80 réponses à ce sujet

[OoKORKYoO]

Ok so appart from 1 or 2 decisions made in ME 1 & 2, ie if you let Wrex live or die and if you destroy Maelon's/Mordan's data. Pretty much all other BIG decisions become pointless. Here are some examples

1. Collector Base
If you hand over the base to Cerburus, they end up with the Human Reaper and it's brain (makes sense).
If choose to destroy the base, Cerburus still ends up with the Human Reaper (by the way was blown to bits and scattered amongst all that other debris at the centre to the Galaxy) but this time with it's heart.
Decision is pointless

2. Rachni Queen
If you let the Queen live, she gets captured by the Reapers and forced to make an army for them.
If you kill the Rachni Queen (the very last one in existence), The Reapers somehow clone another one from a Rachni and they force her to make an army for them.
Decision is pointless

3. Geth
If you re-write or kill the Geth with Legion, all you get is a quick line of dialogue from Legion about how what you did  didn't work.
Decision is pointless

4. Anderson
I chose to make Anderson the Council member at the end of ME1, not Udina! This was confirmed in ME2 and although Anderson said he was not sure if he liked it, he was still the Councillor at the end of ME2.
So at the start of ME3, why is Udina now the Councillor and Anderson an Admiral back on Earth?
Decision is pointless

5. The Council
If you let the Council all die at the end of ME1, they just get replaced by another set of generric characters that say maybe 1 or 2 lines of dialogue about it.
Decision is pointless

I was really excited for ME3, I had multiple saves ready for all the different outcomes of the choices I made along the way. After 2 or 3 playthroughs I realised there was no point in playing the rest...
Don't get me wrong I do like ME3 as a game but surely these decisions were supposed to have a bigger impact!

Bioware "are you engaging in reproductive behaviour with this one?"

[Aetius5]

Reproductive behhavior? Like sex? I don't think so...

[OoKORKYoO]

Aetius5 wrote...

Reproductive behhavior? Like sex? I don't think so...

Dude...
Its a quote from the Blasto 6 easter egg, It means "are you effing with me?"

[HanPL]

Agree.
I made several "alts " to see outcome of decisions in ME 3...almost none of them matters.
When I spoke with Council (new one ) with my Renegade Shepard it looked like that.

"I don't have to remind you that Shepard sacrificed previous Council !"
But he had good reason !
Oh..ok...

[Kilshrek]

OoKORKYoO wrote...

Bioware "are you engaging in reproductive behaviour with this one?"

Gastrodermal lining, you forgot that one.

And yeah, I think they couldn't work out how to fit those elements in, so they just railroaded them.

[MartialArtsMaster]

OoKORKYoO wrote...

Ok so appart from 1 or 2 decisions made in ME 1 & 2, ie if you let Wrex live or die and if you destroy Maelon's/Mordan's data. Pretty much all other BIG decisions become pointless. Here are some examples

1. Collector Base
If you hand over the base to Cerburus, they end up with the Human Reaper and it's brain (makes sense).
If choose to destroy the base, Cerburus still ends up with the Human Reaper (by the way was blown to bits and scattered amongst all that other debris at the centre to the Galaxy) but this time with it's heart.
Decision is pointless

2. Rachni Queen
If you let the Queen live, she gets captured by the Reapers and forced to make an army for them.
If you kill the Rachni Queen (the very last one in existence), The Reapers somehow clone another one from a Rachni and they force her to make an army for them.
Decision is pointless

3. Geth
If you re-write or kill the Geth with Legion, all you get is a quick line of dialogue from Legion about how what you did  didn't work.
Decision is pointless

4. Anderson
I chose to make Anderson the Council member at the end of ME1, not Udina! This was confirmed in ME2 and although Anderson said he was not sure if he liked it, he was still the Councillor at the end of ME2.
So at the start of ME3, why is Udina now the Councillor and Anderson an Admiral back on Earth?
Decision is pointless

5. The Council
If you let the Council all die at the end of ME1, they just get replaced by another set of generric characters that say maybe 1 or 2 lines of dialogue about it.
Decision is pointless

I was really excited for ME3, I had multiple saves ready for all the different outcomes of the choices I made along the way. After 2 or 3 playthroughs I realised there was no point in playing the rest...
Don't get me wrong I do like ME3 as a game but surely these decisions were supposed to have a bigger impact!

