1895 réponses à ce sujet

[goodventure]

*reads only the OP, skips all previous 37 pages of discussion*

... THIS GIVES ME HOPE!!! Even though the interview was paraphrased... Weekes, you are awesome. I am really psyched for the extended ending DLC now. :']

[apieros]

tobito113 wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

That's exactly what I assumed but too many people on this forum were all "Oh noes everyone dies, galactic stone age! Doom and gloom! Whaaaaaaa"

Sorry? I thought you were against rage and hatred?

Hater, heal thyself. (Or at least stop applauding jerks and haters. It makes you look bad.)

[chemiclord]

ME2/Arrival:  Destroying a Mass Relay has grave, terrible consequences.  We're telling you, the gamer, it has star-system destroying consequences that are obvious to everyone.  Including Hackett and Shepard.  Even before the Mass Relay is destroyed they know that the Batarian colonies in the system will be wiped out that's why Shepard, and you, have to agonize over your decision.  Is it worth wiping out the star system and all Batarian life in this colony just to buy yourself a few months of time against the Reapers?  Because if you make this choice, the star system will definitely be destroyed because that's what happens when a Mass Relay is destroyed.

ME3:  ...but not every time because there are also 'controlled destructions' and then everything is fine.

I really don't see how this is inherently a problem.

It doesn't kill the weight of Shepard's decision in Arrival, because he/she does not have the knowledge that there is a way to destroy a Mass Relay in a way that doesn't destroy the system at the time he/she acted.  If anything, it might INCREASE the guilt he/she'd feel, learning later there was a way that he/she could have stopped the Alpha Relay that wouldn't have killed hundreds of thousands.

It's a logical fallacy to assume if A + B = C that A + D = C.  It might, but there's no way to know that from the information given.  Just because one stimuli produces a given result, does not mean ALL stimuli will produce that same result.  The reason Weekes provided does not inherently reject/retcon/damage the galactic lore.  It adds to what we thought we knew about it.

As for FTL travel; I'm cautious about the response we were given, presuming it's a totally accurate remembrance to begin with.  I personally have little problem with a "dark age" in galactic travel, and making the victory over the Reapers to be a pyrrhic one.  If I was to solve the conundrum, I'd be thinking of developing alternative means over time rather than trying to improve FTL or repairing the mass relays; it would not only solve the in-story issue but also serve as a literary device to show that the Reapers no longer control the course of the galaxy, and that the path life takes from that point on is their own.

[M0keys]

Jamie9 wrote...

"With a mass effect drive, roughly a dozen light-years can be traversed in the course of a day's cruise." - From the codex (from the wiki).

See. I guess everybody would be okay. It'd take a few months to get the Quarians back to Rannoch but they'd make it.

Not really, considering Rannoch is about 100,000 lightyears away from the Sol system.

Tali's still going to be waiting a long...long time.

Modifié par M0keys, 08 avril 2012 - 03:08 .

[Nerevar-as]

Shaigunjoe wrote...

Ilgar92 wrote...

So EA didn't have resources for Rachni and neutral dialogue options, but they had resources to add Chobot in the game? wow...i have no words.

Haha, yea...there are always questions of why did someone do this instead of do that, I have no idea why they thought allers was important.

I think it was cool to put a reporter on the normandy, but I'm sure they could have gotten something cheaper than chobot.

I wonder how expensive Emily Wong´s actress was. She also made much more sense and made her character likeable.

Modifié par Nerevar-as, 08 avril 2012 - 03:14 .

[TX-Toast]

Oh wow! Weekey leaks?

[apieros]

Chaoswind wrote...

Remember VIGIL gives you a data file that will give you (Shepard) control of the citadel and the relay networth before corrupting everything.

In short the file VIGIL gives you makes it impossible to turn off the relays again and that is at the end of Mass Effect 1...

Which is another plot hole... why is that possible if the main Mack Daddy Big Dawg Reaper HQ AI is running the Citadel? (Aka Starchild.) It's his crib, why does he let that happen?

Time crunches cause plot holes. And this is just another one. They didn't have the time, or the desire, to think through the nonsense they were spewing.

Modifié par apieros, 08 avril 2012 - 03:20 .

