1896 réponses à ce sujet

[DukeDeren]

Here is my advice to the Writers:

Get rid of the Hologram Kid!

Modifié par DukeDeren, 18 avril 2012 - 12:19 .

[Akiei]

So... even if the ships travel at or slightly faster than 12 light years per day, it would still take about 27 years to get from one side of the galaxy to the other... since the milky way is estimated to be around 120,000 light years in diameter... some of the species fleets are sort of screwed. Let's not forget Rannoch is REALLY far from the local cluster... Even though they might be able to get there with the life ships... thats a long time to wait. Poor Tali =(

My point, the Mass Relays were an awesome idea, and rather than fixing a plot hole, with a plot hole eezo core, why not try and recreate a mass relay like the protheans did? With all the greatest minds in the galaxy in one place, why not give it a shot? =/

I miss the original idea you guys (the writers) were pushing. The idea that the diversity and uniqueness of the galaxy is what made this cycle different from the others (specifically the Protheans as Javik points out). Sort of implying  synthesis is the best ending is  going against some of the big (and wonderful) messages in the story. I know it must be painful for the writers to protect and ending I highly doubt they had any say in =(

That being said, Mass Effect 3 was an amazing game. Thanks for the fun!

Modifié par Akiei, 19 avril 2012 - 06:52 .

[Valorefane Dragonwinter]

A random tweet today confirmed that Mr. Weekes also wrote Specialist Samantha Traynor, a new fan favorite in ME3. Hooray Weekes!

[Akeotwawki]

I'm sorry, there was a lot of content there but my brain got stuck on two things:

1) Joker's sister DIED???
2) What the heck does "talk Kelly Chambers into suicide" mean???

Can anyone clarify? (I'm starting to hate that word)

[PrimeOfValor]

Question: we all know that Bioware isn't change the endings fine, but can they add a new ending like option: Refuse? Ps, i would like shepard uniting with his or her , pretty please, Bioware?

[PrimeOfValor]

I mean Love interest

[Mev186]

Michael Gamble wrote...

The Charnel Expanse wrote...

Michael Gamble wrote...

Cmon - give us some time with the DLC, and let's try to avoid hatin' on Patrick or Jessica:P

Honestly, after all the valid and incisive criticism leveled at the Catalyst and his presence in the ending, why insist on keeping him around? 90% of what's wrong with the ending can be solved simply by retconning him out of existence.

Why not just answer this question directly?

Is your question about whether or not we are going to retcon the catalyst? The answer is no. We've already said we are not changing the endings, but again - there are many things that we *can* do without changing them. 

A lot of folks had questions that we want to answer for them - but just like any piece of content, we are not going to outline the specifics before release. 

Why ? Look, I'm not even going to pretend I'm as good a storyteller than anyone at Bioware, but I honestly cannot think of any way to remedy the many logical fallacies. inconsistencies and feeling of choicelesness that stem from the Catylist's presence. For example in the destroy ending:

Why is Shepard shooting at the tube ? How does Shepard know that shooting the tube would turn on the machine ?

Why does Shepard believe this kid ?

ect.. ect...

It is only when these questions are answered that the ending will truly be fixed.

[Muhkida]

Warp92 wrote...

Patrick Weekes is actually one of the main reasons I'm sticking around ..maybe he can salvage the ending

I concur

Also, is it strange that I picture him sounding like Three-Dogs from FO3?

[Valorefane Dragonwinter]

Akeotwawki wrote...

I'm sorry, there was a lot of content there but my brain got stuck on two things:

1) Joker's sister DIED???
2) What the heck does "talk Kelly Chambers into suicide" mean???