Bioware "are you engaging in reproductive behaviour with this one?"

The decisions most certainly are not meaningless, it's just that their effects are either minor or don't become apparent "right away."

The Collector Base decision is not pointless because the Reaper Brain and Reaper Heart do not have the same Military Strength. The Reaper Brain you get from preserving the base has a Military Strength of 110, while the Reaper Heart you get from destroying the base has a Military Strength of 100. Also, which decision you made also changes some of the requirements for the ending. If you preserved the base, the game will tolerate a lower EMS score and still save the Earth if you pick the Control option. If you destroyed the base, the game will tolerate a lower EMS score and still save the Earth if you pick the Destroy option.

The Rachni Queen choice is not only not pointless, but it can bite you in the butt if you do it wrong. If you save the Rachni Queen in ME1, you can save her again in ME3 without penalty. But if you kill the rachni queen in ME1, but you save the artificial replacement in ME3, she eventually turns on you, takes away the Rachni Workers War Asset, and reduces the Alliance Engineering Corps from 130 to 30. The Rachni Workers have a higher strength than Aralakh Company, but that won't matter if the fake turns on you. So killing or saving the rachni queen in ME1 determines whether your greater advantage is in saving the rachni again or saving Aralakh Company. If you saved the ME1 queen, you're better off saving the rachni in ME3. If you killed the ME1 queen, you're better off saving Aralakh Company.

Rewriting or destroying the geth heretics in ME2 can make it harder or easier, respectively, to gain peace. That's because destroying the geth heretics in ME2 earns 2 "peace points" (out of a maximum of 7) while rewriting the geth heretics earns 0 points. If you rewrote the heretics, you have to get ALL the other possible points, to get a score of 5 (which is the bare MINIMUM allowed to make peace between quarians and geth).

As for the Anderson decision, you need to read the novels, it was not done for no reason, nor is it a bug. Anderson gets fed up with all the political bull**** with the Council, so he voluntarily resigns and gives his job to Udina since Anderson thinks he can make a better difference with the military.

Finally, saving or sacrificing the Council has a huge impact on your War Assets. Saving the Council results in a few of the Alliance Fleets being cut, but you gain the Destiny Ascension, and saving the old salarian councilor's life gives you a stronger War Asset than saving the new salarian councilor's life. Sacrificing the Council results in the loss of the Destiny Ascension, and you gain a weaker War Asset from saving the new salarian councilor's life, but you get full-strength Alliance fleets and gain Rear Admiral Mikhailovich as a War Asset.

Please take all the relevant information into account before declaring these decisions pointless.

Modifié par MartialArtsMaster, 22 mars 2012 - 01:21 .

[Lilunebrium]

MartialArtsMaster wrote...

Please take all the relevant information into account before declaring these decisions pointless.

What you've stated are the gameplay consequences, namely how your War Assets play out. And you're right, in that case, they're far from pointless.

However, I think the OP and many people are complaining about the consequences to the overall plot, which, as far as I've experienced, are non-existant. So in this case, the choices are indeed pointless.

Modifié par Lilunebrium, 22 mars 2012 - 01:31 .

[Blennus]

sheesh. Ninja's by MartialArtsMaster. How appropriate.

Modifié par Blennus, 22 mars 2012 - 01:31 .

[MartialArtsMaster]

Blennus wrote...

sheesh. Ninja's by MartialArtsMaster. How appropriate.

I understand your concern. It's possible I seem to you like someone who corrects others for the sake of doing so.

I understand how I gave that impression, so let me see if I can express myself more clearly.

The fans are trying to give Bioware feedback to improve the game. But, implicit in giving such feedback is a knowledge of what needs improving.