[Jamie9]

M0keys wrote...

Jamie9 wrote...

"With a mass effect drive, roughly a dozen light-years can be traversed in the course of a day's cruise." - From the codex (from the wiki).

See. I guess everybody would be okay. It'd take a few months to get the Quarians back to Rannoch but they'd make it.

Not really, considering Rannoch is about 100,000 lightyears away from the Sol system.

Tali's still going to be waiting a long...long time.

Oh. That equals just over 22 years of travel time. Ouch.

But... aha!

"To an outside observer, a ship within a mass effect drive
envelope appears to have blue-shifted. If within a field that allows
travel at twice the speed of light, any radiation it emits has twice the
energy as normal. If the ship is in a field of about 200 times
lightspeed, it radiates visible light as x-rays and gamma rays, and the
infrared heat from the hull is blue-shifted up into the visible spectrum
or higher." - Again from the Codex.

This means it is possible to develop up to 200 times the speed of light. If they managed to upgrade their eezo cores to this, that would mean it would take the Quarians 1 and a half years to get to Rannoch.

That's not too bad.

[Warlock Adam]

Thank god for Patrick Weekes.

Thank GOD.

[snakeoil_sean]

Sounds unfortunately like a lot of stuff, from visual effects and character development to story line, suffered due to time constraints and resource availability.

Pity, I would have been willing to wait another year for a more complete game.

[foxlockbox]

Sigh just because someone on the writing team comes forward and throws you a bone doesn't mean hes the most talented writer there and isn't responsible for the disaster on the same level as the other writers. This guy just doesn't pull PR crap when fan asks him questions from him which imo is fine as long as he isn't causing damage to his or Bioware's position, it doesn't mean hes suddenly the most talented writer there. The whole team has to be talented and they probably aren't all that responsible for the ending, they could have done alot better revision of it if something (IT theory) was scrapped along the way, but still take everybody should take a reality check.

Modifié par foxlockbox, 08 avril 2012 - 03:29 .

[Valdaka]

So, there was going to be more in the ending but they removed it so if people didn't **** about the ending they would have never added back the stuff that was missing? mmmm k

[Kanon777]

apieros wrote...

tobito113 wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

That's exactly what I assumed but too many people on this forum were all "Oh noes everyone dies, galactic stone age! Doom and gloom! Whaaaaaaa"

Sorry? I thought you were against rage and hatred?

Hater, heal thyself. (Or at least stop applauding jerks and haters. It makes you look bad.)

how is pointing out the irrational and childish behaviour of so many people on these forums means i am not against hatred and rage?

And there is no "hatred" in what Funkdrspot said, its just a humorous take on how people acted here...

[Fredvdp]

pikey1969 wrote...

-Why did we only get top and bottom dialogue choices, no middle?

Part of it was resources. Part of it is that Mass Effect 3 is a war story and it's really hard for Shep to feel middling about the Reapers.

My theory is that less choices would make the speech recognition in Kinect more accurate.

The "no middleground" argument does not explain why we usually only get one investigate option.

Modifié par Fredvdp, 08 avril 2012 - 03:35 .

[Kanon777]

foxlockbox wrote...

Sigh just because someone on the writing team comes forward and throws you a bone doesn't mean hes the most talented writer there and isn't responsible for the disaster on the same level as the other writers. This guy just doesn't pull PR crap when fan asks him questions from him which imo is fine as long as he isn't causing damage to his or Bioware's position, it doesn't mean hes suddenly the most talented writer there. The whole team has to be talented and they probably aren't all that responsible for the ending, they could have done alot better revision of it if something (IT theory) was scrapped along the way, but still take everybody should take a reality check.

Or maybe he did, maybe this "unnoficial" interview was the PR teams way to apease the retakers. Note that there isnt any promise, nothing that you can directly quote from Patrick and later point it has a promise that he made, and how everything is vague enough to still mean anything (no answer on gameplay content, or what they will change/clarify about the story etc..). 

[bboynexus]

I don't really see everybody's problem in accepting the logic of the destruction of the Relays at the end of ME3. The way in which the Crucible interacts with the Relay network - thereby destorying them - always seemed like a special case. I never felt as if their destruction mirrored the Alpha Relay's.

[Anduin The Grey]

tobito113 wrote...

apieros wrote...

tobito113 wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

That's exactly what I assumed but too many people on this forum were all "Oh noes everyone dies, galactic stone age! Doom and gloom! Whaaaaaaa"

Sorry? I thought you were against rage and hatred?

Hater, heal thyself. (Or at least stop applauding jerks and haters. It makes you look bad.)

how is pointing out the irrational and childish behaviour of so many people on these forums means i am not against hatred and rage?

And there is no "hatred" in what Funkdrspot said, its just a humorous take on how people acted here...

The only reason anyone got mad was because nobody had any sort of information. Trolls aside, it was frustrating for everyone.

[Kalas82]

foxlockbox wrote...

Sigh just because someone on the writing team comes forward and throws you a bone doesn't mean hes the most talented writer there and isn't responsible for the disaster on the same level as the other writers. This guy just doesn't pull PR crap when fan asks him questions from him which imo is fine as long as he isn't causing damage to his or Bioware's position, it doesn't mean hes suddenly the most talented writer there. The whole team has to be talented and they probably aren't all that responsible for the ending, they could have done alot better revision of it if something (IT theory) was scrapped along the way, but still take everybody should take a reality check.

But atleast it tells you that there are some people with "brain" left...or better said : people who use their "brain".
It also tells you that an incredible amount of content was cut cause of ressources (money, time) which makes me a bit wonder, why they had so few ressources to begin with.
M1 sold rather well on both PC and 360, part 2 did well too.
Not that i`m complaining (i realy didn`t care much bout following) bout missing animations, 2d-bitmaps everywhere, copy n paste textures etc. .. but after reading that so much else needed to be cut everywhere makes EA look worse than before.

[Anduin The Grey]

bboynexus wrote...

I don't really see everybody's problem in accepting the logic of the destruction of the Relays at the end of ME3. The way in which the Crucible interacts with the Relay network - thereby destorying them - always seemed like a special case. I never felt as if their destruction mirrored the Alpha Relay's.

The problem was at the end of the Arrival DLC it implied that any destruction of the Relays destroyed the solar system it was located in.

[MattFini]

Regardless of who was involved and who wasn't involved in writing the ending, I sincerely hope BioWare understands that the WHOLE writing team needs to be involved in fixing the "extended ending".

This unofficial interview gives me a LOT of hope. Especially that we'll see Harbinger again. Main villain in ME2, and yet he doesn't say a word at the end of the trilogy? ... OK.

Anyway, keeping my fingers crossed for something REALLY good come summertime.

[vertigo72]

pikey1969 wrote...



-Why did EDI have cameltoe?

We don't get a lot of feedback from the art department but (unclear, wish I remembered this better  )

It's a plot-hole

[camirish1]

I think people can agree this was the Q/A people were looking for over the past 4 weeks.

Thanks Pat (I can call you that right?)

[camirish1]

vertigo72 wrote...

pikey1969 wrote...



-Why did EDI have cameltoe?

We don't get a lot of feedback from the art department but (unclear, wish I remembered this better  )

It's a plot-hole

Haha omg. You just made my day!

[bboynexus]

Anduin The Grey wrote...

bboynexus wrote...

I don't really see everybody's problem in accepting the logic of the destruction of the Relays at the end of ME3. The way in which the Crucible interacts with the Relay network - thereby destorying them - always seemed like a special case. I never felt as if their destruction mirrored the Alpha Relay's.

The problem was at the end of the Arrival DLC it implied that any destruction of the Relays destroyed the solar system it was located in.

You clearly didn't comprehend my post. No such thing was implied in Arrival. The only thing Arrival revealed was that when something of considerable size  closes in on a Relay at a fast enough speed, the Relay isn't capable of doing anything with it. When it smashes into the Relay there's a chain reaction of catalysmic forces at work.

In both Arrival and the end of ME3 we're dealing with two very different, very special and very unique cases. You'd be ****ing foolish to derive a 'norm' from the sample size of ****ing ONE.

Modifié par bboynexus, 08 avril 2012 - 03:51 .

[sargon1986]

WHY DIDNT THEY RELEASE THIS INFORMATION EARLIER?!?!?? WHYYYYYYY