Can anyone clarify? (I'm starting to hate that word)

About Joker's sister:  There's an Asari commando with PTSD on the Citadel during the first part of the game.  If you listen to her entire story (it's a long one) she talks about a girl named Hilary.  Here's the blurb from the wiki:

A few weeks before the battle on Thessia, the Reapers hit the colony of Tiptree, where Joker's father and sister, Hilary, are located. Liara later informs Joker that her Shadow Broker network has news on refugee ships from Tiptree landing on salarian territory. Even though the reports don't come with names and claim that the refugees consist "mostly of children", Joker clings to the hope that at least his sister, being only fifteen, is among them. Liara supports him in this belief, claiming that "right now, he needs to take all the hope he can get."
However, it is hinted by an asari suffering from PTSD on the Citadel that Joker's sister is in fact among the dead, as the asari mentions "having to shoot a farm girl on Tiptree" to prevent Banshees from discovering the group. She recalls the girl "wanted to be a pilot when she grows up. Her name was Hilary."


As for the second...  if you meet up with Kelly Chambers again on the Citadel, you have the option to tell her to change her name and appearance to hide from Cerberus.  If you don't, when Cerberus takes over the Citadel, they'll kill her.  I'm guessing that's what is being referenced.  I stand corrected.  Cyanide pill.  See below.

EDIT: Correction and formatting.

Modifié par Valorefane Dragonwinter, 20 avril 2012 - 03:39 .

[DanteTrixter]

Akeotwawki wrote...

I'm sorry, there was a lot of content there but my brain got stuck on two things:

1) Joker's sister DIED???
2) What the heck does "talk Kelly Chambers into suicide" mean???

Can anyone clarify? (I'm starting to hate that word)

In the hospital you can over hear an Asari talking about how she was attacked on a farm. The girl she is running away with is Jokers sister. It's really sad :/

As for Kelly if you see her in the refugee camp you can talk to her. If you visit her she tells you about how she was spying on you for TIM. If you get mad at her she takes cyanide.

[DaosX]

pikey1969 wrote...

Michael Gamble wrote...

By the way, Patrick, John, Reid myself - we were all ready to answer those kinds of questions in dialogue just like the original OP. It was the whole reason we came to PAX. In fact, a lot of people may have gotten a bit *too* much out of me

Either way, we met hundreds of folks - and we were so happy and pleased that everyone just wanted to talk and have some great convo.

All of us are feeling pax with a sense of...renewal, and we are ready to work our butts off in the months ahead.

Hope you all enjoy resurgence!

Didn't Bioware make an official post saying that they will NOT answer ANY questions about the ending prior to PAX? By saying that he was open to answering the questions contradict Bioware's official statement.

[JerusPI]

Michael Gamble wrote...

The Charnel Expanse wrote...

Michael Gamble wrote...

Cmon - give us some time with the DLC, and let's try to avoid hatin' on Patrick or Jessica:P

Honestly, after all the valid and incisive criticism leveled at the Catalyst and his presence in the ending, why insist on keeping him around? 90% of what's wrong with the ending can be solved simply by retconning him out of existence.

Why not just answer this question directly?

Is your question about whether or not we are going to retcon the catalyst? The answer is no. We've already said we are not changing the endings, but again - there are many things that we *can* do without changing them. 

A lot of folks had questions that we want to answer for them - but just like any piece of content, we are not going to outline the specifics before release. 

if your not going to Retcon The Catalyst can we at least blow him away or tell him to take his choices and shove it and just not use the crucible?

[Valorefane Dragonwinter]

JerusPI wrote...

Michael Gamble wrote...

The Charnel Expanse wrote...

Michael Gamble wrote...

Cmon - give us some time with the DLC, and let's try to avoid hatin' on Patrick or Jessica:P

Honestly, after all the valid and incisive criticism leveled at the Catalyst and his presence in the ending, why insist on keeping him around? 90% of what's wrong with the ending can be solved simply by retconning him out of existence.

Why not just answer this question directly?

Is your question about whether or not we are going to retcon the catalyst? The answer is no. We've already said we are not changing the endings, but again - there are many things that we *can* do without changing them. 

A lot of folks had questions that we want to answer for them - but just like any piece of content, we are not going to outline the specifics before release. 

if your not going to Retcon The Catalyst can we at least blow him away or tell him to take his choices and shove it and just not use the crucible?

If they go with the Indoctrination Theory or some variant thereof, they don't have to retcon the starbrat.  He'll be non-existent when Shep wakes up.

[wolfstanus]

Hey jokers sister was a badass... She took out husks with a stick...
POKE EM IN THE EYE!

On a serious note. By the time I'm done playing me1/2 again I'll have a brand new Shepard to play me3 ash will be alive.

[Sean]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I completely agree that synthetics are created as tools, which is why I
have trouble believing the new hybrids won't need them. As far as we
know, synthesis does just that: merges synthetics with organics. I am
given no reason to believe everyone is now a miniature god that does not
need food, can teleport anywhere it wants, etc etc.

I don't think it's as much an issue as to whether or not we'd "need" them, but more whether we'd "desire" them.  It's all part of the confusion that transcendence gives me.  If we're in the next stage of evolution, does that mean that many of faults (laziness, stuff like that) no longer exist?  Just thinking out loud mostly.

I know this is old but I have to pick that out.

How does the crucible tell what is just a computer and what is an AI to hybridize it?

The only difference between the two are proceesing power and coding so how does the crucible know specifically that this machine should now have organic bit? In the synthesis ending on the biblical allegory planet (that was just awful) it shows leaves with the "synthetic overlay" so if something like that gets hybridized then even something like a smartphone would get hybridized.

Then there is the fact that AI don't have DNA. They are machines with high processing power to emulate sentience.


Finally, just because something "reached the apex of evolution" (also not possible) immediately doesn't mean it deserves it so they would carry on with how they normally would act but with a lot of power. Similar to how Legion in ME2 describes the events that led to the schism between the geth. The reapers offered the geth a reaper body which is similar to the geth's end goal but since they were given it they wouldn't fully understand it deserve it. The phrase "It isn't the destination that is important but the journey."

[GuardianAngel470]

I find Mike Gamble's post disheartening.

[Totally Not Swaggacide]

Should of asked him why our decisions don't matter

[The Angry One]

Michael Gamble wrote...

Is your question about whether or not we are going to retcon the catalyst? The answer is no. We've already said we are not changing the endings, but again - there are many things that we *can* do without changing them. 

You know, the fact that you have a chance to retcon Space Hitler out of the story and you won't take it just makes me sad.

[ZombifiedJake]

Michael Gamble wrote...

Is your question about whether or not we are going to retcon the catalyst? The answer is no. We've already said we are not changing the endings, but again - there are many things that we *can* do without changing them. 

This is the worst thing I could have read about this mess. Good job, ignore everything.

And that last part of the reply - some kind of an outline should be given.

EDIT: Oh and:

Michael Gamble wrote...

A lot of folks had questions that we want
to answer for them - but just like any piece of content, we are not
going to outline the specifics before release. 

Basically suggests "we're ignoring the main criticisms and we will just explore the consequences of the ending".

Modifié par ZombifiedJake, 21 avril 2012 - 11:57 .

[Valorefane Dragonwinter]

I hate to repeat myself, but:

If they go with the Indoctrination Theory or some variant thereof, they don't have to retcon the starbrat or "change" the existing ending. It'll all be non-existent when Shep wakes up.

[Totally Not Swaggacide]

Some of these things are bogus

[Valorefane Dragonwinter]

Totally Not Swaggacide wrote...

Some of these things are bogus

That's pretty open to interpretation.  Which things, and how are they bogus?

Because I've no idea if you mean the OP, or the subsequent posts, or something else entirely.

[MaximizedAction]

Valorefane Dragonwinter wrote...

I hate to repeat myself, but:

If they go with the Indoctrination Theory or some variant thereof, they don't have to retcon the starbrat or "change" the existing ending. It'll all be non-existent when Shep wakes up.

...and just continue the story from there...

At this point we have NO idea what their DLC will be about - besides the rumored Omega. With all their comments about how "the DLC will make sense", it might just as well continue right after ME3's ending, and I'm not talking about EC.

At this point, we don't know ANYTHING, yet.

[luzburg]

i only hope and the shuld have crew/LI shepard reunificatuon at destroy(shepard lives) ending. that and at syntesis/control the LI is pregnant anyway that would make alot of pepole happy

[ShepnTali]

In Patrick Weekes I trust. Just don't know how much pull he has here.