713 réponses à ce sujet

[XTR3M3]

mauro2222 wrote...

XTR3M3 wrote...

Snip

Love your sig!

Thanks

well that is what happened lol. I finished the game, watched the color coded plot/lore flawed "ending", got some add telling me to buy DLC, FF the credits, then the only option that wasn't an autosave was the Cerberus Base Mission. I just figured the game experienced a critical error and restarted from where the plot still had cohesion.

Modifié par XTR3M3, 11 avril 2012 - 04:44 .

[InvincibleHero]

Korubrus wrote...


Volume is it only a small part. But it is the most important part. 
Its the part which is supposed to show us what our choices did to the world of Mass Effect. How we changed and effected the world.

The ending showed us the rest of the game and many hours invested and money invested was absolutely irrelevant. I could have killed everyone except me and a couple of other people in ME2 - and the endings would be no different.
I'd pick ending A (Control) B (Synthesis) or C (Destroy) and watch the generic ending with one of three colours. Yay, since 2007 everything is leading to this moment... Then you get a generic "One size fits all" ending which goes against the whole franchise.

The ending was a lazy 'One size fits all" job. Its something I would expect from someone so over their job that they just dont care anymore.
It wouldn't be impossible to consider 3 completely different endings, and different ways to get to that ending.
Let alone 2 endings that alter atleast more than the colour of lights.

Some games have no ending. Maybe those changes were to be shown at a later date and they didn't want to spoil that. They had planned to revist the ME universe I am sure. Now who knows?

So what if it is the same choice of endings. Some games have no ending and others end the same period. They gave a choice of three things and choices leading up to that aplenty. You grossly mischaracterize what happens. Each of the endings leaves an indeliably different post game universe. The choice is also harder than the previous ones with more at stake.

Oddly how does it go against the franchise when each game had two endings you could choose that ending you guessed it generically similar. Gasp oh the horror.  They did end happy so if that is your bone to pick then say so.

[XTR3M3]

some games have no ending on purpose because it is very hard to make an ending so they chicken out. That is not why we were dissatisfied with the current ending. We were led to believe, both by their PR dept. pre-release and by past ME games that our choices would matter and the ending would make sense. The current ending lives up to none of those options.

[InvincibleHero]

mauro2222 wrote...

That's your opinion and in fact "proper perspective" it's very subjective.
The ending made ME1 and well, actually ME3 as a whole made ME2 pointless... not my point. It ruined replayability for me, and that's my opinion. The ending it's the most important part of the story, the game is about choices and the ending doesn't reflect one.

To me the end means it's over and if I made it that far then it must have done something right. Otherwise book returned to shelf game uninstalled etc. It doesn't kill replayability for me either. People only let it affect them as much as they want it to. It's just a game don't let it unduly influence you and make you harbor negative feelings.

I'll just have to disagree they gave three choices like them or not. Maybe you didn't get one you wanted but that is not what you stated. Three choices= choice of some kind in my book.

[Kanner]

InvincibleHero wrote...

To me the end means it's over and if I made it that far then it must have done something right. Otherwise book returned to shelf game uninstalled etc. It doesn't kill replayability for me either. People only let it affect them as much as they want it to. It's just a game don't let it unduly influence you and make you harbor negative feelings.

I'll just have to disagree they gave three choices like them or not. Maybe you didn't get one you wanted but that is not what you stated. Three choices= choice of some kind in my book.

Yes, I'm sure fans are *really* happy that Bioware satisfied a strictly legal definition of 'choice'.

Those explosion are definitely, provably, *different* colors.

[AndroLeonidas]

InvincibleHero wrote...

Korubrus wrote...


Volume is it only a small part. But it is the most important part. 
Its the part which is supposed to show us what our choices did to the world of Mass Effect. How we changed and effected the world.

The ending showed us the rest of the game and many hours invested and money invested was absolutely irrelevant. I could have killed everyone except me and a couple of other people in ME2 - and the endings would be no different.
I'd pick ending A (Control) B (Synthesis) or C (Destroy) and watch the generic ending with one of three colours. Yay, since 2007 everything is leading to this moment... Then you get a generic "One size fits all" ending which goes against the whole franchise.

The ending was a lazy 'One size fits all" job. Its something I would expect from someone so over their job that they just dont care anymore.
It wouldn't be impossible to consider 3 completely different endings, and different ways to get to that ending.
Let alone 2 endings that alter atleast more than the colour of lights.