So, to use a hypothetical example, if I were to say that Mass Effect 3 sucks because you can't recruit Kaidan or Ashley, I would be giving useless feedback because since you CAN recruit one of them, the part I'm saying needs to be improved does not in fact need to be improved, the error in that case would be on my end in forming my opinion before finishing Priority: Citadel II.

[Blennus]

No, actually when I said ninja'd, I meant that you wrote exactly what I was intending to write, (except it was more articulate, detailed, and accurate). No concerns, here. Just saying "sheesh" while laughing. And I thought that being "ninja'd" by a person named MartialArtsMaster was funny. See? Ninja'd? Martial Arts? ha ha ha...

never mind. I'll go sit in a corner now.

[MartialArtsMaster]

Blennus wrote...

No, actually when I said ninja'd, I meant that you wrote exactly what I was intending to write, (except it was more articulate, detailed, and accurate). No concerns, here. Just saying "sheesh" while laughing. And I thought that being "ninja'd" by a person named MartialArtsMaster was funny. See? Ninja'd? Martial Arts? ha ha ha...

never mind. I'll go sit in a corner now.

I apologize, then, I misunderstood you. Please forgive me, sir.

[Astralify]

I can't believe this is happening.... This HURTS me...

[VAIOMANIAC]

MartialArtsMaster wrote...

OoKORKYoO wrote...

Ok so appart from 1 or 2 decisions made in ME 1 & 2, ie if you let Wrex live or die and if you destroy Maelon's/Mordan's data. Pretty much all other BIG decisions become pointless. Here are some examples

1. Collector Base
If you hand over the base to Cerburus, they end up with the Human Reaper and it's brain (makes sense).
If choose to destroy the base, Cerburus still ends up with the Human Reaper (by the way was blown to bits and scattered amongst all that other debris at the centre to the Galaxy) but this time with it's heart.
Decision is pointless

2. Rachni Queen
If you let the Queen live, she gets captured by the Reapers and forced to make an army for them.
If you kill the Rachni Queen (the very last one in existence), The Reapers somehow clone another one from a Rachni and they force her to make an army for them.
Decision is pointless

3. Geth
If you re-write or kill the Geth with Legion, all you get is a quick line of dialogue from Legion about how what you did  didn't work.
Decision is pointless

4. Anderson
I chose to make Anderson the Council member at the end of ME1, not Udina! This was confirmed in ME2 and although Anderson said he was not sure if he liked it, he was still the Councillor at the end of ME2.
So at the start of ME3, why is Udina now the Councillor and Anderson an Admiral back on Earth?
Decision is pointless

5. The Council
If you let the Council all die at the end of ME1, they just get replaced by another set of generric characters that say maybe 1 or 2 lines of dialogue about it.
Decision is pointless

I was really excited for ME3, I had multiple saves ready for all the different outcomes of the choices I made along the way. After 2 or 3 playthroughs I realised there was no point in playing the rest...
Don't get me wrong I do like ME3 as a game but surely these decisions were supposed to have a bigger impact!

Bioware "are you engaging in reproductive behaviour with this one?"

The decisions most certainly are not meaningless, it's just that their effects are either minor or don't become apparent "right away."

The Collector Base decision is not pointless because the Reaper Brain and Reaper Heart do not have the same Military Strength. The Reaper Brain you get from preserving the base has a Military Strength of 110, while the Reaper Heart you get from destroying the base has a Military Strength of 100. Also, which decision you made also changes some of the requirements for the ending. If you preserved the base, the game will tolerate a lower EMS score and still save the Earth if you pick the Control option. If you destroyed the base, the game will tolerate a lower EMS score and still save the Earth if you pick the Destroy option.

The Rachni Queen choice is not only not pointless, but it can bite you in the butt if you do it wrong. If you save the Rachni Queen in ME1, you can save her again in ME3 without penalty. But if you kill the rachni queen in ME1, but you save the artificial replacement in ME3, she eventually turns on you, takes away the Rachni Workers War Asset, and reduces the Alliance Engineering Corps from 130 to 30. The Rachni Workers have a higher strength than Aralakh Company, but that won't matter if the fake turns on you. So killing or saving the rachni queen in ME1 determines whether your greater advantage is in saving the rachni again or saving Aralakh Company. If you saved the ME1 queen, you're better off saving the rachni in ME3. If you killed the ME1 queen, you're better off saving Aralakh Company.

Rewriting or destroying the geth heretics in ME2 can make it harder or easier, respectively, to gain peace. That's because destroying the geth heretics in ME2 earns 2 "peace points" (out of a maximum of 7) while rewriting the geth heretics earns 0 points. If you rewrote the heretics, you have to get ALL the other possible points, to get a score of 5 (which is the bare MINIMUM allowed to make peace between quarians and geth).

As for the Anderson decision, you need to read the novels, it was not done for no reason, nor is it a bug. Anderson gets fed up with all the political bull**** with the Council, so he voluntarily resigns and gives his job to Udina since Anderson thinks he can make a better difference with the military.

Finally, saving or sacrificing the Council has a huge impact on your War Assets. Saving the Council results in a few of the Alliance Fleets being cut, but you gain the Destiny Ascension, and saving the old salarian councilor's life gives you a stronger War Asset than saving the new salarian councilor's life. Sacrificing the Council results in the loss of the Destiny Ascension, and you gain a weaker War Asset from saving the new salarian councilor's life, but you get full-strength Alliance fleets and gain Rear Admiral Mikhailovich as a War Asset.

Please take all the relevant information into account before declaring these decisions pointless.

Destiny accension I said screw the council in the first game and the destiny accension was destroyed but it somehow magically appeared anyway at the end of my game so POINTLESS.

[Dangerfoot]

Yeah, from a story telling perspective, the game is not an RPG. Some cool mechanics though.

[Kajan451]

MartialArtsMaster wrote...

The decisions most certainly are not meaningless, it's just that their effects are either minor or don't become apparent "right away."

Yes they are, but thanks for highlighting the very fact that they boil down to the equivalent of 1 Multiplayer Character getting promoted. Yeah that really held meaning.

MartialArtsMaster wrote...


The Reaper Brain you get from preserving the base has a Military Strength of 110, while the Reaper Heart you get from destroying the base has a Military Strength of 100.

10.... 10.... really... wow... 10 points differance, that surely can make or break the game right there. If you don't get those 10 extra points your DOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMed. <play dum dum duuuuuum music>

MartialArtsMaster wrote...



The Rachni Queen choice is not only not pointless, but it can bite you in the butt if you do it wrong. If you save the Rachni Queen in ME1, you can save her again in ME3 without penalty. But if you kill the rachni queen in ME1, but you save the artificial replacement in ME3, she eventually turns on you, takes away the Rachni Workers War Asset, and reduces the Alliance Engineering Corps from 130 to 30. The Rachni Workers have a higher strength than Aralakh Company, but that won't matter if the fake turns on you. So killing or saving the rachni queen in ME1 determines whether your greater advantage is in saving the rachni again or saving Aralakh Company. If you saved the ME1 queen, you're better off saving the rachni in ME3. If you killed the ME1 queen, you're better off saving Aralakh Company.

Wow, so i need to promote 1 more Mutliplayer character as i need to anyway if i get the queen... yeah that was meaningful and totally not pointless. 

MartialArtsMaster wrote...



Rewriting or destroying the geth heretics in ME2 can make it harder or easier, respectively, to gain peace. That's because destroying the geth heretics in ME2 earns 2 "peace points" (out of a maximum of 7) while rewriting the geth heretics earns 0 points. If you rewrote the heretics, you have to get ALL the other possible points, to get a score of 5 (which is the bare MINIMUM allowed to make peace between quarians and geth).

Thats about the only thing even remotely meaningful or mattering, for the matter. But since you don't see anything about that during the game, its pointless as well. 
As the peace can be archived obviously without bothering to do that loyality mission.

MartialArtsMaster wrote...



As for the Anderson decision, you need to read the novels, it was not done for no reason, nor is it a bug. Anderson gets fed up with all the political bull**** with the Council, so he voluntarily resigns and gives his job to Udina since Anderson thinks he can make a better difference with the military.

Which made the decision pointless.. but at least it got to shoot Udina, something i really wanted to do from the first second i met him. Still, it makes the players decision completely pointless.

MartialArtsMaster wrote...



Finally, saving or sacrificing the Council has a huge impact on your War Assets. Saving the Council results in a few of the Alliance Fleets being cut, but you gain the Destiny Ascension, and saving the old salarian councilor's life gives you a stronger War Asset than saving the new salarian councilor's life. Sacrificing the Council results in the loss of the Destiny Ascension, and you gain a weaker War Asset from saving the new salarian councilor's life, but you get full-strength Alliance fleets and gain Rear Admiral Mikhailovich as a War Asset.

Please take all the relevant information into account before declaring these decisions pointless.

So in the end it was meaningless and pointless to make the decision, the whole impact is reduced to a few points which becomes even more obsolete with the ability to promote Multiplayer Characters to ingame assets.


Buttom line is... nothing about this decisions was meaningful. It boils down to a few points and it doesn't change your chances in the game.

The only effect it has on the end is if you see the "breathing" sequence or not. Its as meaningful as getting an Email and a few couple points of War Asset for Zus Hope. Really shaped your experiance right there and made a huge differance.

[leapingmonkeys]

MartialArtsMaster wrote...

OoKORKYoO wrote...

Ok so appart from 1 or 2 decisions made in ME 1 & 2, ie if you let Wrex live or die and if you destroy Maelon's/Mordan's data. Pretty much all other BIG decisions become pointless. Here are some examples

1. Collector Base
If you hand over the base to Cerburus, they end up with the Human Reaper and it's brain (makes sense).
If choose to destroy the base, Cerburus still ends up with the Human Reaper (by the way was blown to bits and scattered amongst all that other debris at the centre to the Galaxy) but this time with it's heart.
Decision is pointless

2. Rachni Queen
If you let the Queen live, she gets captured by the Reapers and forced to make an army for them.
If you kill the Rachni Queen (the very last one in existence), The Reapers somehow clone another one from a Rachni and they force her to make an army for them.
Decision is pointless

3. Geth
If you re-write or kill the Geth with Legion, all you get is a quick line of dialogue from Legion about how what you did  didn't work.
Decision is pointless

4. Anderson
I chose to make Anderson the Council member at the end of ME1, not Udina! This was confirmed in ME2 and although Anderson said he was not sure if he liked it, he was still the Councillor at the end of ME2.
So at the start of ME3, why is Udina now the Councillor and Anderson an Admiral back on Earth?
Decision is pointless

5. The Council
If you let the Council all die at the end of ME1, they just get replaced by another set of generric characters that say maybe 1 or 2 lines of dialogue about it.
Decision is pointless

I was really excited for ME3, I had multiple saves ready for all the different outcomes of the choices I made along the way. After 2 or 3 playthroughs I realised there was no point in playing the rest...
Don't get me wrong I do like ME3 as a game but surely these decisions were supposed to have a bigger impact!

Bioware "are you engaging in reproductive behaviour with this one?"

The decisions most certainly are not meaningless, it's just that their effects are either minor or don't become apparent "right away."

The Collector Base decision is not pointless because the Reaper Brain and Reaper Heart do not have the same Military Strength. The Reaper Brain you get from preserving the base has a Military Strength of 110, while the Reaper Heart you get from destroying the base has a Military Strength of 100. Also, which decision you made also changes some of the requirements for the ending. If you preserved the base, the game will tolerate a lower EMS score and still save the Earth if you pick the Control option. If you destroyed the base, the game will tolerate a lower EMS score and still save the Earth if you pick the Destroy option.

The Rachni Queen choice is not only not pointless, but it can bite you in the butt if you do it wrong. If you save the Rachni Queen in ME1, you can save her again in ME3 without penalty. But if you kill the rachni queen in ME1, but you save the artificial replacement in ME3, she eventually turns on you, takes away the Rachni Workers War Asset, and reduces the Alliance Engineering Corps from 130 to 30. The Rachni Workers have a higher strength than Aralakh Company, but that won't matter if the fake turns on you. So killing or saving the rachni queen in ME1 determines whether your greater advantage is in saving the rachni again or saving Aralakh Company. If you saved the ME1 queen, you're better off saving the rachni in ME3. If you killed the ME1 queen, you're better off saving Aralakh Company.

Rewriting or destroying the geth heretics in ME2 can make it harder or easier, respectively, to gain peace. That's because destroying the geth heretics in ME2 earns 2 "peace points" (out of a maximum of 7) while rewriting the geth heretics earns 0 points. If you rewrote the heretics, you have to get ALL the other possible points, to get a score of 5 (which is the bare MINIMUM allowed to make peace between quarians and geth).

As for the Anderson decision, you need to read the novels, it was not done for no reason, nor is it a bug. Anderson gets fed up with all the political bull**** with the Council, so he voluntarily resigns and gives his job to Udina since Anderson thinks he can make a better difference with the military.

Finally, saving or sacrificing the Council has a huge impact on your War Assets. Saving the Council results in a few of the Alliance Fleets being cut, but you gain the Destiny Ascension, and saving the old salarian councilor's life gives you a stronger War Asset than saving the new salarian councilor's life. Sacrificing the Council results in the loss of the Destiny Ascension, and you gain a weaker War Asset from saving the new salarian councilor's life, but you get full-strength Alliance fleets and gain Rear Admiral Mikhailovich as a War Asset.

Please take all the relevant information into account before declaring these decisions pointless.

Strongly disagree.  They fudged the entire "continuity" theme.  Those decisions had no *visible* impact on the game play and served only as a small variable in determining the final video that gets played (and the videos are all almost identical to begin with).

What was required is that the prior decisions impact game play in a visible manner.  What they did was get lazy so that they didn't have to figure out multiple plot paths through ME3 and could just play a different colorized ending video.

[Astralify]

leapingmonkeys wrote...

Strongly disagree.  They fudged the entire "continuity" theme.  Those decisions had no *visible* impact on the game play and served only as a small variable in determining the final video that gets played (and the videos are all almost identical to begin with).

What was required is that the prior decisions impact game play in a visible manner.  What they did was get lazy so that they didn't have to figure out multiple plot paths through ME3 and could just play a different colorized ending video.

This.

[FRANCESCO84Inn]

not only the decision, i wait this chepter for continue the love story whit Laira start in ME1, i'm wait the culmination of the romance in this tragedy ending,

Liara its the only motivation for the Commander to figth the Reaper, this is contain in some dialogue,

i never image for Shepard this end, never, i image Shepard whit Liara after the Reaper.

[wheelierdan]

for me i recognized this early on, and i was ok with it. i recognize the illusion of choice in the main plot points as much as i recognise that no matter how pretty the skybox is, its still a corridor. it's hard to write a ton of content most will never see because they made a different choice.

But what they've always been good at is the illusion that the choices have an impact, just as much as how the sky looks open. Games arent real, the trick is making me buy into it. and i buy into the fact that my choices matter.

That what made the ending so hard they ruined the illusion by making the trick so obvious, and that break was retroactive.

[Dr. Catt]

Surely collecting war assets is a rather fundamental part of the gameplay and therefore to say these choices are pointless is just wrong. A bit like saying scoring 1 billion points in space invaders is pointless because it doesn't change the story - scoring points is part of the objective of the game and therefore by definition poinful. Maybe crudely put but hopefully comprehensible.

I think it's more accurate to see the ME series as an interactive film trilogy. It's not, and never has been, an RPG except in the sense that you take control of a protagonist. From what I can tell people who complain about the RPG elements of the game are playing under a misapprehension.

[AnttiV]

You don't even need to promote any MP characters. If the comparison is with pure SP (ie. Galactic Readiness at 50%). It isn't that hard to collect 4-5000 War Assets in the game, just don't rush. I collected about 7500 in my first playthrough.

So, if you saved Rachni in ME1 and again in ME3, you get 100 assets. If you didn't in ME1, but did in ME3 and the fake turns on you, not only do you not gain the 100, but you actually lose 100. So the difference between "best" and "worst" possible results with the rachni is 200 points in War assests.


So let's say you have 5000 assets. That's exactly half of what you need for the best possible ending.
The first few rounds in MP raise your GR by 4% (after that, 3% per round, approx.). 4% out of 5000 is exactly 200. So the whole "monumental decision" and "galaxy wide consequences" of the Rachni situation is reduced to ONE ROUND of multiplayer, on Bronze. (if you win, but you don't even need to win, then you just need to reach Wave 5 TWICE to get a 4% raise in GR.)

On average, you need 15 matched won at bronze level to reach GR of 100%. If you're lucky, that'll take some 5 hours. (I managed that in 18 matches and 8 hours spread on two different days.) That's what it takes. 5 hours of MP will net you more war assets that you can ever achieve in multiplayer (go from 5000 -> 10000 assets, I don't think that is possible currently. to have 10000 War Assets? That would be 5000 effective at 50% GR.)

Also, after ~2000 or so effective, the rest do not actually make a huge difference. they only matter if Anderson/Shepard lives or not. TWO lives (in the scale of a galaxy). Yeah.

[AnttiV]

Dr. Catt wrote...

Surely collecting war assets is a rather fundamental part of the gameplay and therefore to say these choices are pointless is just wrong. A bit like saying scoring 1 billion points in space invaders is pointless because it doesn't change the story - scoring points is part of the objective of the game and therefore by definition poinful. Maybe crudely put but hopefully comprehensible.

I think it's more accurate to see the ME series as an interactive film trilogy. It's not, and never has been, an RPG except in the sense that you take control of a protagonist. From what I can tell people who complain about the RPG elements of the game are playing under a misapprehension.

Except it is marketed as a RPG,so it most definitely should be one. Otherwise somebody has a problem.
And, for the most part, it is. ME2 actually has a huge amount of content (dialogue, mostly) that differs quite drastically from playthrough to playthrough, if you make different choices. 

Read my above post about the assets. Yes, collecting assets is a fundamental part of the gameplay mechanics and it is easily achieved via a few MP matches. That makes the original decisions, if not totally, then mostly pointless gameplay-wise. Story-wise they are totally pointless regarding the ending, that isn't even up to arguing. It is EXACTLY the same game-mechanics AND story-wise whether you save the Rachni every time, or not at first and do the second time or you play ONE match of multiplayer. (or more if your assets are low, but then you couldn't get the best ending anyway, so there's no point)

[Svests]

People are acting like this is some big surprise. You should have known after ME2 that all most decisions were really going to change was a few lines of dialogue.

At least this time there were a couple decisions that actually could cause major changes. Practically nothing changed in ME2 besides a few background conversations.

[mothbanquet]

Meaning is relative to the player but yeah, that is pretty much the impression I got for most of the 'major' decisions in the games, though the Maelon's cure and geth rewrite ones really seemed quite monumental during my first playthrough. Oh, it was easy to predict what would have been different if I had saved Maelon's research but the consequences of that decision certainly seemed far-reaching at the time. And then you have the geth, whom I took every opportunity to weaken during the second game and I certainly felt that my past actions were enough to achieve my goal of exterminating them completely.

Of course, once you've finished the game and you see the numbers being crunched and what does/doesn't happen then it's easy to be critical but as ever, I couch the very first playthrough to be the 'purest' and there were some definite moments where I felt that my past decisions had real weight and (sometimes unforeseen) consequences.

Of course, the most important part for me was to see how all these things sculpted the final battle and the shape of the galaxy afterwards, but that's by the by...

Modifié par mothbanquet, 22 mars 2012 - 04:46 .

[idspisp0pd]

Yeah, the whole war assets mechanic was evidently just a way to tie up plot threads and decisions that they couldn't (or didn't want to) resolve in a way that might actually impact the course of the story. I would be fine with this if it weren't for two things:

(a) Developer comments saying that the plot would be much more variable based on your decisions, since they didn't need to worry about anything carrying over into the next game, and

( The fact that war assets have a very, very limited impact on the actual ending (which as we all know has been discussed ad nauseum).