7055 réponses à ce sujet

[Terrorize69]

Countless list, but I'll stick with a couple for now.

1) Better/More Scenes showing the Victory Fleet fighting the Reapers, and the ground forces on Earth fighting.

2) More LI options for Femshep.

3) More/Better Content for existing LI's.

[MeTaLx22793]

You guys did an amazing job with the game. It was probably the best game i played ever.
I'm gonna go through a list of things that will sum up what i would like to see as a major mass effect fan.
1.I think that there should be closure on the destroy ending.You showed that shepard was alive in that last cutscene. I want to know what happens after that, like i wanna know what happens to liara and shepard or any other LI.
2.It will be really cool if you put more fighting in the final battle cutscenes, like if you kept samara alive you'll see her and a bunch of other justicars killing things, stuff like that.
3.And at last i wanna see what happens to everyone else after the war like.......what happens to garrus and tali or what happens to the quariens if you destroy the geth or what happens to everyone when the mass relays are destroyed.
That is all i wish to see in the EC.I hope this has been helpfull and i wish all of you the very best. And want all of you to know that we all still believe in you. GOOD JOB GUYS

[DRTJR]

Kal'Reegar as a companion instead of Liara, Option to convert Liara into a war asset. ME2 Companions as ME3 Companions, War assets doing something.

[Collegeboy21]

I don't know if something like this has been suggested yet, but I don't have enough time to read through every post.
Here's my idea on how to make the war assets mean something, while preserving the artistic integrity of the original endings, while also providing players with a happy ending, and the complete fail scenario.
If the player arrives at Earth with the maximum possible amount of war assets, then the Crucible makes it to the citadel without taking any damage. This would allow it to fire a perfectly refined and controlled energy burst that does not destroy the Citadel, the relays, the Geth, or EDI, but ONLY takes out the Reapers, as was intended. Shepard survives, makes blue babies or what have you. You could even make it a white explosion.
If the player does not bring the maximum amount of assets to earth, but comes close, then the Crucible takes a bit of damage, preventing it from working perfectly, resulting in the ending as it stands for the best current possible ending scenario, with the Geth and EDI getting destroyed too. The fewer the assets brought to Earth, the more damage the Crucible takes, the worse the outcome gets. The next step down could be that it also destroys the relays, a step below that lays waste to Earth, and if the player brings in too few assets, the Reapers destroy the shield fleet and the Crucible and win.
Thus, the war assets can actually mean something other than simply being an arbitrary number. This also provides for the happier ending that some fans want, the current endings, and the ultimate fail scenario that some fans want as a possibility, which would add urgency to finding those assets.

What do you think, fellow forumites?

[Iecerint]

^ The war assets already have a function similar to that, though their influence is so minimal that you'll miss it if you blink. The score affects whether the squad survives, etc. I think adding cutscenes that show more clearly the effects is the absolute bare minimum that could be done to make things passable.

That said, I think I'll be both surprised and disappointed if IT doesn't end up being canon.

[Hollins]

My non ending related suggestions:

I hate to be negative, but ME3 didn't live up my expections, which were based on what you accomplished in the first two games and DLCs. It is still a very good game, an 8/10, but it wasn't what it could/should have been.

To begin, it seems that the series is transitioning from a Action/Roleplaying hybrid to an all out action game. I don't think this is a great direction for the series and, if EA/Bioware continues on this path, a significant portion of your fans will be alienated. By all means, continue to improve the combat or add multiplayer, but not at the expense of being able to make choices. I don't want to be a passive viewer waiting for the next cut scence.

One issue I had with the game was the new linear approach. It would be nice if we could have chosen to go to Rannoch before starting Tuchanka for example. Having a greater number of choices of missions, at one time, would have made the game feel less linear. Like in ME2, you could have done any of the N7 missions or loyalty quests in any order you chose. Even recruiting your squad provided some flexibility. But, my main issue with the linearity was lack of explorable areas, with only the Citadel and the Normandy to explore, the universe felt very small. ME3 would have been a better game if we were given the option to liberate Omega from Cerberus and then have a new area to explore freely afterwards. I have sneeking suspicion that you are preparing that for a DLC. I would have definitley included Omega as an explorable area where you could purchase items, build your squad, do a loyalty mission, and perhaps run a few errands.

This brings me to my next topic, Day 1 DLC. Now this was a great idea for generating extra revenues at launch, but it comes with a price to your reputation and can leave fans with impression that your holding out your fans so you can milk as much money as possible from them. I have heard the story, that the DLC was created 3 months after the game was completed, while you were waiting for launch and that this wasn't done intentionally. That the game stood up on its own. I would agree with that, as the DLC made the game better, but not that much. Javik and his mission were good, but not great.

I would have liked to be able to get back more of my squad in ME2. I think that keeping our squad size small allowed you to reduce the amount of dialogue in the game, so its understandable. Most of our conversations with ME2 characters are brief, automated and offer few dialogue choices. But, It would have been better if you could have at least gotten back the surviving ME2 characters during the final mission and have been able to make certain choices, like with the SM, that effected the lives of your squad.

Planet exploration was something I missed from ME and I was hoping it would make a return, but in a slightly different capacity. I got the impression that it might be making a return as it featured in 2 or 3 DLCs. The game would have been better if a new and improved Mako made a comeback in sidequests and priority missions. For me, planet exploration in ME blew me away at first and made the universe feel like such a large place as you had so many massive areas to explore. Being able to freely explore so many different worlds made you feel as if you are in this fantastic and massive universe. Now, after your 20th planet it does start to get old, as the landscapes of these planets were very similar and the bases you explored were pretty much identical. There was also very little dialogue or much in the way of plot on these planets, so it did become repititive. But reintroducing exploration on a reduced scale with more dialogue and narrative would have made the game better. Like if you could visit 6-7 planets and encounter more complicated and varied terrains on each of them, including bases like we visit on the N7 missions in ME3, it would been cool. I would have liked to have explored all sorts of different terrains and encountered wildlife on several planets while searching for ancient research bases left behind by the protheans or someone else. Lastly, if your going to feature fetch quests, then lets actually land on planet and get the object.


I really like some of the dialogue in ME3, but not as much as ME2 overall. There were some great moments, like on Tuchanka and Rannoch, where you made big decisions, and this was very dramatic and well written. But the dialgue overall is of a lower standard than in ME2 IMO. I think you tried to be too epic in ME3 and also the serious tone of the narrative left few opportunities for the charm and humour that was frequent in ME2. For example, hearing everyone apologizing for Earth destruction started getting old after a while. Also, so many of paragon Sheppards lines were cheasey while renegade Sheppard was just a dick a lot of the time. In ME2 s/he was more sarcastic and had a lot of great lines and moments. Part of the problem was the lack of dialogue choices available, we really couldn't be on the fence about anything. Sometimes I didn't want to make a strong statement on whatever the issues was. I hope future ME games bring back the ME2 dialogue wheel and also include some sort of character approval rating like in DAO.

In the end, ME3 was a very good game, but it just wasn't the game I was hoping for. I'll leave the discussion of the endings to other posters, as I wasn't as upset as many others on this board, but I don't like them either. I do hope you create another trilogy in a few years time and make that perfect ME game your capable of. The only recommendation I would make would be to write out the trilogy from the outset.

Modifié par Hollins, 08 juin 2012 - 07:38 .

[Obitim]

I'm inclined to agree with the above...on the fetch quests I'd have liked to have landed on theplanet, had a bit of a fight, get some credits, do a bit of exploration and find the object, it would have made the quests a bit more fulfilling rather than go there, scan that, go to the Citadel, get credits...

[Skelly]

RaenImrahl wrote...

Bioware's Jessica Merizan has made a request of the community...

Jessica Merizan wrote...

I think I need to clarify myself. For the past few weeks, I've been collecting feedback. I have excel sheets, word documents, quotes, graphs, you name it.

In order for a collaboration between the devs and the fans to work, I need you guys to CONTINUE being constructive, and organizing your thoughts. I know where to look, but I need you to help me by contributing to the dialogue.

Saying "this blows" helps no one. Saying, "I enjoyed X but I found Z _____ because of A,B,C" is what I'm looking for. Channel your frustration into something positive (such as the RetakeME3 movement - constructive, organized thoughts).

Chris and I are both collecting your feedback. We're listening. Make yourself heard.

I hope this is the right thread for my post, then!

First off, I'm a huge fan of the series.  Ever since I was a kid, military sci-fi has been my favourite genre in books, films, games, whatever, which has put the Mass Effect  games pretty high on my "favourites" list. (The fact that it's also been three fantastic games helps put it there.)  The ending of ME3 didn't ruin my life, it didn't make me regret playing the games, etc. etc.   That being said, I definitely think it had some hiccups.

(For the sake of clarity, when I talk about the "ending", I don't just mean the final dialogue and cutscene.  As far as I'm concerned, the ending of the game starts the moment Shepard drops in London.  It's a right proper denoument!)

Now that that's out of the way, here's what I thought really worked about it.  For one thing, those fights in London are fantastic - frantic, messy, not easy but not spirit-crushingly hard either (I've only played it on Hardcore and Insanity).  And they enhance the atmosphere that's been building throughout the whole game of just how desperate Shepard and Co.'s fight is, and emphasize the fact that even if Shepard manages to end the war, it's not going to end well - it'll be an end, rather than a victory.  It's a great way to prepare the player for the final dialogue.

Re: the final dialogue - it had some good ideas.  Overall, that final dialogue/cutscene was, I think a suitable end to the series.  The war had to end hard, there was no way to do it that wouldn't be bittersweet at best.  But this was where the end got messy for me: for one thing, the big ideas, IMO,  weren't supported by the quality of the writing.  I'm not attacking the writing staff.   I'm saying that big concepts like the ones in ME3's ending are hard for any writer to express, and I don't think they entirely succeeded here, and it wouldn't hurt  to revisit and revise.  At the risk of sounding like a total snot, I feel like the only reason I "got" the ending (as much as anyone "got" the ending, right? ), is because I've been steeped in Big Concept sci-fi since I was a kid - Asimov, Clarke, Gene Wolfe, Alistair Reynolds, the really artsy-fartsy stuff, so the language and ideas of ME3's ending were ones I'm familiar with.  But if I wasn't, I have no idea what I'd make of it.  Honestly, the thing I am most surprised that I haven't encountered a lot of online fuss about is the fact that Shep's three choices are basically identical to the choices at the ending of the original Deus Ex.  I went to art school, so I'm under no delusions that everyone can be 100% original all the time, and good ideas work in more than one story, you know?  But there's still a part of me that expected more than something already seen in a great, critically acclaimed sci-fi RPG.  However, for all I know, the writers aren't familiar with DE and have no idea they overlapped like this.  It sounds ludicrous, but it happens more often than you might think.  

My biggest problems with the ending were with the Catalyst - personally, I'm hoping that part of the "truth" in the DLC will be whether or not the Catalyst's assertions were accurate.  Because all I wanted to say in response to him was, why?  How do you know that it'll never end?  And why should synthesis make it end?  We'll always find something to fight against.  And why would synthesis stop the hybrids from making AIs and then having AI wars all over again?  Just because the hybrids have machine parts?  That doesn't hold water.  I also echo everyone who's said that synthesis presented as an ideal solution contradicts portraying the resolution of the Quarian-Geth was as being, you know, at all relevant and a good thing.  After all, whichever choice you make, the Geth take Reaper code  - i.e. parts from other synthetic beings - into them, not Quarian DNA, in order to end their war.

I completely agree with what Madversary said earlier up the thread:

Real-world experience goes against synthesis too: it's like saying that
the solution to racism is not for people to be tolerant of different
skin colours, but to force people to intermarry until everyone looks the
same, or that Canada's national unity problems would go away if
everyone agreed to speak franglais. ;-)

I would love for the
extended cut to either give me some reason to believe that synthesis is a
good thing, or not present it as a good option at all.

And ditto to everyone who's expressed...confusion at the Normandy's role in the ending.  The Normany went to rejoin the fleet, so why'd they go back through the relay before it exploded?  And how the beeeep! did the people I took down to the final battle in London wind up on the Normandy, casually strolling along on Earth 2?  That didn't make me happy that Garrus survived, it just made me very, very confused.  I'm also still trying to figure out how the destruction of the relays didn't destory other things, for example the Earth, after that little incident with Shepard destroying the Batarian relay.   There's an unfortunate amount of things told or shown in the ending that contradict things told or shown in all three games, which is what makes the Catalyst's lack of explanations for his big declarations so problematic.


One thing I really don't want to learn in the Extended Cut is that the indoctrination theory is true - it's interesting, and there's a lot of good reasons to believe it, but if it's true, it would mean three things: that the game didn't actually end, that the players didn't actually get to complete Shepard's story, and that BW sold an unfinished game.  And I don't believe for a second that they would do that, so I really hope my bubble isn't burst by the EC saying "indoctrination theory FTW!" 

On a sort of connected note, I also have some sheer conjecture on how the inclusion of Action and Story mode may have had an unintended impact on responses to the ending of ME3....but I'm pretty sure this is not the thread for that, yes?

Modifié par Major Casey, 09 juin 2012 - 12:33 .

[Creylin]

For me, revealing Tali's face was a big deal.  Huge.  It should have been a major reveal/payoff.  Emotion all over the place.

It should be far more than an altered photo taken from the internet that doesn't even get the fingers right.

Modifié par Creylin, 09 juin 2012 - 01:18 .

[Neverwinter_Knight77]

Since developers have said that they're not going to change the ending, I really don't see what good this thread is doing.

[visionazzery]

Neverwinter_Knight77 wrote...

Since developers have said that they're not going to change the ending, I really don't see what good this thread is doing.

Totally agree is it merely paying lip service to us the fans? we find out soon enough wish we knew more about their sp plans soon

meantime i leaving you this link it highlights one of the reasons me3 did not reach its full potential it regarding Cerberus

 http://social.biowar.../index/12491266

[Torga_DW]

actually, its a lot like australian politics.

The politicians decide they're going to do something, and announce it
the australian people get to have their say
then the politicians do whatever they had decided in the first place

sad but true, its a very effective people management tool.

[AM94]

I'm sure somebody has mentioned them but i would like to see a couple of things changed:

1. Create a secondary option to gain galactic readiness so that i dont have to play hours of already incredibly boring multiplayer just to get the best ending. Especially since the community will die out at some point and i plan to keep playing this series for ages to come. Or at the very least make it so my galactic readiness doesn't go down overtime and just stays the way it is forever.

2. Make more side missions that don't involve flying around the galaxy scanning for war assets. Its more boring than mineral scanning in the second game. I wanna actually help all the species fight the reapers, or at least help somebody fight them or Cerberus. The N7 missions are one thing but they're basically the same as playing multiplayer which loses its enjoyment pretty quickly.

Theres probably other things i want changed but i dont want to think about them right now, of course the ending but we'll see about the EC before i decide to explode in your faces again about it.

[AM94]

Major Casey wrote...

RaenImrahl wrote...

Bioware's Jessica Merizan has made a request of the community...

Jessica Merizan wrote...

I think I need to clarify myself. For the past few weeks, I've been collecting feedback. I have excel sheets, word documents, quotes, graphs, you name it.

In order for a collaboration between the devs and the fans to work, I need you guys to CONTINUE being constructive, and organizing your thoughts. I know where to look, but I need you to help me by contributing to the dialogue.

Saying "this blows" helps no one. Saying, "I enjoyed X but I found Z _____ because of A,B,C" is what I'm looking for. Channel your frustration into something positive (such as the RetakeME3 movement - constructive, organized thoughts).

Chris and I are both collecting your feedback. We're listening. Make yourself heard.

I hope this is the right thread for my post, then!

First off, I'm a huge fan of the series.  Ever since I was a kid, military sci-fi has been my favourite genre in books, films, games, whatever, which has put the Mass Effect  games pretty high on my "favourites" list. (The fact that it's also been three fantastic games helps put it there.)  The ending of ME3 didn't ruin my life, it didn't make me regret playing the games, etc. etc.   That being said, I definitely think it had some hiccups.

(For the sake of clarity, when I talk about the "ending", I don't just mean the final dialogue and cutscene.  As far as I'm concerned, the ending of the game starts the moment Shepard drops in London.  It's a right proper denoument!)

Now that that's out of the way, here's what I thought really worked about it.  For one thing, those fights in London are fantastic - frantic, messy, not easy but not spirit-crushingly hard either (I've only played it on Hardcore and Insanity).  And they enhance the atmosphere that's been building throughout the whole game of just how desperate Shepard and Co.'s fight is, and emphasize the fact that even if Shepard manages to end the war, it's not going to end well - it'll be an end, rather than a victory.  It's a great way to prepare the player for the final dialogue.

Re: the final dialogue - it had some good ideas.  Overall, that final dialogue/cutscene was, I think a suitable end to the series.  The war had to end hard, there was no way to do it that wouldn't be bittersweet at best.  But this was where the end got messy for me: for one thing, the big ideas, IMO,  weren't supported by the quality of the writing.  I'm not attacking the writing staff.   I'm saying that big concepts like the ones in ME3's ending are hard for any writer to express, and I don't think they entirely succeeded here, and it wouldn't hurt  to revisit and revise.  At the risk of sounding like a total snot, I feel like the only reason I "got" the ending (as much as anyone "got" the ending, right? ), is because I've been steeped in Big Concept sci-fi since I was a kid - Asimov, Clarke, Gene Wolfe, Alistair Reynolds, the really artsy-fartsy stuff, so the language and ideas of ME3's ending were ones I'm familiar with.  But if I wasn't, I have no idea what I'd make of it.  Honestly, the thing I am most surprised that I haven't encountered a lot of online fuss about is the fact that Shep's three choices are basically identical to the choices at the ending of the original Deus Ex.  I went to art school, so I'm under no delusions that everyone can be 100% original all the time, and good ideas work in more than one story, you know?  But there's still a part of me that expected more than something already seen in a great, critically acclaimed sci-fi RPG.  However, for all I know, the writers aren't familiar with DE and have no idea they overlapped like this.  It sounds ludicrous, but it happens more often than you might think.  

My biggest problems with the ending were with the Catalyst - personally, I'm hoping that part of the "truth" in the DLC will be whether or not the Catalyst's assertions were accurate.  Because all I wanted to say in response to him was, why?  How do you know that it'll never end?  And why should synthesis make it end?  We'll always find something to fight against.  And why would synthesis stop the hybrids from making AIs and then having AI wars all over again?  Just because the hybrids have machine parts?  That doesn't hold water.  I also echo everyone who's said that synthesis presented as an ideal solution contradicts portraying the resolution of the Quarian-Geth was as being, you know, at all relevant and a good thing.  After all, whichever choice you make, the Geth take Reaper code  - i.e. parts from other synthetic beings - into them, not Quarian DNA, in order to end their war.

I completely agree with what Madversary said earlier up the thread:

Real-world experience goes against synthesis too: it's like saying that
the solution to racism is not for people to be tolerant of different
skin colours, but to force people to intermarry until everyone looks the
same, or that Canada's national unity problems would go away if
everyone agreed to speak franglais. ;-)

I would love for the
extended cut to either give me some reason to believe that synthesis is a
good thing, or not present it as a good option at all.

And ditto to everyone who's expressed...confusion at the Normandy's role in the ending.  The Normany went to rejoin the fleet, so why'd they go back through the relay before it exploded?  And how the beeeep! did the people I took down to the final battle in London wind up on the Normandy, casually strolling along on Earth 2?  That didn't make me happy that Garrus survived, it just made me very, very confused.  I'm also still trying to figure out how the destruction of the relays didn't destory other things, for example the Earth, after that little incident with Shepard destroying the Batarian relay.   There's an unfortunate amount of things told or shown in the ending that contradict things told or shown in all three games, which is what makes the Catalyst's lack of explanations for his big declarations so problematic.


One thing I really don't want to learn in the Extended Cut is that the indoctrination theory is true - it's interesting, and there's a lot of good reasons to believe it, but if it's true, it would mean three things: that the game didn't actually end, that the players didn't actually get to complete Shepard's story, and that BW sold an unfinished game.  And I don't believe for a second that they would do that, so I really hope my bubble isn't burst by the EC saying "indoctrination theory FTW!" 

On a sort of connected note, I also have some sheer conjecture on how the inclusion of Action and Story mode may have had an unintended impact on responses to the ending of ME3....but I'm pretty sure this is not the thread for that, yes?

War is always bittersweet, i think victory at the cost of billions of lives is enough bittersweet for one person to handle. The endings didnt have to be downright dismal though, victory at the cost of technology that took the protheans centuries to not even quite fully replicate and billions dead, stranded, no hope for the future. Theres no way in hell those fleets with all those people would be able to build mass relays to get them to their homeworlds without them all dying off first. The only place they got to make food is Earth which was blown to hell by the Reapers and over-constructed beforehand. If you think about it realistically, everyone is screwed even though they win, its not bittersweet, its total crap, a fate worse than being damned to hell. Bioware can make all the excuses it wants but they totally blew it on when trying to rationalize any part of the ending.

[Crysis I]

HARBINGER to say at least a sentence in the game

[Massa FX]

I want my Shepard to personally defeat Harbinger. If she dies in the process ok, but I want to bring Harbinger down.

I want to know if my Shepard(s) are indoctrinated and if so, when did that happen?

I want to understand the child AI/VI being seen in Shepard's dreams. If not indoctrinated and manipulated by the Reapers how did she see this kid? This should be clarified.

I understand that the developers are free to create whatever they want in the ME Universe, but... please try to stay true to the characters. My Shepard's (I have 5 imports to ME 3 and 6 more waiting to finish out ME2. Also 5 more in ME1.) all have a certain style and a certain focus. The current end game Shepard is a wuss. Please understand, I may not have been a developer, but all those hours I've spent playing, molding my Shepard's makes me feel like a subject matter expert.

My Shepard isn't going to accept the child AI/VI's assertion that there are only 3 choices. My Shepard would have found a way to shut the kid down. It's what she does. When there seems to be no solution, Shepard makes one. Right or wrong, she'll get the job done without too many deaths. Destroying the Reapers along with an entire population of Geth isn't something she'd do. Nor would spreading her atoms across the universe, and especially she would never ever try to control the Reapers. Never.

From week one of Mass Effect 1 Shepard's said "Destroy the Reapers", "The Reapers are the real enemy" so... the only option given true Shepard (based on her behavior throughout the series) would be to destroy the Reapers. She just liberated the Geth. Why are they destroyed? They were created by the Quarians, not the Reapers. I'd understand the destroy ending better, if there's some explanation of why the Geth and all synthetic life must end.

Mass Relay destruction. How's that again? Destroying the Reapers gets rid of all Mass Relay's? Why? Please explain.

Adam and Eve Normandy. What? How? Only 3 survivors got off that ship and 2 of them should have been on Earth, not the Normandy.

So... Shepard must die. Ok. I'd accept that if it was explained why. Explained in a way that makes sense.

There's so much more I wish to say, but I find it hard to. It's just a game. Not real life or real death. But the ending of Shepard deserves more than it got.

Thank you for reading.

[Massa FX]

Suggestion for future ME Universe games: Add more romance partners for female main characters. I'm a heterosexual woman and I must say, I preferred Garrus to Kaiden, but couldn't get past the pointy things seen on his body. I just couldn't. So I settled for Kaiden, which is OK, but he's not very virile... He whines. (worse than ME fans do, myself included.) One of my Shep's went with Jacob and we all know how that ended. Realistically, my Shep would have punched him hard when she found out about his new love. Broke his nose at least. Or hit him below the belt.

The Normandy was full of human males. The Citadel is full of men. Earth had men.

Pick one Shep! You go girl!

[melooche4]

 War Assets / MP- Personally, I've had an issue with the war assets in regards to multiplayer. The Mass Effect 3 multiplayer allows players to promote a character to their singleplayer campaign allowing for a +10 points in the war assets, however, these characters become converted into a number instead of receiving the recognition they deserve on the war assets page. In integrating cutscene or a list of multiplayer character names in the war assets would have sufficed and solved this issue. They didn't need a plotline or a voice, they just needed to be acknowledged. Naming and customizing a character feels so useless when they become converted and lost within numbers.

War Assets - There is a avid disagreement regarding the war assets. Many of us felt rightly or wrongly that we expected some form of in-game visualizations of the war assets taking back Earth. I don't mean to exclaim the space fleets that rock the Reaper world at the end, although it was awesome, it would've been beneficial and more rewarding if we witnessed the Elcor Living Tanks, bands of Krogan, mercenary groups and most importantly our Mass Effect 2 squadmates taking the Reaper invasion head-on. In all honesty, the battle on Earth was expected to be far grander than it was.

Final Mission - It's fair to say that many of us expected the final mission to be similar to the suicide mission in Mass Effect 2. Shepard would task crewmates and their survival would depend heavily on choices previously and presently in the game. With the number of times Shepard said we were going to lose people, it was surprising that no one on his current squad actually died.

Character Deaths - Building off the issues with the final mission is the prospect of character deaths. The characters and squadmates who did end up dying, i.e Thane, Mordin, & Legion, found redemption in their picture perfect deaths. Their deaths made the final mission even more peculiar with the fact that none of Shepards squadmates died, at least to his/her knowledge they didn't.

The Catalyst - Our main issue resides with this godlike child. His argument simply doesn't match up with logic. As a player who utilizes Shepards defiance against the odds, it seemed peculiar as to why we weren't allowed to argue with this child and point out the flaws in its argument. For 2.99 games, we, as players, have been able to fight and defeat the odds mounted against us, however, in this instance, we weren't given that chance. We couldn't inform the Catalyst of the potential peaceful relationship between the Quarian and Geth emphasizing the assertion to reject that synthetics and organic life will always be at war. In essence, we find fault in the Catalyst's reasoning and are, for the first time in the series, unable to challenge it. (To put it in laymen's terms, here's a gif explaining the Catalyst's reasoning in the most simplest of terms.)

Mass Relay Destruction - Despite the philosophical debates on how the ending should be interpreted, all choices barrel down to one distinct feature, that being that the mass relays are destroyed. This, in turn, creates, more or less, a practical issue rather than a philosophical issue. By destroying the mass relays, Shepard has inevitably stranded all of the alien fleets within the Sol system. The question then rises as to how these fleets of alien life will be able to return home?

The Ending - At the moment, there are numerous concerns revolving around the understanding of the Mass Effect 3 ending. Some theories point towards Indoctrination others stick to a more literal ending, however, all in all, it doesn't really matter what the ending is, as long as it provides closure. Players are left in awe and confusion as to whether or not they've succeeded or failed in their attempt to rid the universe of the Reapers. Worst of all, they are unsure on whether or not the squadmates from the entire Mass Effect franchise made it out alive or not. For a game that focuses heavily on its character, it seems apparent that there was little done to provide comfort for players who have grown emotionally attached to certain characters in the game. That being said, regardless of how the ending is to be interpreted, it seems apparent that BioWare provide closure in some way or form regarding the well-being and position the galaxy is in as well as Shepards squadmates after the final encounter with the Reapers. 

The Epilogue - "Three identical, context free scenes of the Normandy crash landing on a strange planet followed by a nonsensical epilogue featuring a Grandfather and his grandson [which] almost seems to smugly imply that gamers themselves were nothing but children who couldn't understand these events." - Gamefront

Cutscenes - Many of the cutscenes/dialogues seemed to be 'copied and pasted' into the game. In laymen's terms, they are all virtually the same. Compared to the Mass Effect 2 cutscenes/dialogues, Mass Effect 3 seems far less cinematic. There is also the 'shame talk' bug where characters often are not looking at Shepard during their conversations. It's almost as if they are ashamed to look at him/her. I also found numerous graphical issues in some cutscenes where the camera was looking at a wall or through a character instead of positioning itself correctly.

Technical Issues - There are numerous issues regarding the Journal and its tendency to permanently fix on already completed missions instead of automatically going to new ones. There is also the inevitable issue regarding face importation.

Personal Issues - "Commander Shepard has become a legend by ending the Reaper threat. Now you can continue to build that legend through further gameplay and downloadable content." I'm not sure what BioWare thought when writing this but how on Earth could this be a good idea?

Modifié par melooche4, 10 juin 2012 - 07:19 .

[Massa FX]

Last comment, I promise. Thank you Bioware team. ME 2 is the best game I've ever played. ME 3 is the next best (except for the ... you know). I purchased an Xbox 360 to play ME 1. As a RPG lover, console wasn't for me until ME. I couldn't get used to the controller and everything was awkward at first. Now, I'm hooked. And Bioware started it all.

So, don't despair. All the whining and groaning is out of love for Bioware Games. The vows from fans to never buy another Bioware game prolly just isn't true. We are hooked. We love your games.

Ok, maybe I speak for myself.

Overall, I'm more than satisfied with all my purchases. Keep it coming.

[Massa FX]

I unintentionally lied. More questions I'd like answer to. I romanced Kaiden in ME 1, no-one in ME 2 and declared my love for him in ME 3 with a couple FemSheps. Kaiden clearly states that he loves Shep and has forever. So, imagine my surprise when Kaiden steps off the Normandy all smiles and happy at the end. If Shep died a horrible death or is just missing, how could my lover, the only man for Shep, just step off the Normandy on the Adam/Eve planet and not be crushed? He's OK with her death? Got a thing going with Allers (if she lived) or has a thing for Joker now that EDI is dead?

Just saying. That's just wrong. and clearly insulting.

Another insult to Shep was the fact that not one friend from ME 1or ME 2 came to see her during her house arrest period. Some friends there. No-one came. Seems cold. Poor Shep.Doesn't she later say true friends are right there beside you?

Those same friends took time to pick up folks on Earth, but not Shep's body? How's that again? What? Why? Please clarify.

[robertm2]

people do realize that the only reason this thread exists is so they can say they are listening and nobody can argue right? nothing people say is going to get them to go back and redo the whole game or even change minor things aside from the extended cut which im sure they already know exactly what they are doing with it anyways. This whole thread is a walking talking public relations stunt.

[Creylin]

I keep seeing people say that this thread "doesn't matter."  And maybe it doesn't.  But what I'm doing is giving Bioware a chance.  Let me explain.

With the game (and especially the endings) in the current shape it's in, Bioware/EA is never going to sell me a scrap of DLC for this game.  That's just truth.

In addition, parts of the game (Tali's face reveal) and the endings are so bad and such a complete cop-out that I don't see myself buying any Bioware games for the next few years, at least.  Ever since I finished my first play through of ME3, I haven't touched any Bioware games because I'm just disgusted.  I haven't even worn my ME2 t-shirt.  I've been playing other games.  Games that made me want to play them again and buy their DLC because they didn't want to make me vomit at the end.  I'm in no hurry to let Bioware make me feel that way again any time soon.

Therefore, if Bioware/EA wishes to make any more money off me in the next few years, and I assume that there are others who feel the same way, they'd better fix the ending and other parts of the game.  If that "doesn't matter" to them and their bosses, then fine.  But this isn't me begging them to fix ME3.  This is me giving Bioware one last chance to get more of my money by pulling together the shreds of loyalty to Bioware that still remain after the betrayal of that loyalty that was ME3.  Of course, they shouldn't need this help.  Myself and others here are really just pointing out the obvious.  But, if for some reason, they can't see it, then so be it.  But this is the last bit of help they are going to get from me.

On a final note, I'm a software developer by trade.  I've said on more than one occasion,  "This doesn't need to be done" and "I'm not going to do that", only to have my boss tell me, "It is worth doing" and "You will do it."  I've also said "I want to do it this way" only to have my boss say "No, you'll do this this way."

One guess who got their way...

Modifié par Creylin, 10 juin 2012 - 01:23 .

[Neverwinter_Knight77]

I1 Trust wrote...

Flesh out Allers' character. I'd like to see more of her in the game.

Or at least fix some of her voice acting.

I saw Chobot during G4's coverage of E3 and had two thoughts:

1. She's pretty cute.  Facial scanning sucks.
2. I kinda like her.  She's not nearly as bad as her voice acting.

[Dimius]

Whatever happens at the end of ME3 on the citadel, is Shepard being fed false memories by the Reapers' indoctrination process/torture. The Geth step in and recover Shepard's body. The last scene with the old man is just a Geth therapy to clean-up Shepard's mind from the indoctrination (Shepard's mind is the little boy).

So in reality the mass relays are fine, and there's a huge war going on that needs to be won. Which is where the DLCs come in. Wonder if this would work?