Some games have no ending. Maybe those changes were to be shown at a later date and they didn't want to spoil that. They had planned to revist the ME universe I am sure. Now who knows?

So what if it is the same choice of endings. Some games have no ending and others end the same period. They gave a choice of three things and choices leading up to that aplenty. You grossly mischaracterize what happens. Each of the endings leaves an indeliably different post game universe. The choice is also harder than the previous ones with more at stake.

Oddly how does it go against the franchise when each game had two endings you could choose that ending you guessed it generically similar. Gasp oh the horror.  They did end happy so if that is your bone to pick then say so.

They specifically stated there woul dbe no A, B or C ending to ME3. That came from Casey himself. All we got was an A, B or C ending. And while each choice the ending left the universe in a different state, the Mass relays were all destroyed, which according to the DLC Arrival would have destroyed the system the Relay was in. That is the canon they established with Arrival and the Mass relays. So every major world and population center not already ravaged by the Reapers is now toast. Interstellar travel has been reduced to the darkages of FTL drives and unless you turn everyone into a machine with the Synth ending... many of those left in the Sol system will starve or die.

There was no choice here. Where do you see choice I wonder? Relays destroyed. ME universe basically comes to an abrupt end. No option to tell the star child to go ****** off... which is what most people's shepards would have done. There is no choice.

You liked the ending and saw no problem with it. Many more do not adhere to your view.

[Terror_K]

InvincibleHero wrote...

See I don't get that at all. I expect there to be changes game to game or they will be stagnant. I can understand if you do not like the changes but to expect them to make them one certain way is self-defeating. I keep a broad mind and buy games I feel will satsify me. IF you feel BW no longer does then why belabor the obvious? They are not going to cater to just one fan. they have to do what they feel will be the best use of their resources.

Changes, yes. But not changing the whole formula to the point where the sequel isn't much like the original game any more. You can make improvements and changes to games while not deviating from the core of the game, but BioWare don't seem to be able to do that. ME2 cut out too much of the statiscial RPG elements for instance, and while ME3 brought some of these back, it ended up cutting out player choice, dialogue and narrative freedom instead, which were even more key to the Mass Effect experience than what ME2 had removed (at least ME2 had kept these factors mostly intact). DA2 was almost a complete middle-finger to everything DAO was supposed to stand for and trying to be: a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate that was a hardcore epic Fantasy RPG with the PC as the lead platform. It was none of these things at all, and just ended up being a shallow, short action hack'n'slash affair made for consoles that was half rebooted to suit those who were put off by its classic elements, when it should have be designed for the existing fans.

Other non-BioWare series have managed to improve themselves with each title without straying from the core formula. The Assassin's Creed series is one example, as are the Halo and even Gears of War titles. Even though I think they are generally overrated, I acknowledge the things they did right and how they evolved without changing what they started as. BioWare seem too concerned about trying to nab that perfect middle-ground audience they believe lies somewhere between "Hardcore AD&D nerd" and "Modern Warfare Jock" that they seem to have lost sight of what really matters with their games, and are no longer capable of sticking to their principles and doing their game series' justice.

[AndroLeonidas]

Terror_K wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

See I don't get that at all. I expect there to be changes game to game or they will be stagnant. I can understand if you do not like the changes but to expect them to make them one certain way is self-defeating. I keep a broad mind and buy games I feel will satsify me. IF you feel BW no longer does then why belabor the obvious? They are not going to cater to just one fan. they have to do what they feel will be the best use of their resources.

Changes, yes. But not changing the whole formula to the point where the sequel isn't much like the original game any more. You can make improvements and changes to games while not deviating from the core of the game, but BioWare don't seem to be able to do that. ME2 cut out too much of the statiscial RPG elements for instance, and while ME3 brought some of these back, it ended up cutting out player choice, dialogue and narrative freedom instead, which were even more key to the Mass Effect experience than what ME2 had removed (at least ME2 had kept these factors mostly intact). DA2 was almost a complete middle-finger to everything DAO was supposed to stand for and trying to be: a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate that was a hardcore epic Fantasy RPG with the PC as the lead platform. It was none of these things at all, and just ended up being a shallow, short action hack'n'slash affair made for consoles that was half rebooted to suit those who were put off by its classic elements, when it should have be designed for the existing fans.

Other non-BioWare series have managed to improve themselves with each title without straying from the core formula. The Assassin's Creed series is one example, as are the Halo and even Gears of War titles. Even though I think they are generally overrated, I acknowledge the things they did right and how they evolved without changing what they started as. BioWare seem too concerned about trying to nab that perfect middle-ground audience they believe lies somewhere between "Hardcore AD&D nerd" and "Modern Warfare Jock" that they seem to have lost sight of what really matters with their games, and are no longer capable of sticking to their principles and doing their game series' justice.

Very nicely said. And oh so true.

[Korubrus]

InvincibleHero wrote...

Korubrus wrote...


Volume is it only a small part. But it is the most important part. 
Its the part which is supposed to show us what our choices did to the world of Mass Effect. How we changed and effected the world.

The ending showed us the rest of the game and many hours invested and money invested was absolutely irrelevant. I could have killed everyone except me and a couple of other people in ME2 - and the endings would be no different.
I'd pick ending A (Control) B (Synthesis) or C (Destroy) and watch the generic ending with one of three colours. Yay, since 2007 everything is leading to this moment... Then you get a generic "One size fits all" ending which goes against the whole franchise.

The ending was a lazy 'One size fits all" job. Its something I would expect from someone so over their job that they just dont care anymore.
It wouldn't be impossible to consider 3 completely different endings, and different ways to get to that ending.
Let alone 2 endings that alter atleast more than the colour of lights.

Some games have no ending. Maybe those changes were to be shown at a later date and they didn't want to spoil that. They had planned to revist the ME universe I am sure. Now who knows?

So what if it is the same choice of endings. Some games have no ending and others end the same period. They gave a choice of three things and choices leading up to that aplenty. You grossly mischaracterize what happens. Each of the endings leaves an indeliably different post game universe. The choice is also harder than the previous ones with more at stake.

Oddly how does it go against the franchise when each game had two endings you could choose that ending you guessed it generically similar. Gasp oh the horror.  They did end happy so if that is your bone to pick then say so.

It goes against the franchise because we were promised "Closure" from ME3. We did not get it
We were promised "Not a simple A, B or C ending" - to which we got A - B or C endings which are extremely similar, with very little creativity.
ME3 is the ending of Shepard's journey (apparently). This it should end, not "Oh, kind of end but not really... But the end".
There were plenty of choices up until the ending. To which you get 3 choices - with one ending.
Which is ok; but the 'plenty of choices' prior to the ending make NO DIFFERENCE to the ending. Sure you can get different EMS and things vary slightly in the universe - but not to the degree you'd expect from hundreds of hours of gameplay as the universe's most central person.

I can understand the need to keep it open ended - if this is the case then telling the community "ME3 will provide a satisfying closure to the saga" was a mistake. Either Hudson didn't know what the ending was like, or he is now laughing his ****** off at everyone who actually beleived him.

[mauro2222]

InvincibleHero wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

That's your opinion and in fact "proper perspective" it's very subjective.
The ending made ME1 and well, actually ME3 as a whole made ME2 pointless... not my point. It ruined replayability for me, and that's my opinion. The ending it's the most important part of the story, the game is about choices and the ending doesn't reflect one.

To me the end means it's over and if I made it that far then it must have done something right. Otherwise book returned to shelf game uninstalled etc. It doesn't kill replayability for me either. People only let it affect them as much as they want it to. It's just a game don't let it unduly influence you and make you harbor negative feelings.

I'll just have to disagree they gave three choices like them or not. Maybe you didn't get one you wanted but that is not what you stated. Three choices= choice of some kind in my book.

Well... you didn't understand me about choices and ending, that's for sure

It affects me because I care about it, otherwise... yeah would have reacted like you (uninstalled and all that crap).

[TygerHeart]

I got NWN and all the on-disk expansions. (And Obsidian's NWN2.)

I got KotOR and all expansions for X-Box. (And the same for KotOR2.)

Same with ME 1 & 2.

DA1 I had to get used due to financial issues. However, I bought Ultimate Edition new.

DA2 ... I tried to like. I really did. It just got really... really... really repetitive.

ME3, I'm still enjoying the MP. I'd probably pay another $10 for a PC online pass despite my misgivings about Origins. (Sometimes I just don't get dibs on the TV.) Not going to buy a whole new game though. