7052 réponses à ce sujet

[Grammarye]

The above post is how endings should work. Reflect choices, give genuinely dark & genuinely light options based on them. Even if not exactly how it might have went, this ending style is what would have worked for me.

Anyway, my positive/negative feedback summarised as succinctly as I could manage:

Liked:
Companion interactions (between each other).
Tense mission parameters & design keeping the pressure on.
Javik - the slightly sarcastic way he delivers every line, especially Thessia, and yet warms up through the game is extremely well done.
Mods on weapons & weapon variety.
The Citadel actually feeling like the Citadel again.
All major ME1 & ME2 NPCs making an appearance.
Scoring - Leaving Earth, View of Palaven, Creation, Fleets Arrive are all excellent pieces. The remainder, so-so, but still good.
Pretty much all of the Krogan & Quarian/Geth sequences of missions.
Few loading screens and no Mission Complete screens.
Much more fun enemies & AI variety.
Grunt coming out from the Rachni when loyal. Loved that sort of moment, where you felt he was going to die, and just at the last second doesn't.

Disliked:
Facial Import, facial redesign problems - Continuity is so incredibly important. Not only having my Shepard look exactly like the same Shepard as seen in ME1 & ME2, but the other NPCs of the game looking similar. Ashley & Kaidan were ok, Anderson just about the same look, but some like Kelly Chambers just look different.

Intro - no exposition, no hint as to what Shepard has been doing the last six months; there is an implicit assumption that people have read the comic - this diverges significantly from the rest of the game which goes out of its way to ram ME1 & ME2 events into players' minds even if they know them by heart.

Animations & Lipsync - Something very wrong in some dialogue e.g. the opening sequences prior to leaving Eart where Shepard & Anderson just look wrong, unnatural. Traynor bends her neck in ways that just aren't physically possible. This persists through a lot of the game in little irritating ways. Why change what worked extremely well in ME2 (ok, running was a bit off, but nothing like this bad)?

The journal just never seems to work properly. As a mission tracker it's terrible. It never updates when I obtain items, nor tells me where I might like to drop them off. All I end up doing is wandering the Citadel, looking for map hints and usable people that might take stuff.

Multiplayer - To clarify, I like the concept, it's just all wrong in terms of execution details. Revamp the UI and fix the bugs and it'll be great. My more detailed review over in the review thread explains more.

Fleet & ground battle participation in Priority: Earth - The entire focus of the game is on the giant ME3 version of the ME2 suicide mission, and yet throughout the vast majority of Priority: Earth, nothing changes, no other races are seen in combat; there is no sense of fulfilment of that task. That segment needed to be longer with some real 'retaking' of Earth. It didn't scale to the same sense of achievement as the ME2 suicide mission.

Too few companion (especially LI) interactions - I miss Ashley quoting poetry at me, Thane's deep explanations of Drell culture, Garrus' heart-to-hearts over the way to do things. Most ME2 squadmates had 6-7 conversations through the game, romances more so. Kaidan/Ashley had been gone an entire game and yet when back, they seem... distant. Heck, Miranda, Jacob, and Thane are all love interests that get minimal or zero interaction.

Lack of dialogue options - A significant amount of the time people just keep talking; contrast with ME1 where nearly every dialogue goes to a wheel with three or more options almost immediately. This causes significant sense of railroading and it ceases to feel like 'your Shepard'. Two options at best on a few occasions was a real kick in the teeth to the actual point of the game.

Virtually no Paragon/Renegade interactions. No idea why these vanished most of the time.

Side-missions that turned out to be thirty seconds of scanning. Lazy, lazy, lazy.

Running around the ship just to find people had no new dialogue, and it never being clear why or when new dialogue would turn up.

Just where did all that dark energy MacGuffin go from ME2?

Lack of heroic music except in certain places. As I said above, I liked the scoring, but music defines a lot of how people react & play in games, and there needed to be more rousing themes and heroic overtures, preferably to match an heroic story, finale, and ending credits (hint). The final sets of music were just depressing.

Different game modes - Really? Why try and make ME3 more like something it isn't? The entire value of the ME series had been that it blended shooter, sci-fi, and RPG together, and you want to take parts of that away? I just don't understand the value this brings given the effort it must have taken to split the game up.

Ending - well, I think people have made that one pretty clear. I would like closure, my intelligence not insulted, and preferably a way to have, if not a happy ending, then at least one where life struggles on, following Shepard's example for the last three games. Please for the love of all that is holy clarify whether he/she is alive. Blue children optional extra for bonus points. Above all else, I want to end ME3 feeling like I did at ME1, where I wanted to go make another character immediately, instead of viewing that as a pointless exercise in futility. Diversity in endings, as promised.

Modifié par Grammarye, 22 avril 2012 - 08:41 .

[mademan2]

Alright, first of all, ME 3 was briliance, obviously until the ending so kudos to the writing team, Me 1, Me 2, Me 3 were incredibly awesome and it left me in such a mood like no game before, every single hour i have spent playing these games was pure entertainment. That said, Bioware/Ea, what the heck?! (you all know what i mean)
Now to the busines.
First of all, i dont want just cutscene with random colors, random people at random places doing random things. No cutscene after the space battle and Crucible joining the citadel was good o.O (not saying badly done, just not ME at all) This was supposed to be ending to the greatest series ever, u said no more games with Shepard...WE DONT NEED NOR WANT OPEN ENDING! We want full closure, we want to see what really happens after he was hit by harbinger (still belive that the citadel was not true, obviously except for the scene with Anderson ,which was awesome and nicely personal).
I miss a final boss fight, ending to ME series disires and needs one. Get us like a big keeper that is controled by harbinger at the heart of the citadel, where from he controls it. I dont want to know why the hell are repaers doing what they are doing, they are crazy machines, i dont want to belive there is a higher purpose of helping other generations or cycles to survive or stay alive, they are bad guys, the indomitable, never understood bad guys. And above all in this secton, i sure as hell dont want a child god entity becoming a leader of reapers, man what a punch in a throat that was o.O
U made nice amount of cutscenes but none actually showing us the resources we gathered, only difference is that there is either Destiny Ascension shown, or there isnt. We want Geth being there, Quarians and we want to see squads on the ground, we want to see our companions fighting at the edge of our sight, we want to belive it is the final battle of this cycle, live or die. We saw one or two Makos on our way to the beacon and that was it.. what the hell o.O
Make our choices matter, i know there are 16 different endings, but hey, they are the same o.O Make more use of the war assets, there is very small difference, make it like that crucible is gonna use that power, and dependant on how stron that is and how strong our army is, we will defeat reapers o fail. Make a difference between paragon and renegade Shepard, it was the thing that made us play this game more than once or twice or three times, we wanted to see everything, now we want to know if it was actually good for something.  
Fix the plot holes, i cant really say them all here, but u know the drill, Normandy on the run, god child saying stuff that doesnt make sense, Reapers being turned into a joke (tho thats not a plot hole, it still bothers me greatly), and for example if the god child was in the ciradel, if he is leading reapers, why the hell he did not simply open the realy for reapers at the end of ME 1, i doubt that if he is the citadel he had trouble overcoming Prothean conduit, and if he was that lame... man that would be really something o.O
Give us please a real ending, we had some random scenes we didnt understand and with every new scene begining we hoped a little and with its ending we died inside a little more yet again. What u did at the end of Dragon Age was awesome, it wasnt an epic cuscene but it gave us all the informations, all the little details which we wanted to know, it showed us what happened with our choices, it was good enough for me at least
I have heard that you are like trying to keep the integrity of your writers and sticking to their ideas and whatnot, i dont mean to be insulting they are obviously talented and good otherwise they wouldnt have been on team doing ME 3 but, what the hell have they been smokin while making the end, in which was is that an ending, it doesnt explain anything, its just causes shock, panic, fear, sadness, hatred and absolutely unbearable feeling of being cheated (90% of all the choices are ending in the same frikin way, how is that possible?!!) 
Plus once again, it was said that you will not be changing the ending in the new extended cut dlc, u will only explain it and fill the plot holes,no final boss, no new gameplay, maybe some choices but thats it... man what a buzzkill that was. The ending was HORRIBLE, if we step into a pile of s**** it doesnt really help us to know what kind of s**** it was, it will still be, u know what.
Go with the indoctrination theory, if that isnt what u had intended from the start (im still trying to give you credit for the briliance i belive you have ) just take it, use it and give us what we want, there is so many sings all over the place that it cant be coincidence, and if it is, u will need an extended cut dozens of hours long to make a sense of it, and even than, u would probably lose us. (Check out videos on youtube on the indoctrination theory, there is no way all of that is just a misshap, missread or something we made up in hopes of the ending being better than it is) 

Fans have created hours and hours of constructive videos on youtube, thousands of lines that are more or less saying the same things, u have to know what to do by now o.O I still belive Bioware, please, dont fail us. 

Edit: plus i agree with almost everything that is said above and bellow me, thats how united we are in this
Edit 2: Wow this is cool   http://arkis.deviant...ILERS-289902125
Edit 3:

Modifié par mademan2, 22 avril 2012 - 11:33 .

[FlyingSquirrel]

Regardless of all the debate over the ending, one thing I found a bit disappointing about ME3 is that you have to play almost all the major missions in the same order each time, to an extent that you didn't have to do in the first two games, and in turn this limits the opportunities to bring different squad members on missions.

Mass Effect 1
Eden Prime -> Citadel -> 2 of 3 main missions + sidequests -> Virmire unlocked -> 2 more main missions + sidequests -> Ilos -> Back to Citadel

You can get your entire squad lined up pretty early in the game if you go to Therum and get Liara as one of your first two missions, so there's plenty of variability in who can accompany you.

Mass Effect 2
Obviously one big difference is that you *can't* get your whole squad right away, but again, the game allows you considerable variation in your order of recruitment and thus in choice of squadmates for missions as well. If you choose to do all the available recruitment missions before you start doing loyalty quests, you could have up to 15 missions with a full or almost-full (i.e. minus Legion) squad to choose from: 12 loyalty missions + Collector Ship + Derelict Reaper + Suicide Mission, and even more if you throw in DLC content.

Lazarus Project -> Freedom's Progress -> 4-6 Recruitment, DLC, possibly loyalty (Kasumi, Zaeed) -> Horizon -> 5 recruitment, DLC, loyalty -> Collector Ship -> various recruitment, DLC, loyalty -> Derelict Reaper -> various recruitment, DLC, loyalty -> Suicide Mission

Mass Effect 3

Unless I'm missing something, there is really no possible progression of the main missions other than the following:

Earth -> Mars -> Citadel -> Palaven -> Sur'Kesh/Tuchanka -> Citadel - Cerberus Coup -> Perseus Veil/Rannoch  -> Thessia -> Horizon -> Illusive Man's Base -> Earth/Back to Citadel

The only "priority" that doesn't have to go in this order is getting Javik from Eden Prime if you have "From Ashes," and most of the N7 missions are just short "drop in and shoot a bunch of bad guys" missions without much dialogue (thus making your choice of squadmate fairly inconsequential). And from what I understand, at least a couple of the longer side missions (Grissom Academy and the Tuchanka bomb) are timed and will disappear if you don't get to them quickly enough. I haven't had this happen to me, but if true, then I gather that taking the Virmire survivor or Tali on either mission may not be possible.

I don't know if Bioware ever considered doing this in a less linear fashion, but at the very least, I would like to have (a) the choice whether to do Sur'Kesh/Tuchanka or Perseus Veil/Rannoch first and/or ( the option to take the Virmire survivor on some missions before the Cerberus coup attempt once (s)he has recovered. They could even still preserve the coup scenario as it is by adding a sequence in which the VS is recalled to the Citadel and some other Alliance ship picks them up shortly before the coup unfolds. And if the thinking is that neither Sur'Kesh/Tuchanka nor Perseus Veil/Rannoch is a situation that can realistically be "left to sit," they could randomize which one comes first so that it isn't the same on each playthrough.

If BW did in fact record dialogue for Tali and the VS on earlier missions, I'd like to see a DLC allowing for this flexibility in order of missions, if only to allow us a little more variation in squad choice.

[Flammenpanzer]

A suggestion?

Instead of a text-box that says 'Reapers have destroyed the Crucible'...having something like this:

www.youtube.com/watch

Seriously, your 'Reaper Victory' ending was a textbox. Not cool.

Modifié par Flammenpanzer, 22 avril 2012 - 10:05 .

[Spectre Impersonator]

Agreed, the ENTIRE MISSION desperately needs work or the ending won't be fully salvaged. There is no drama because the squadmates (former and current) become non-entities. What's Wrex doing? What's Jack doing? What's Miranda doing? What about Tali, EDI, and Vega? I didn't include them in my squad so are they just sitting back admiring the view? What about the squaddies in my trio? Why don't they say anything or get any badass moments in cutscenes? This is the FINAL BATTLE. Everything we've been fighting for comes down to this.

Moreover, the war assets don't play any visible role. Where are those rachni and krogan soldiers I worked so hard to acquire? Why don't we see a PAYOFF for what we've collected and consequences for what we might've missed.

EX: Perhaps if we told the biotic students to go on the front lines, Jack dies protecting them.

Lastly, there are no choices to make during the mission. Bioware has so much freedom at this point. Anyone is killable, anything can happen, we're at the END here! There should have been a culmination of a bunch of difficult choices here, with possible consequences of squad deaths or mission failure. Instead it all builds up to the worst single choice of the entire series and we don't get any idea of what the consequences are.

Huge missed opportunity and I'd rather PAY REAL MONEY to Bioware to make it right than get a free Extended Cut that does the bare minimum. {smilie}

[animadpig]

Please re-make the floor of Normandy. No any military ship will allow the cables crawling around the floor.

[ParagonGreg]

How about showing my LI in the final vision flashbacks? I romance Tali, but I see Joker, Liara, and Anderson as I die. Really?

[hellgate49698]

A good ending for Mass Effect 3 Please!



Tali ending



Ashley ending
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8g4Me5H71Jc&feature=g-upl&context=G2741e30AUAAAAAAABAA

For a small moment, Bioware and EA have managed to deflect the problem for some of your customers with the Mass Effect 3 ending; with the promise of summer clarification. It will not last. The second you release that clarification and it still doesn't hold up to a fan made ending, like this one post above, that will be it for EA and Bioware. No one is going to trust your company with writing a decent video game story or plotline ever again.

All this person had to do, to make the ending tolerable, was take the existing footage from the game, cut out the worthless god child, and created two much better ending with minor effort. Do yourself a favor and your game community one too, change the ending.

Explaining a bad ending won't get you out of this mess; it will just make things worse. Please rise above this foolish pride and correct the problem with the Mass Effect 3 game's ending. When your house is on fire, you don't just stand there and look at it. You go call 911 and start looking for source of water or dirt to help put out the flames.

You have the power to make a difference; the choice is up to you.

[EmEr77]

I'm also going to go ahead and throw in a literary analysis of the ending for the writers to look at--should it actually get that far, should it be deemed that important.

• I would have liked to see the story of the Star Child fleshed out (for lack of a better term) considering it seemed to be a rather major player in all of this chaos, but was only given a few minutes of real spot-light time. To introduce such a dense character, who espouses very layered, and complex thoughts (all of which are unfortunately founded on at least three logical fallacies: circular reasoning, subjectivist reasoning, and sweeping generalization) and give it no exposition has nothing to do with the hermeneutic code but rather, everything to do with lazy writing.
• The three decisions would have been interesting, had they not all led to nearly the same conclusion. Regardless of what minor tweaks happened, energy was released from the Citadel, which was then ruined, the Reapers are "defeated," the Mass Relays send out the energy and blow-up (or are deactivated... through explosions?) and the Normandy crash lands on a planet that is atmospherically supportive of the life forms on the Normandy... conveniently. Any literary academic would face-palm at this moment, because this maneuver is a very cheap way for a writer to wrap something up. It's yet another expressed form of true laziness, and the lack of control with which the writer has over their story line.
• Shepard dies--or doesn't?. The clear indecision over Shepard's fate lies again, with underdeveloped writing. What BioWare should have done (yes, I'm going to say it) is allow room for endings in which Shepard dies, and everything is screwed, Shepard dies, and everything is saved; Shepard lives, but things go wrong, and Shepard ends up watching a gruesome battle that either leads to victory or death depending on I suppose... resources. Shepard lives, and everything is saved. All of these choices, reflective of decisions made from one, two, and throughout three. From those four options, it is then much easier to branch out and form those "16 different endings" that BioWare stated there would be--and I mean real endings. Unfortunately, this is no longer a viable option--but it does not discount the fact it needs to be said either way, perhaps for a future story endeavor for another anticipated BioWare title...
• This was an idea that in recent days I was kicking around in my head--why can't Shepard choose to not utilize the Citadel? After the Star Child talks at us, it is very clear now, even to a bloodied Shepard (who, if he/she can be woken up by a simple command after fainting, is far more coherent than individuals are claiming), that each decision pretty much sucks. Taking what we know about the lore throughout the games--as well as what the Prothean Javik tells us, there has never been such a cohesive, full-scale attack on the Reapers before. This cycle has been able to do what no other cycle has done before, and it is even admitted by the Star Child itself. That being said, because of the Illusive Man, Sanctuary, and the Geth, we have critical pieces of Reaper code that can be used in some form as a weapon against the Reapers themselves. We've discerned that the Reaper weak point is where the lazer mechanism is located. There are millions of individuals staging an all out offensive in Sol Space (with millions more staging offensives elsewhere), on just a portion of the Reaper armada. When we do the simple math, if we are to believe that the Reapers have been around for at least 37 million years, indicated in Mass Effect 2 by the derelict Reaper we find, and they do a purge every 50,000 years, creating ONE new Reaper each cycle, there are only 740 Reapers--which then leads me to believe their forces are spread rather thinly. Taking all of this into account--why would a full-scale battle, using conventional means, once we HAVE the conventional means, not be an option? Why couldn't the armada wipe out the Reapers from Earth, then systematically go through the Mass Relays, taking out the rest of the Reapers in similar fashion? I believe it is here that if we had further exposition regarding the Star Child, we'd understand why this may, or may not be a viable option--but we don't, so as it stands... it's entirely viable--and it's entirely believable. Nor is it corny. In fact, making THAT decision, is far more reflective of real-world, real-life situations than the three embarrassingly crafted decisions leading to the "heroic" death we get.
• Star Child's Logic: As I've talked about before, the Star Child's logic is founded on not one, but three logical fallacies. Logical fallacies are defined mainly from uses in speech writing, but can be found in other forms of literature as well. Logical fallacies, are a big no. The Star Child makes a "sweeping generalization" about synthetics, by saying that synthetics will always rebel against their organic masters. Whether or not you united the geth and the quarians, you see this isn't true of the geth, based on the memory you witness inside of Legion, or some other geth if Legion didn't make it through ME2. The very explanation the Star Child provides for why exactly it does what it does, is called "circular reasoning." Basically in circular reasoning, the conclusion of an argument is supported by the argument itself--instead of outside facts. So you go from the argument, to the conclusion, and from the conclusion back to the argument--like a circle. Circular reasoning excludes the notion of any other possible outcomes, which, again, as evidenced with the geth, there are other possible outcomes. Even if you did not unite the geth and quarians, the option is still there to do so--debunking the Star Child's explanation entirely. Lastly, the Star Child uses the "subjectivist fallacy." This means the Star Child outright denies the unification of the geth and quarians, if you did so (or the possibility even if you didn't), simply because it doesn't fit with its own logical point of view. I could go on about that one for hours, but I won't. Temporality conflict: Regarding the sudden appearance of your crew, including your squad mates who were with you on the streets, suddenly being inside of the Normandy. The Normany running away. In order for the Normandy to be where it was--mid relay jump--Joker would have had to manage to scrape up your crew, who are all scattered on the surface by the way, without a shuttle, and then high-tailed it out of there in order to make it to a mass relay before the decision was made. The repercussions of the decision actually happened very quickly after.
• Character inconsistencies: Above mentioned, Normandy crew fleeing. They essentially abandon you, and the fight. Then there's Shepard. Shepard who just accepts what's being given, when in every other major instance Shepard's been like "naw bull****. I call shenanigans, this is how I want it to go down." I know Shepard is broken everywhere, bleeding profusely, and is probably only half-conscious, but Shepard also died once--so compared to that state, he/she is pretty much exponentially better. While Shepard's initial reaction to the Star Child is probably the same reaction ANY person in such a severely crippled state would have, Shepard has been conscious for a while, Shepard also had a pretty coherent argument with the Illusive Man just moments before, and if you have enough Paragon/Renegade points you can actually persuade him into stuff, so why can't Shepard have such coherency with the Star Child? I know Shepard "faints" but if Shepard was fully unconscious, the Star Child would not have been able to have Shepard open his/her eyes and get on their feet. That's not how that physically works with someone who is knocked out. Trust me. I've been in that state before, people have to slap you to wake you up--multiple times. 

I mentioned earlier, the "hermeneutic code," BioWare actually employs the proairetic code as well, but in a far different manner than that of an actual text-based story. 

Hermeneutic Code: Involves the entirety of the narrative; it creates suspense in a story (or drive to read further) by unanswered questions. 

Proairetic Code: Involves portions of the narrative/sequences; and creates suspense through a viewer's want for resolution of specific actions.

BioWare has failed to follow through with these codes at the ending of Mass Effect 3. Now, the way the proairetic code can be applied to the game, is that it's crucial writers to remember that the gamers are the directors of the proairetic action. You've spent two games, and  97% of a third, establishing this structure of story-telling. We come up to a decision, we wonder what possible resolution there could be, and then we resolve it ourselves (which lends further credence to the fact that this game is a very collaborative process between the gamers and BioWare). You, BioWare, provide the over-arcing theme to which we are finding the answers to our questions through. 

The application of the proairetic code essentially negates the argument of artistic integrity that BioWare should solely stand by their choice based on some sort of misguided and extremely convoluted principle to cover their mistake. True artistic integrity does not lie in stubbornness, but the willingness to actively incorporate constructive criticism into your own work in a healthy balance with your own beliefs. Do not mock us, we know what you were intending when you spouted off that "artistic integrity" ]BioWare, you created a game in which situational based resolutions are dependent on the players, NOT you. You've created the avenues yes, but we ultimately pick which to travel down.  You have actively taken that control away fro m yourselves and given it to the community.The ending gives us three decisions that essentially lead to the same resolution, which is a disruption and inconsistency with the usual system BioWare has used to deliver the story. In short: interactive gameplay suddenly no longer interactive gameplay.  

Roland Barthes, a French literary theorist, who established these codes, came up with a process by which truth is revealed when utilizing the hermeneutic code, and that is that we are presented with an enigma (who are the Reapers? Are they real? What is their intended purpose? Can we defeat them?) and as the story progresses we are lead on a rollercoaster of revelation. We are sometimes intentionally misled, given only partial pieces of the final puzzle, even made to believe that everything is hopeless--all in an effort to make the final reveal something truly spectacular and cathartic (satisfying). However, there are times in which we never receive all of the answers, and one, or some of the big questions remain unanswered--but it takes an incredible level of detail, inventiveness, and attention in order to do this without it hindering the story's over-arcing concept. If it is done without care, then the unanswered questions at the end seem nothing more than lazy writing, which discredits all of the hard work that came before.

Therin lies the problem BioWare is currently facing. Either the intent of the ending was to seem complete, but did not adhere to the principles of the hermeneutic code, therefore the concept fell far short of its intended purpose, or, it was intended to have questions remain open, in which not enough attention actually went into crafting such a mysterious ending (not adhering to the proper sequence of the hermeneutic code), and the questions left unanswered are more a cause of dissatisfied distraction, instead of intelligent, thought-provoking discourse.

Gameplay. Considering that this game so strongly employs the proairetic code of story-telling, it is almost required there needs to be some sort of gameplay/decision-making on the part of the player in order to create full closure to the ending. The reason the resolution as it stands is incomplete is due to not only a number of consistency errors, but also a lack of adherence to the proairetic code in which the PLAYER is in control. The dialogue scene with the Star Child, and then the following choices can be seen as two separate situations with which the player can make decisions. When speaking with the Star Child, the player should be given the opportunity to disregard what the Star Child is saying. The player should be able to choose "D: None of the above" and receive new gameplay based on that. Why? For the reason I stated before. It is not only plausible, but far more LOGICAL than the GIVEN SITUATION for Shepard to choose a 'D' answer. For BioWare to disregard such a gigantic gain in the plot is folly. Yes, I'm going out on a limb here and asserting such a forward opinion, but it just needs to be said. Had the other consequences to the given choices been fully developed--especially the resulting cutscenes, then the need for a 'D' answer would STILL be necessary, but not the only good one. You wanted this game to reflect that not everything in real life is sunshine and rainbows? Then don't make a GAME. Or, rather, go ahead and fairly include all the aspects of life. Both good, and bad.  

So while I can sit here and say "I'd like this, I'd like to see that," all day long, essentially, NONE of what I'd like to see would even make sense if these major issues are not addressed in the DLC. 

Modifié par EmEr77, 23 avril 2012 - 05:21 .

[MRadway]

Zuka999 wrote...

thor_viking wrote...

For what it's worth this is a proposed endgame put together based on numerous great ideas from the forums. I believe this is much more satisfying, removes plot holes and makes your decisions matter a whole lot more without completely changing the last mission. Like I said this is based off ideas from other posters so I claim no credit.

To start we obviously need to see more of our war assets in action. During the fight through no-mans land there should be cutscenes depicting Asari commando's setting up biotic shields, krogan fighting rachni, geths working alongside quarians etc.

Once we reach the beam and Harbinger arrives this is where the new ending would come into play.

1)  Shepard's team charges towards the beam but they are blasted by Harbinger.
2)  Anderson picks up a shellshocked Shepard and they continue towards the beam.
3)  The two squad mates are already there and hold off Reaper forces whilst Shepard and Anderson enter the Citadel.
4)  Inside they find Illusive Man who is attempting to control the Reapers.
5)  TIM uses his new powers to make Shepard wound Anderson.
 
 a) If collector base saved:         TIM is too strong and Shepard is made to finish off Anderson.
                                                   Shepard forced to watch as TIM attempts to control the Reapers.
                                                   It fails and he dies, breaking the hold over Shepard.
  If collector base destroyed:   Shepard resists TIM and spares Anderson.
                                                   A wounded Anderson shoots TIM in the side, breaking the hold over Shepard.
                                                   Shepard can shoot TIM or talk him into suicide.
                                                   Shepard and Anderson share their final conversation.

6)  Shepard opens the Citadel and Hackett docks the crucible.
7)  Harbinger takes over TIM's corpse and tries to convince Shepard that resistance is futile.
8)  Shepard must fight off an indoctrination attempt in his dream (by shooting the kid? mwahaha)
9)  Shepard resists and at this point can learn the reason why the Reapers are attacking.
     (Or not if the mystery works better.)
 
 a) Harbinger explains that as organic life grows so do the levels of dark energy. These energy levels are causing the
     galaxy to die as evidenced by the sun on Haestrum. The Reapers cull organic life to keep the energy levels safe
     and preserve the harvested genetic material within themselves. By resisting the Reapers Shepard is actually
     dooming the entire galaxy.
  New game plus mode would reveal the real reason. The Reapers are the ones causing the rise in dark energy.
     They have been trying to solve the problem by harvesting organics and using the genetic material to adapt their
     own evolution. The only way to stop dark energy levels rising is to destroy the Reapers.  

10) The Normandy has landed at the base of the Citadel beam and is dropping off the rest of the squad as
       reinforcements.
11) Harbinger offers to spare Shepard's squad and Earth until the next cycle if they give up now.  

  a) Shepard agrees so the Reapers leave Earth and harvest the rest of the galaxy before heading back to dark 
      space. The End.
 
  Shepard refuses so Harbinger attacks the Normandy. Squad mates could die based on previous choices.

12) Shepard prepares the Crucible to fire which will destroy all Reaper technology.
13) Harbinger leaves Earth and heads towards the Citadel. The allied fleet attempts to hold him off.

  a) 25% EMS:   Fleet fails to slow down Harbinger who reaches the Crucible and destroys it. The entire galaxy falls to
                          the Reapers. The End.
  50% EMS:   Fleet struggles to hold off Harbinger. Hackett is forced to activate the Crucible early in an unsafe
                          state. The blast kills the Reapers but also Hackett, Shepard and badly damages Earth. The End.
  c) 75% EMS:   Fleet holds off Harbinger long enough for the Crucible to charge completely. Someone must stay
                          behind to ensure it goes off safely. Hackett or Shepard can decide to sacrifice themselves. Crucible
                          detonates correctly and kills the Reapers. The End.
  d) 100% EMS: Fleet holds Harbinger at bay. Crucible charges completely and countdown begins allowing Shepard
                          and Hackett to evacuate. Crucible detonates safely and kills the Reapers. The End.

14) Epilogue scenes which reflect the choices you made.

There could be an explanation that once the Geth/Quarian alliance is formed the Geth introduced a safeguard into the Crucible design that means they aren't affected by the blast. The Protheans could also have altered the Crucible based on the research at Ilos to only use the Mass Relays as a delivery system and not have them destroyed in the process.

No star-child, no faulty logic, decisions taken into account, varied endings, Harbinger and EMS playing a bigger role.    
      

Please, for the love of god, this! BioWare, I  hope you still read this thread..

Yes! This is so cool and allows for different playthroughs, I love it. Leaps and bounds better than what we got.

[MRadway]

EmEr77 wrote...

   

• This was an idea that in recent days I was kicking around in my head--why can't Shepard choose to not utilize the Citadel? After the Star Child talks at us, it is very clear now, even to a bloodied Shepard (who, if he/she can be woken up by a simple command after fainting, is far more coherent than individuals are claiming), that each decision pretty much sucks. Taking what we know about the lore throughout the games--as well as what the Prothean Javik tells us, there has never been such a cohesive, full-scale attack on the Reapers before. This cycle has been able to do what no other cycle has done before, and it is even admitted by the Star Child itself. That being said, because of the Illusive Man, Sanctuary, and the Geth, we have critical pieces of Reaper code that can be used in some form as a weapon against the Reapers themselves. We've discerned that the Reaper weak point is where the lazer mechanism is located. There are millions of individuals staging an all out offensive in Sol Space (with millions more staging offensives elsewhere), on just a portion of the Reaper armada. When we do the simple math, if we are to believe that the Reapers have been around for at least 37 million years, indicated in Mass Effect 2 by the derelict Reaper we find, and they do a purge every 50,000 years, creating ONE new Reaper each cycle, there are only 740 Reapers--which then leads me to believe their forces are spread rather thinly. Taking all of this into account--why would a full-scale battle, using conventional means, once we HAVE the conventional means, not be an option? Why couldn't the armada wipe out the Reapers from Earth, then systematically go through the Mass Relays, taking out the rest of the Reapers in similar fashion? I believe it is here that if we had further exposition regarding the Star Child, we'd understand why this may, or may not be a viable option--but we don't, so as it stands... it's entirely viable--and it's entirely believable. Nor is it corny. In fact, making THAT decision, is far more reflective of real-world, real-life situations than the three embarrassingly crafted decisions leading to the "heroic" death we get.   

To paraphrase from Babylon 5; "What if the correct choice is to not choose at all?"

[Xellith]

Not like I'll ever play ME3 ever again - but is there any chance of getting Michael Beattie back to reprise his role as Mordin and letting us download his dialogue via DLC? William Salyers just doesnt work. There - I said it.

[VibrantYacht]

The ending should be determined by our choices, it should not be a choice itself.
My opinion of course, but I like it.

[EmEr77]

MRadway wrote...
To paraphrase from Babylon 5; "What if the correct choice is not to choose at all?"

Rock on.

Modifié par EmEr77, 23 avril 2012 - 04:32 .

[Splodey Dope]

This is a long video but it's excellent!

[OldSwede]

SilverSabre wrote...

I'm still unclear as to why Bioware is asking for feedback?

If this has already been mentioned somewhere can anyone please point me in the direction of the post??

Much appreciated

So am I

Many thanks in advance

Modifié par OldSwede, 23 avril 2012 - 05:45 .

[-IT-]

MRadway wrote...

Zuka999 wrote...

thor_viking wrote...

For what it's worth this is a proposed endgame put together based on numerous great ideas from the forums. I believe this is much more satisfying, removes plot holes and makes your decisions matter a whole lot more without completely changing the last mission. Like I said this is based off ideas from other posters so I claim no credit.

To start we obviously need to see more of our war assets in action. During the fight through no-mans land there should be cutscenes depicting Asari commando's setting up biotic shields, krogan fighting rachni, geths working alongside quarians etc.

Once we reach the beam and Harbinger arrives this is where the new ending would come into play.

1)  Shepard's team charges towards the beam but they are blasted by Harbinger.
2)  Anderson picks up a shellshocked Shepard and they continue towards the beam.
3)  The two squad mates are already there and hold off Reaper forces whilst Shepard and Anderson enter the Citadel.
4)  Inside they find Illusive Man who is attempting to control the Reapers.
5)  TIM uses his new powers to make Shepard wound Anderson.
 
 a) If collector base saved:         TIM is too strong and Shepard is made to finish off Anderson.
                                                   Shepard forced to watch as TIM attempts to control the Reapers.
                                                   It fails and he dies, breaking the hold over Shepard.
  If collector base destroyed:   Shepard resists TIM and spares Anderson.
                                                   A wounded Anderson shoots TIM in the side, breaking the hold over Shepard.
                                                   Shepard can shoot TIM or talk him into suicide.
                                                   Shepard and Anderson share their final conversation.

6)  Shepard opens the Citadel and Hackett docks the crucible.
7)  Harbinger takes over TIM's corpse and tries to convince Shepard that resistance is futile.
8)  Shepard must fight off an indoctrination attempt in his dream (by shooting the kid? mwahaha)
9)  Shepard resists and at this point can learn the reason why the Reapers are attacking.
     (Or not if the mystery works better.)
 
 a) Harbinger explains that as organic life grows so do the levels of dark energy. These energy levels are causing the
     galaxy to die as evidenced by the sun on Haestrum. The Reapers cull organic life to keep the energy levels safe
     and preserve the harvested genetic material within themselves. By resisting the Reapers Shepard is actually
     dooming the entire galaxy.
  New game plus mode would reveal the real reason. The Reapers are the ones causing the rise in dark energy.
     They have been trying to solve the problem by harvesting organics and using the genetic material to adapt their
     own evolution. The only way to stop dark energy levels rising is to destroy the Reapers.  

10) The Normandy has landed at the base of the Citadel beam and is dropping off the rest of the squad as
       reinforcements.
11) Harbinger offers to spare Shepard's squad and Earth until the next cycle if they give up now.  

  a) Shepard agrees so the Reapers leave Earth and harvest the rest of the galaxy before heading back to dark 
      space. The End.
 
  Shepard refuses so Harbinger attacks the Normandy. Squad mates could die based on previous choices.

12) Shepard prepares the Crucible to fire which will destroy all Reaper technology.
13) Harbinger leaves Earth and heads towards the Citadel. The allied fleet attempts to hold him off.

  a) 25% EMS:   Fleet fails to slow down Harbinger who reaches the Crucible and destroys it. The entire galaxy falls to
                          the Reapers. The End.
  50% EMS:   Fleet struggles to hold off Harbinger. Hackett is forced to activate the Crucible early in an unsafe
                          state. The blast kills the Reapers but also Hackett, Shepard and badly damages Earth. The End.
  c) 75% EMS:   Fleet holds off Harbinger long enough for the Crucible to charge completely. Someone must stay
                          behind to ensure it goes off safely. Hackett or Shepard can decide to sacrifice themselves. Crucible
                          detonates correctly and kills the Reapers. The End.
  d) 100% EMS: Fleet holds Harbinger at bay. Crucible charges completely and countdown begins allowing Shepard
                          and Hackett to evacuate. Crucible detonates safely and kills the Reapers. The End.

14) Epilogue scenes which reflect the choices you made.

There could be an explanation that once the Geth/Quarian alliance is formed the Geth introduced a safeguard into the Crucible design that means they aren't affected by the blast. The Protheans could also have altered the Crucible based on the research at Ilos to only use the Mass Relays as a delivery system and not have them destroyed in the process.

No star-child, no faulty logic, decisions taken into account, varied endings, Harbinger and EMS playing a bigger role.    
      

Please, for the love of god, this! BioWare, I  hope you still read this thread..

Yes! This is so cool and allows for different playthroughs, I love it. Leaps and bounds better than what we got.

[Agamoto]

I'm posting this here as well as in the "... Yes, we are listening."  thread in the hope that someone is in fact still listening ... you never know ...  I haven't posted here before and haven't read extensively in the forums ,so most of this has probably already been said before, but I wanted to chip in my 2 cents anyway  ...

What needs to be changed about Mass Effect 3?  ... well, ... the ending of course. If you really were listening you might have picked up on that, Sadly you seem resolved to stand by "the team's artistic vision for the end of this arc of the Mass Effect franchise." That's a real shame because, as so many people have already pointed out, the ending really is appallingly bad. It's doubly a shame because the rest of the game, up to Shepard's final scene with Anderson, is damn good. The last 10 minutes ruin what would otherwise be a fantastic game.
Basically the whole ending (or at least, everything following Anderson's death-scene) needs a complete re-write, it's irreparably broken and a few extra cut scenes won't fix it, There are plenty of good ideas floating around if you wanted to pick up on them - but of course that's out of the question because you've got your 'artistic vision' to think about. So in a spirit of what I hope is 'constructive' criticism I'd like to offer some thoughts on how to make improvements to the existing ending. I'll try to prioritise these, starting with the most important and working down from there:

1) Get rid of the Crucible Kid, Starchild or whatever you want to call him  ... edit him out, delete him, make him GONE. This in an unavoidable and non-negotiable prerequisite to a functional ending. No ending which includes him or his crazy "We're destroying you for your own good, y'know" pseudo-philosophising will ever work. Apart from that he's 100% superfluous. You don't need to provide a rationale for the reapers. The reapers don't need a rationale. Why do they do what they do? Because they're inscrutable badass alien insectoid killing machines and THEY CAN. End of. THEY DON'T NEED A REASON. And even if they did we don't need to discuss it with a shiny translucent ten year-old ... No, no , no, no, no, no, no, no, NO! Apart from that, as I'm sure you've read a thousand times on the Internet already, introducing new characters and concepts in the last five minutes of a 100-hour story arc is, well ..., awesomely incompetent. So number one priority, get rid of the kid. EDIT HIM OUT. Information brokering and choice selection can be made via the Citadel console, reusing the Prothean VI animation - the Crucible is a Prothean design, after all. Lose the kid and you automatically improve the ending by at least an order of magnitude.

2)Lose the synthesis ending. What? Everybody's complaining about there not being enough choice and you want us to lose one of the endings we already have?
Yup.
First up, as things stand, it's not really an ending, it's a colour choice. Secondly, although I'm guessing it's the preferred choice of the development team (it takes the most EMS points to access, it gets pride of place at the centre of the end sequence and it sorta picks up on those conversations you had with EDI and Legion, and, of course, you get to finish with that, *cough*, great 'New Beginning' scene with EDI and Joker watching the sun set on some idyllic garden world) it really is the worst of the three options available. Because  it springs yet another completely novel idea on us in the closing moments of the game.  NOBODY, prior to The Kid, has EVER talked about synthesizing organics and synthetics. Sure we've had those conversations  I mentioned about synthetics evolving and becoming sentient/emotional, but that's hardly the same thing as "Let's fuse organics and synthetics into some weird new hybrid form of life never before seen in the history of the universe. As mentioned above introducing new concepts in the last five minutes of a 100-hour story arc is ... sloppy. Aside from that - you want me to re-write the DNA of every sentient being in the galaxy without their knowledge or consent?  Change who and what they are on the basis of a snap decision on an idea that I've thought about for all of ... a minute? Duh! OK. Nah, doesn't work.
Finally, it's lame and derivative. Is that your "artistic vision for the end of this arc of the Mass Effect franchise"?... "I know, let's make it end like Battlestar Galactica!" Great work there guys. Really outdid yourselves on 'artistic vision'. So, ... another  suggested change, the 'synthesis ending' joins the Starchild on the cutting room floor.

3) Having done away with that great Battlestar Galactica ending, there's really no need to keep the 'Joker flees destruction and crashes the Normandy on an idyllic garden planet' sequence, I mean, it's only really there to line up that 'New Beginning' sunset scene and is incomprehensible when combined with the control or destruction endings. Apart from that, as I'm sure you're tired of hearing, it opens up huge plot holes: How do the crew get back aboard the Normandy? Why is Joker, an Alliance officer, fleeing an ongoing military operation? ... and on, and on and on. Simple answer is - don't open those plot holes. *snip* One more for the cutting room floor. "But, ... but ...  the development team wanted 'a bittersweet ending', if you cut the crew surviving where's the sweetness?." My tip:  You don't get bittersweet by taking ashes and slapping a big glob of sugar on top - the ashes still taste like ashes and the sugar makes you feel sick
I have no pretentions about being a writer, but I could imagine something like :  Activating the Crucible in 'destroy mode'  devastates the planet it is orbiting, in this case Earth  but does  not destroy the relays. To destroy the reapers Shepard must sacrifice himself, his squadmates and his homeworld , (Why did the Reapers move the Citadel to Earth? because they thought Shepard wouldn't be prepared to make the sacrifice). Earth is destroyed (that footage already exists). A final  cinematic  could show Hackett conducting the funeral service for Shepard and his teammates on Eden Prime. During the funeral oration, which is being broadcast live on galactic radio, we  blend to similar scenes at memorial services on battle-scarred Thessia, on Palaven and on Tuchanka; add in a few glimpses of the surviving characters: Jack, Jacob, Wrex; back to Hackett for some final uplifting words on how Shepard has become a legend and cut to fade. Where are we? Shepard and most of the characters we've grown to love are dead, Earth is in ruins but galactic civilization has been saved, Shepard is truly a legend and humanity has gained a place of honor amongst the races of the galaxy.
That's a bittersweet ending.
 Not "galactic civilization is screwed, but hey, Joker gets to play Robinson Crusoe with EDI, so it's all good!"

I'm gonna stop there because this is turning bitter and I've written more than I meant to anyway. Just for the record: I find the current ending to be so bad as to be offensive  Empty platitudes such as 'artistic vision' are just insulting.
Hackett out

[cindercatz]

Alright, first and foremost, the ending must be changed, it must make sense, and it must include a rejection option, preferably adopting the Indoc theory for the existing ending scene, and then incorporating that into the larger, better ending scenes that follow. So I'm reposting what I'd really like to see after I bring up my other short suggestions.

Other Suggestions List:
----I'd like a few more personal scenes with whoever the Love Interest is, or a scene and a few altered lines/animation in a few scenes. I played something like 12-14 hours in the middle of the game worried that my romance was glitched and had been excised from my story all of a sudden. I think, speaking of the Liara romance, her send off scene on Earth before the end, and a few of her romance scenes along the way, including but not trumped by the love scene, were probably my favorite moments in the game. Every scene that was there was excellent.

----There's that and Wrex, Thane, Miranda, Jack, and Mordin's cameo/important npc moments, and the squad personal scenes, especially Ashley's hangover, Liara's arguement with the Prothean, and Tali's homeworld plans. I loved the big dramatic stuff this time, of course, the Mars VS injury, Grunt's wading into Rachni, Thane's duel, Mordin's singing finale, and the Quarian/Legion standoff coming to mind just now.

----The love scenes. I played Liara's first, so my thoughts were "Ok, that was pretty good, way too short, still Teen rating style in a Mature rated game, unfortunately, but pretty good. I loved the conversations before and after the love scene. Pretty good." Then I saw most of the other LIs' love scenes, and I thought "yeah, that's bad.. I'll just stick with Liara or ME2 cameo LIs" So Liara's romance is overall excellent, though I was wondering if it still existed for those 12-14ish hours, but the other romances seemed to suffer worse from the PG-13 romance problem, with bras and undies being worn throughout, even in the shower, and seemingly even shorter than Liara's. I liked Jack's scenes, but like the rest of the ME2 group excluding Miranda, there's no extra scene, unfortunately. Just her mission, dancing, and the comm device thing at the end, which are all great.

----I wanted Jack as a squaddie too. Maybe we can get Jack centric dlc? *wishes* And I'm sure there's something more with Aria. Gotta be.

----The journal doesn't update. Frustrating. So get the journal updating so I know when I've got my fetch items acquired and when I don't. That's the kind of thing that slips the mind while you're running around doing everything else.

----Show Tali's face on Rannoch, not just for LI. She's been one of my favorite BioWare characters since the first game, and I wouldn't want to get cheated just because I didn't romance her. Don't do the cheaty thing it does now where Shep sees it and we don't. That was disappointing.

Ok, the ending. I made this response to a thread/poll just a bit ago, but I want to make sure it's seen by BioWare. I also left the quoted portion in the "we are listening" ending thread, since I'm not really sure where the most appropriate place to put it was. Slightly reordered:

" I'd prefer BioWare to basically adopt the indoctrination theory wholesale, make all four indoc sequence choices available regardless of EMS, and then, if you reject starchild in the dream sequence, the following is what results. If you choose "destroy", the rest still occurs, but there are later repercussions with EDI and the Geth (who are not destroyed by the indoc sequence, but learn of their betrayal). If you choose "synthesis", Shepard and a number of the human troops are fully indoctrinated and become enemies during the battle. If you choose "control", Shepard is indoctrinated and must be killed by his squad, which also takes a casualty or two in that scene.

I think it should basically depend on your EMS. It's impossible to save everyone in your squad, but depending on your EMS, you have a choice of who to save in a series of events during the battle. If you have very low EMS, most die, if very high EMS, you sacrifice a few.

Optionally, Shepard can sacrifice him/herself to save more of the squad. If EMS is very low, Shepard dies along with most of the squad. LI survives all scenarios, unless EMS is low and Shepard refuses to sacrifice him/herself to save them.

In all scenarios, Earth takes heavy casualties, as do the allied fleets. If EMS is high, the Battle for Earth is won, and significant survivors remain across all species. The allies go on to win the war. If EMS is very low, the Battle for Earh is lost, casualties are much higher, and the Reapers win. If medium low, the Battle for Earth is lost, but the war eventually won. Medium high EMS, the Battle for Earth is a push (both sides take severe casualties and withdraw), but there are more survivors and the allies win.

*When I refer to squad, I mean the entire squad across all three games. All of the surviving squad members should have visible roles during the final battle, encomposing that "series of events" I mentioned.

**I also reject the idea that this option (Reject the Starchild) results in "countless more casualties". It is the better option and therefore should be made clear to be such. Besides, how could any amount of standard warfare equal the destruction of the relays? If BioWare wants to remain consistent with their options (if BioWare rejects the Indoc Theory), you see that wave basically disintegrating half the normandy, so the destruction of the relays must be a widely destructive event, not a Reaper off switch. " 

So what to do about the Crucible? Maybe the Crucible, when truly fired (not by Shepard in the Indoc sequence), actually does delay or outright stop ftl travel, but does not destroy the relays, maybe it effects Reaper code directly and strips them of their ability to indoctrinate. Basically, it is a super weapon, and it can be used to turn the war in the allies' favor, but it's no longer an off switch.

All of the above can be a series of cutscenes with choices along the way to determine outcomes, the higher the EMS, the better outcomes available for most events. No need to create run and shoot levels, unless you've just got a lot more time and budget for it. Make sure the battle scenes incorporate the composition of our forces along with all series squadmates. Afterwards, you have a short set of epilogue scenes. This would fully satisfy and save Mass Effect from completely abandoning its themes, as the current ending basically does, indoc or not.

Modifié par cindercatz, 23 avril 2012 - 10:40 .

[Sanctuary74]

I'm not entirely sure that this is the place to put it, but I hope that in the extended cut this scene is added back in:

[rickyroonz]

MaskofSkin wrote...

Have the Indoctrination theory be correct, Space Child = Harbinger, etc. The Mass Effect universe is too good for space magic. Even if it wasn't planned, there is enough coincidental evidence to support it.

I would rearrange some things so Anderson and Shepard still have their final moments. That was just too good to be a hallucination, unless you give me something even better.

Have the war assets make a difference in the final sequences. Have 10 Brutes appear and right when you're thinking OH SH.. here come the Volus Bombers or Elcor Commandos and wipe them out. Anything that give some context to the War Assets.

Show Tali's face on Rannoch. It's the perfect time for it.Or in the Super Happy LI ending.

Show some scenes of the Reapers either getting beat down by all the different races in your fleet or show the opposite with them all being annihilated.

There needs to be a wide range of endings to reward players for their dedication, or show them the consequences of their poor decisions. Endings that wrap up THE PLAYERS experience with the story and characters. It will be harder to do but that's what the fans and the characters deserve.

Overall I think this is quite a good summary.  Indoctrination would explain Shepard's lack of questions as well as the 'God-child' guff and it's flawed reasoning.  Lots of good ideas out there though, including the conversation/battle with Harbinger, happy LI ending (which I think must be a possible ending), seeing Rannoch, Thessia and other worlds post reaper, and fixing the relay explosion/Normandy fleeing part since none of it makes any real sense.
This also presents a good case:
http://www.gamefront...fans-are-right/

I remain hopeful though, that this is all part of the game...

Modifié par rickyroonz, 23 avril 2012 - 10:52 .

[DrSatchmoe]

 I was abit disappointed in the LI story for Kaidan. Shepard waits two and a half years to be with him Gaian and there isn't even a paragon interrupt for a kiss. A bit harsh. There needs to be more relationship building interrupts or conversation. Not him talking about how good EDI looks. Also what happen to Fem Shepard Straight LI choices?
 Not sure this will even be read or cared about just wanted to throw in my2 cents. Thanks

[Hippeh]

Zuka999 wrote...

thor_viking wrote...

For what it's worth this is a proposed endgame put together based on numerous great ideas from the forums. I believe this is much more satisfying, removes plot holes and makes your decisions matter a whole lot more without completely changing the last mission. Like I said this is based off ideas from other posters so I claim no credit.

[snip]

Please, for the love of god, this! BioWare, I  hope you still read this thread..

This I find very good and much better than what we have, thanks. 

[thebestoralist]

I took my time playing through this game.  It may sound cheesy, but Mass Effect brought me back to video games.  After a long hiatus after college, the ads for this game got my attention and I bought a 360 - dozens of games later, I don't regret the decision.  Games are art.

This was a beautiful game.  Which is why I really want to believe the Indoctrination Theory is true: it is the only thing that saves what was an utterly confusing conclusion.   

I love you guys at Bioware.  I spend my hard earned money to buy your stuff brand new.  Dragon Age and Mass Effect, plus all their DLC, has put me back a  pretty penny and I wouldn't have spent it any other way.  But this ending... it made no sense, guys.  The Indoctrination Theory is the only way it works, which is why I hope it's true. 

You don't have to give me an add-on ending where Shep comes back and kills Harbinger with his bare hands and then passionately bangs Ashley on top of its broken body.  Or Liara.  Or Kaiden.  Or all three, for that matter.  You don't even have to give me extended cuts showing why Joker turned coward in the middle of the Apocalypse and figured he'd take the whole crew into a mass relay while Shep is doing what they've spent three games trying to do... and the whole crew was apparently cool with it.  Apparently there will be more games - which is good, I'll buy them.  Behave consistently, remember your own rules, and please, please, don't take advantage of your fans by skimping on the payoff via witholding anwers to questions you've been making us ask for three games.  That's not fair, man.

That being said, the Indoctrination Theory is solid.  I hope that was your plan, because if it was, you got me.  I spent a whole day fuming about the ending and scratching my head before I started to look closer.  If it's true, you've worked a wonder.  If not, well, whatever.  Not every artistic decision translates well with everyone.  I get that.

I could totally see a follow up game where shep really did become indoctrinated and is actually the main villain.  The battle of the crucible was lost... or maybe just a statelmate... and the war continues.  New protagonists rise through the ranks and you take down your former character.  But hey, I'll leave the heavy lifting to the pros.

Again, wonderful game, confusing ending.  I hope the announced DLC accomplishes what you intend.

[ilego]

For the extended cut option i wanted to ask you to please keep the big battle scene over earth but make it longer or show the battle above earth is going more often also i know you have heard this before but from the end of cerbrus to the end it is over all the same sure you can romance samatha instead of tali but you always get the same scenes and you said the romance scenes will be diffrent this time, not really, and during the admiral hacketts speech it is the same sure if you get the geth they are shown during the speech but is the only time, and then when you exit sol relay the same scene everytime the asari's ship (look like the Destiny Asenstion) and more like them appear and then tirans appear if you got them then the quarians ship as long as you didn't kill them appear but even if you keep the geth alive you don't see there ships only turians and alliance i know the main battle is on earth skipping to Hammer Landing you only see alliance ships landing and human soliders then at the FOB you can only talk to your squadmates or former squadmates not the Geth you recuited or aria's army and liara memory what was that all about skipping to leaving FOB same as before except this time you see a korgan or a turian Sorry if i was rude but what is up?