauses.  They promote games on competitive consoles.  They maybe could do that whereas Bioware at the time couldn't, given their contracts with Microsoft.  This idea of games being offered for more than one console also meant more money.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 14 mai 2012 - 07:59 .

[FENERIUM1907]

Hudathan wrote...

I try to lighten the mood whenever I can these days, and I want you guys to know that Mass Effect 3 is the best game in the series for me and possibly the best gaming experience I've ever had. And that if you guys have more surprises coming then it would be more than welcome.

Amen brother!!Thats exactly what I was thinking too!!

[Arcamenel]

FENERIUM1907 wrote...

Hudathan wrote...

I try to lighten the mood whenever I can these days, and I want you guys to know that Mass Effect 3 is the best game in the series for me and possibly the best gaming experience I've ever had. And that if you guys have more surprises coming then it would be more than welcome.

Amen brother!!Thats exactly what I was thinking too!!

okkkkk I must agree lol I wouldn't mind having to replay ME3 and MAYBE see a twist in the storyline! this would be awesome

and I wanted to share something ! everyone who played Dragon Age saw some similarities with Mass Effect. and we ALWAYS thought that ME was set in the same universe ONLY IN THE FUTURE...but what if the mass relays destroyed...and starting all over again...could this CREATE Dragon Age universe through all this chaos we saw in the ending????

Ok might have LOTS of flaws lol I'm the first to say that I haven't played Dragon Age! But...do you think that my theory is possible??? Lemme know

[Voodoo-j]

Yeah, I forgot about being stuck with ms :/ I always wonder what would have happened with Halo if it wasn't an xbox platform, would the mp it was meant to be for pc had taken pc gaming to new heights?

/sigh

I don't think it affected ME1, while I hate to see games being stuck to 1 console, I wonder if it would have turned out better with MS over EA. Perhaps the time to create a finished product?

[daveyeisley]

Been poking around in the "lit. professor thread", if you haven't seen it, you simply must check it out.

Found one post farther in, by Strange Aeons, that just resonated so.... perfectly... I mean like, immaculately resonated, and explained in beautiful prose.... insight, impact... it was really kind of beyond my ability to adequately describe how well written it was. Parts are a bit harsh, but all in all....

...just Wow.

Do youself a favor and READ THIS!

Modifié par daveyeisley, 14 mai 2012 - 08:47 .

[3DandBeyond]

daveyeisley wrote...

Been poking around in the "lit. professor thread", if you haven't seen it, you simply must check it out.

Found one post farther in, by Strange Aeons, that just resonated so.... perfectly... I mean like, immaculately resonated, and explained in beautiful prose.... insight, impact... it was really kind of beyond my ability to adequately describe how well written it was. Parts are a bit harsh, but all in all....

...just Wow.

Do youself a favor and READ THIS!

That's an awesome thread that I've enjoyed as well and they get to the point as to how the game fails literature-wise and in other ways.  There are a lot of discussions regarding what Shepard would and wouldn't do and I agree with him that it makes no difference if Shepard is Renagade or Paragon.  Shepard is still Shepard with a certain goal.

One other interesting thing that I'd like to note is there are a lot of people that think synthesis/synergy is the way to go and the best choice.  Well, I want people to show where in the game any form of synthesis is ever shown as a good thing.

The reapers themselves perform a sort of synthesis, by creating organic goo and reaper creatures.  We've all noted this.  Sovereign and Saren said it was a goal.  The star kid says it's the final outcome of evolution.  They want it.

But, beyond that I can't find any instance in the game where anyone decent says it's a good idea.  I'm not talking about what we might think Synthesis could mean, I'm talking about what Shepard has seen before.  And what we've seen in the game.

One thing I now remember is Project Overlord, where the one brother is hooked up to the machine by Cerberus and his brother scientist.  This is stated as some sort of melding of human and machine.  It's as if everyone you dislike is trying to mesh man and machine-even Shepard's existence or TIM's go partway to get to Synthesis and we all know what Shepard thinks of TIM.  But the true horror of what was done to the autistic brother in Overlord would hit Shepard hard, well and it did.  Just how Shepard deals with this helps to determine one set of war assets in ME3, so it would appear even the game is directing you to make the "right" choice here.

I just wanted to point out that just as in that post you cited there's a lot about what Shepard would and wouldn't do and directly related to Destroy and the Geth/Quarian conflict, so too the same thing exists for the other 2 options. 

Shepard would not choose them almost simply because of those other beings that "liked" them.  There are other reasons as well, but this alone is almost reason enough.

[daveyeisley]

I had explained to several people what made me sad about mass effect’s ending, and that it was more than just the ending being sad (I hope that makes sense). Sure it was confusing, disjointed, and a bit intellectually insulting…. but still more than that.

It was the wasted potential, and the missed opportunity. So may ways they could have taken it that would have been amazing, elevated the medium (truthfully they already did that, but it could have been incredibly so much moreso).

Im an avid gamer, have been since Zork on the Apple IIe. Never hoped or expected as much from a game as I did from ME3. Didn’t even fully realize how invested I was and how high my expectations were until the disappointment set in.

I weep for ME3, Bioware, the development team, and the entire cast of characters. I weep for what gaming might have achieved. I weep for the rapture this story almost gave. I weep, and I continue to struggle with letting go.

[Arathyl]

i honestly loved the ending of ME3 and i think bioware did i great job with the storyline and gameplay for the most part. i thought ME ended how it should have ended. i can't see how a happily-ever-after ending would have fitted in the story. it would have ruined the seriousness of the reaper invasion.

however, i can see why alot of people complained about having only three possible endings. now that i've played the game several times over again i wish that my choices of the previous two games had more affect on the story.

but the main thing bothering me was the romance. to me that was the major part to the story of commander shepard aside from fighting the reapers/collectors i was looking forward to. with liara, for example, there were just so much more cut scenes. i just wish that since kaidan was the other main character for the female shep, aside from liara and garrus, that shepard would have had an equally indepth relationship with him. and not that you only get one reply with no cut scene when you press 'A'. so i hope that either with the dlc that's coming in the summer or a separate romance dlc pack, bioware will have changed that, which is, to me, the only thing that needs to be changed. this, i think, is more important than the ending.

[LiarasShield]

Again a random person saying the ending is awesome and why can't their be a happy ending their was one during me2 hell even when shepard fought soverign in me1 their still was but perhaps you didn't play those....

[LiarasShield]

and yes depending on your choices and how you did stuff their should've been a possiability for a good ending just like their was in the previous mass effect just like a true failure ending like we have now if you don't make decent decisions or have enough assets

[LiarasShield]

LiarasShield wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

thompsonman wrote...

THANK YOU to the MASS EFFECT team!!! just finished the me3 campaign for the first time. i heard many complaints about the ending but i was very impressed and satisfied. IT WAS AMAZING. i really cant believe all the bad words said about it. imagine what i would of missed out on if i bought Lost Planet instead of Mass Effect1 that day in the store. thanks again bioware

I'm not trying to pick a fight, but I really want someone that thought it was amazing to explain what was amazing about it.

Was it the idea that the created will always rebel against the creators and destroy them so the star kid must destroy advanced organics to keep synthetics from destroying advanced organics?

Or was it the part where the heroic, always challenging and resistant Shepard (you know the one that didn't just accept explanations but asked questions and fought and things like that), just accepts the star kid's "solution"?

Or was it the part just after the beam hit Shepard where someone orders a retreat-when there's nowhere to retreat to?

Or, was it the part where Shepard chooses Destroy which means the Geth and EDI will be vaporized, when your Shepard may have united the Geth and Quarian (see created/creator thing) and may have taught EDI a bit about love?

Or, was it the part where Shepard simply believes the star kid when the star kid all along has been the evil puppet master behind the reapers-meaning he is the big nasty in the game?

Or, was it the part where Joker simply swooped in super quickly and scooped up teammates that may have been fighting with Shepard when Shepard got hit by the beam and then ran away (you know because your teammates would leave and Joker would think there's actually some place to run to to hide from reapers)?

Or, was it the part where your teammates and Joker and your Love Interest, who all turned and ran away somehow, ended up on some jungle planet?

Or, was it the charcoal encrusted Shepard chest that gasped at the end (*see below) that appears to be laying in debris in London (magical space fall and planetary re-entry)?

*Referencing above-Was it that gasping chest that you can only get if you have a high enough EMS score based upon multiplayer play (promised not to be needed for the game) that you can only get if you choose the "correct" option from A, B, or C (also promised not to be in the game)?

Or, was it the lack of meaningful difference amongst the endings you could get whether you worked really hard to acquire assets in the game or just sat on your assets and did nothing?  Keep in mind the basic differences are whether you get all 3 choices, or whether Earth gets vaporized in one and whether Shepard gasps in another.

Or, was it the blue screen that popped up after the credits that said to get ready and buy some DLC?

Or, was it the Stargazer scene, ambiguous as it is, which features the greatest misuse of a truly heroic figure's voice (Buzz Aldrin) in any video game ever?

Or, was it the lack of story cohesion where you begin these games racing to fight against a super evil, larger than life foe that is the stuff of nightmares-you know the one that turns humans and others into organic goo-only to suddenly be thrown into slow motion, non-action, and to face a glob of super silly light in the form of a kid?  A star kid that you had no idea existed, but are somehow in the last few minutes of the game, supposed to believe, to hate, to love, to like, to follow, or what?  Shepard would never believe and certainly would never follow anything this glow boy says.

Or, was it that all that your Shepard and friends may have sacrificed for, end up being basically meaningless?  What did Mordin die for?  Legion?  Thane?

Or, was it the lack of any of these friends fighting alongside you at the end and the lack of any real fun at seeing your war assets in use?  Some people actually thought it might be awesome to see Asari warriors really fight, Krogans on dino back, Jack and her biotic kids, but some people apparently didn't care.

I just want to know what was awesome and amazing about it-was it the generic scene of some unknown military guys waving their guns in the air?  I personally wanted to see Garrus cheer or Grunt.  I wanted to see Vega jump for joy and I feel less fraternal feeling for Vega than many of my other friends. 

The ending to me was neither action-packed nor was it emotionally engaging.  It was empty.  And it didn't leave me cheering or feeling like I'd accomplished anything.  It left me feeling empty.

See the funny thing is is that people who say the ending is great or amazing can't give any real true decent reasons for why it's great and for a series like mass effect about choices and decisions and consequences of said decision the ending is just as important as the journey and is suppose to make sense and be meaningful not fall apart at the last min

But yeah Most ending lovers can only say it is great but can't really give decent reasons for why it is great but those of us who loath the ending can give very decent valid reasons for why we hate the ending why it doesn't make sense and why it does not feel like a victory

Shepard giving into the flawed logic that organics must be destroyed by synthetics so that organics won't make synthetics that will destroy them I'm sorry this once again makes little to no sense

And yes joker leaving with loyal crew when joker saved shepard and the others on the collector base could barely abandon the normandy at the begining of mass effect 2 and shepard had to pull his ass out of the cockpit or when joker played as a distraction during grissom academy giving shepard time to save jack and her kids or the biotic children from grissom academy and many other scenarios that paint the pure clear picture that joker would never abandon shepard or his or her squad let alone the entire fleet fighting against the reapers to save the galaxy no I'm sorry can't accept that joker would do a complete 360 and say **** you to the galaxy and have us all potentially be annhilated by the reapers

Let alone magically picking up your squad who would fight with you to the end and followed you as you charged towards the beam up to the citadel and getting hit by harbingers beam I'm sorry either they're dead or extremely wounded but they wouldn't be a ok without a scratch one nor would they just let joker take off without a care in the world leyt alone joker himself doing so

And once again shepard has always fought for another way has always refused to give in even in the face of death or impossiable odds so all of sudden shepard just lays down and die without fighting back or looking for another way or making the reapers have to give them all to kill him or her I'm sorry shepard became a zombie in the final minutes no longer was shepard this powerful noble hero who fought with tooth and nail to save the galaxy he or she became a mindless drone that just gave up to illogical nonsense to make a suicide with really no pay off

And The quarians have a hard time survivng as it is why do you think that they have the young ones go on a pilgrimage to bring resourceful things back to the flotila because they're resources are not that fast and the civilian
ships and most of the important rescources are being used to secure rannoch so once again that tells me that because the relays are destroyed they won't be able to get important rescources to the flotilla to help them out or the turians

At best the quarians and geth will live the longest out of all the races trapt in our hurt solar system but whos to say that old ways or at least when the quarians start begining to run low on food and rescources try to attack to geth to attempt to gain more or use their advanced tech in hope of trying to escape our solar system in the end it still goes back to how nobody reallys wins and how the catalyst and the reapers have the last laugh

You know what I really saw at the ending the death of the human spirit that is what I saw instead of never giving up and stand our ground or no matter how hard you get hit it isn't about how hard you hit but how hard you get hit and keep on moving how much you can take and keep pushing forward I saw the death of human spirit shepard giving up and seeing the powerful human spirit destroyed that is what I saw

And No I don't think this is a good lesson to either the younger audience or for the older adults because it is pretty much saying you can give 110% percent but no matter what you do in the end you will still fail

NO THAT IS NOT A GOOD LESSON

really how people can accept the way the ending is it almost makes me think that indoctrination is real and that either bioware or ea must've been really good at mind control or powerful subliminial messages within the game

Seriously random people saying the ending is fine without decent reasons again is becoming a contrivance espically when it looks like they only played the final game instead of the previous one

[Dublinguy65]

Beat, beat, the dead horse.

[3DandBeyond]

daveyeisley wrote...

I had explained to several people what made me sad about mass effect’s ending, and that it was more than just the ending being sad (I hope that makes sense). Sure it was confusing, disjointed, and a bit intellectually insulting…. but still more than that.

It was the wasted potential, and the missed opportunity. So may ways they could have taken it that would have been amazing, elevated the medium (truthfully they already did that, but it could have been incredibly so much moreso).

Im an avid gamer, have been since Zork on the Apple IIe. Never hoped or expected as much from a game as I did from ME3. Didn’t even fully realize how invested I was and how high my expectations were until the disappointment set in.

I weep for ME3, Bioware, the development team, and the entire cast of characters. I weep for what gaming might have achieved. I weep for the rapture this story almost gave. I weep, and I continue to struggle with letting go.

Zork takes me back.  My first computing and video gaming was on a Commodore Vic 20.  I played Adventure I think it was later on and then Zork.

And yes, you are right it was wasted potential.  Great games deserved an especially great ending.  The nuance of the dialogue and even body language and expression were amazing.  Again, the ending doesn't fit.

[3DandBeyond]

Arathyl wrote...

i honestly loved the ending of ME3 and i think bioware did i great job with the storyline and gameplay for the most part. i thought ME ended how it should have ended. i can't see how a happily-ever-after ending would have fitted in the story. it would have ruined the seriousness of the reaper invasion.

however, i can see why alot of people complained about having only three possible endings. now that i've played the game several times over again i wish that my choices of the previous two games had more affect on the story.

but the main thing bothering me was the romance. to me that was the major part to the story of commander shepard aside from fighting the reapers/collectors i was looking forward to. with liara, for example, there were just so much more cut scenes. i just wish that since kaidan was the other main character for the female shep, aside from liara and garrus, that shepard would have had an equally indepth relationship with him. and not that you only get one reply with no cut scene when you press 'A'. so i hope that either with the dlc that's coming in the summer or a separate romance dlc pack, bioware will have changed that, which is, to me, the only thing that needs to be changed. this, i think, is more important than the ending.

Honestly, have you read anything in this thread at all?  And did the star kid really add to the seriousness of the situation.  Please, we ask questions as to how this could be awesome about that.  Again, not fighting here but asking.

Not everyone is asking for a simple happy, sappy ending.  But, the kid borders on ridiculous.  I was fighting reapers, not glow boys.  And really does the Joker scene on the jungle planet qualify as serious?

But, and this is a big one....your choices were supposed to matter, but in the end you get a spineless whimpy Shepard who believes this crazy star kid whose logic sounds like it came out of a fortune cookie.  I do think the ending should have been serious and I seriously think it should have been about the reapers and fighting the reapers.

Another but here.  Why not a happy ending?  Ok we have said it many times before, there could be both a sacrificial one and a happy one, why the heck not?  And in case you missed it there was an ambiguously happy ending-Shepard lives.

But, it's just as valid that there could be at the very least a happy and a less than happy ending.  The ending of ME2 was no less serious, the Collector base fight was harsh, and your teammates could die-even Shepard could die.  But, you could work harder and get a good ending where everyone lives.

The bigger problems are that the ending does not fit the rest of the game, the star kid is illogical and isn't the foe we were all fighting.  The reapers are on vacation, your teammates ran away, Joker magically whisked them away at some point and then they have crash landed away from all civilization and you.  The end, buy some DLC, oh and look at this meaningless, ambiguous Stargazer scene that means either this was a bedtime story or I don't know what.  And please don't tell me that's Joker with his grandkid there.  That scene with Joker on the jungle planet could be an all male one-I haven't see any indication that that's even possible in the game.

You even point out that the romance was a big part of this game-how's that going to work with a sad, Shepard dies ending?  DLC with your LI crying every day?  I'm pretty sure Shepard being dead kind of puts an end to any romance DLC.  If not, you really don't want a sad ending.

Again, I'm not picking on you or trying to fight, I just don't understand how you can see the ending as great, want a sad one, and then think there should be a Shepard romance DLC pack.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 15 mai 2012 - 01:50 .

[Archonsg]

Dublinguy65 wrote...

Beat, beat, the dead horse.

Something we all forgot

Happiness and the pursuit of happiness, freedom and the right to choose, a happy ending. Do you really want to give up on hope and all that entails from having hope?

ME3 was dark yes, but it could have been about not giving up.
ME3 was depressing with so many dead and dying but it could have been about rising above adversity and keeping true to one's principles.
ME3 placed all living things at the edge of destruction but it could have been about never loosing hope.
ME3 had an enemy who, in every description would take that hope away but it could have been about the strength of the human spirit.

Instead, we get a Shepard whose spirit is broken, who accepts suicide, and betrays all that he knows to be right. Every one of those three choices speak of evil, and yes every choice that was given to you, was a suicide based on a betrayal.
That is not the Shepard I know.

Modifié par Archonsg, 15 mai 2012 - 09:30 .

[LiarasShield]

Agreed archonsg

[cyrslash1974]

It's not MY Shepard, the Shepard I played. Fully agree.

[3DandBeyond]

Archonsg wrote...

Something we all forgot

Happiness and the pursuit of happiness, freedom and the right to choose, a happy ending. Do you really want to give up on hope and all that entails from having hope?

ME3 was dark yes, but it could have been about not giving up.
ME3 was depressing with so many dead and dying but it could have been about rising above adversity and keeping true to one's principles.
ME3 placed all living things at the edge of destruction but it could have been about never loosing hope.
ME3 had an enemy who, in every description would take that hope away but it could have been about the strength of the human spirit.

Instead, we get a Shepard whose spirit is broken, who accepts suicide, and betrays all that he knows to be right. Every one of those three choices speak of evil, and yes every choice that was given to you, was a suicide based on a betrayal.
That is not the Shepard I know.

But you see the problem is ME3 was about all of those things.  They were there throughout the game and that's what made the ending so abhorrent to me.  It is counter to all the things I believed were possible.  Consider that Shepard grew up alone and so must have had this incredible nature to overcome the gangs and bad stuff of that life.  Shepard was the embodiment of redemption, hope, and the strength of the human spirit.  The choices I made throughout the game and games reflected that, but the whole idea of what Shepard was going to try and do and the constant warnings about the reapers show that Shepard had a higher purpose.  S/he kept getting told s/he was crazy, misguided, hallucinating, alone, and so on and yet Shepard still set about to save the galaxy from the reapers.  Talk about adversity.

People keep saying the main reason Shepard kept going was because of his/her teammate family, but I don't think so.  They eventually put faces on the what the fight was for, but Shepard was "all in" even before assembling the family.  Shepard persisted in large measure for the greater good of all.  S/he also knew that in doing this some of these teammates would probably die.  So the idea that the game then had to turn into one of resignation where Shepard just loses it and accepts what the reaper's puppet master says and commits suicide (I agree) is ridiculous.  All along Shepard has been told and has known that s/he is the only one that has been standing between life and annihilation.  Shepard wouldn't just believe the kid and wouldn't die because then who's left standing to fight?

A better option and one Shepard might see is that they could attempt the optional conventional fight that s/he and Hackett had discussed.  The Catalyst isn't much help.  My EMS said I had an even chance.  My galactic readiness said I was winning in key areas.  Why should Shepard just give up when the kid could be lying and there's no one to do what Shepard can do?

[daveyeisley]

Been thinking about the endings, specifically destroy and what is wrong with it. Still processing this, haven't yet figured out how it affects my overall opinion.

I have said before that the Catalyst's statement that all synthetic life, including the Geth and EDI, would die just seems like an artificial, contrived, tacked-on penalty. It truly feels as if the only reason it is there is to make the choice harder for the player.

There doesn't really seem to be a reasonable explanation in the game content of why the (sigh, I'm actually going to use these words) Space Magic cannot be selective in destruction. Theres no foreshadowing of it, no buildup. No foundation on which that drawback to Destroy was built on.

Its just there, sticking its tongue out at you for wanting to annihilate the armada of mass-murdering demonbots.

I posit that there should not be such an explanation, even if one could be added. Strange Aeons, I think, described the reason for this best. The premise of the game, up until the Catalyst, has been trying to defeat an enemy who seeks to subjugate and impose its will on our character, our friends, and our peoples.

Its was never about synthetics versus organics. Its was never about Order vs. Chaos. That trope is tossed at us a few times in side missions (Tali and Legion's story most notably), and then revealed to be the Big Idea by the Catalyst. Up till then it was about about defeating the reapers and achieving freedom and self-determination. It asks us to forget so much we have seen and done, forcing us to believe this new premise. That hurts me, but isn't the point.

The problem I see with the destroy ending is, it punishes only one playstyle. You can get off pretty much scot-free if you let the Geth die, and were mean to EDI. You may feel like a little bit of a jerk, but if you went Renegade, you've probably accepted you are a jerk and can sleep fine at night.

A mostly renegade Shepard can get plenty of satisfaction from the Destroy ending, and if they had the EMS, they get to live on top of it.

Paragons are the ones who get screwed. To paraphrase Javik, "Because you still believe you can end this war with your honor intact."

There is no satisfying ending for a Paragon which also allows them to live. You can do your headcanon with Synthesis and Control to make it so you get satisfaction, sure.... but you die, no matter your EMS.

This makes me feel outrage. I feel like my predisposition to paragon choices has been mostly rewarded throughout the trilogy, reinforcing my belief in that path. Then at the end, I get shafted for it arbitrarily. Either I die, or I become a hypocrite and a monster.

Destroy is broken for this reason, among many others.... but I could live with the endings if this was fixed.

[daveyeisley]

3DandBeyond wrote...

People keep saying the main reason Shepard kept going was because of his/her teammate family, but I don't think so.  They eventually put faces on the what the fight was for, but Shepard was "all in" even before assembling the family. 

Bingo. The family formed *because* Shepard was "all in". That was his conviction. It was a major reason he personified leadership to everyone around him.

[3DandBeyond]

daveyeisley wrote...

Been thinking about the endings, specifically destroy and what is wrong with it. Still processing this, haven't yet figured out how it affects my overall opinion.

I have said before that the Catalyst's statement that all synthetic life, including the Geth and EDI, would die just seems like an artificial, contrived, tacked-on penalty. It truly feels as if the only reason it is there is to make the choice harder for the player.

There doesn't really seem to be a reasonable explanation in the game content of why the (sigh, I'm actually going to use these words) Space Magic cannot be selective in destruction. Theres no foreshadowing of it, no buildup. No foundation on which that drawback to Destroy was built on.

Its just there, sticking its tongue out at you for wanting to annihilate the armada of mass-murdering demonbots.

I posit that there should not be such an explanation, even if one could be added. Strange Aeons, I think, described the reason for this best. The premise of the game, up until the Catalyst, has been trying to defeat an enemy who seeks to subjugate and impose its will on our character, our friends, and our peoples.

Its was never about synthetics versus organics. Its was never about Order vs. Chaos. That trope is tossed at us a few times in side missions (Tali and Legion's story most notably), and then revealed to be the Big Idea by the Catalyst. Up till then it was about about defeating the reapers and achieving freedom and self-determination. It asks us to forget so much we have seen and done, forcing us to believe this new premise. That hurts me, but isn't the point.

The problem I see with the destroy ending is, it punishes only one playstyle. You can get off pretty much scot-free if you let the Geth die, and were mean to EDI. You may feel like a little bit of a jerk, but if you went Renegade, you've probably accepted you are a jerk and can sleep fine at night.

A mostly renegade Shepard can get plenty of satisfaction from the Destroy ending, and if they had the EMS, they get to live on top of it.

Paragons are the ones who get screwed. To paraphrase Javik, "Because you still believe you can end this war with your honor intact."

There is no satisfying ending for a Paragon which also allows them to live. You can do your headcanon with Synthesis and Control to make it so you get satisfaction, sure.... but you die, no matter your EMS.

This makes me feel outrage. I feel like my predisposition to paragon choices has been mostly rewarded throughout the trilogy, reinforcing my belief in that path. Then at the end, I get shafted for it arbitrarily. Either I die, or I become a hypocrite and a monster.

Destroy is broken for this reason, among many others.... but I could live with the endings if this was fixed.

No good deed goes unpunished. 

And I agree with you-you suffer a lot of adversity if you took the harder route and felt something for the geth and for EDI.  It's like the game is then saying you shouldn't do what appears to be and could be the good thing, because it won't matter.  Your reward for caring about "people" is you get to annihilate them.  Great idea.

But I think it's even worse because while a Renegade is about expediency and is rather ruthless, I don't think that makes a renegade Shepard stupid.  Overall, the renegade must care about something too or else why do all this?  Now, maybe a renegade would never see EDI as a person, but that Shepard would still be concerned with the destruction of the mass relays and such.  But still and all a renegade would have it far easier than a paragon.  Man, I had real trouble deciding to have my Shepard cheat on Liara with Kelly so Kelly would feed my fish.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 15 mai 2012 - 12:57 .

[daveyeisley]

Yeah, speculation (that specifically does not contradict what is shown in the game) can allow the player to get 'satisfaction' in any of the endings. Only a renegade can get satisfaction and still live.

I got a problem with that. It makes EMS less meaningful for Paragons, yet Paragons are the ones who work harder for higher EMS.

[3DandBeyond]

daveyeisley wrote...

Yeah, speculation (that specifically does not contradict what is shown in the game) can allow the player to get 'satisfaction' in any of the endings. Only a renegade can get satisfaction and still live.

I got a problem with that. It makes EMS less meaningful for Paragons, yet Paragons are the ones who work harder for higher EMS.

Exactly.  It's almost like for a game that has a lot of stuff you would figure you should do, it's counter-productive to try and do it all.  Even the ending gasp is basically meaningless.  It's another scratch your head moment where you end up just more convinced you want some questions answered now.

Why gather all that EMS and do all the reaper tag scanning missions?  Why play multiplayer, just to get a gasp?  Now, I know there are real issues if you don't get to a certain EMS, but you can do almost nothing past the point where you hit the minimums and get all the endings-just not the gasp.  And you can't take Liara on one mission or she could die (as I understand it).

Stupid me, I played the game to get a high Paragon (because of what had happened in ME2-lost Jack's loyalty and Garrus died because of that, so I went back and regained her loyalty and everyone lived) and I worked to get as much and as high an EMS as I could.  So what?  It might have been way more fun to play full on renegade.  And it really wouldn't have mattered much.

[ForumHelper]

http://cdn.memegener...0x/16263808.jpg

This, I believe, clearly describes what the 'starchild' intention was when creating the reapers.

The ending could've been so great, but instead we got this... this... bad piece of script. The game should've ended after Anderson's death.

Modifié par SarKter, 15 mai 2012 - 03:26 .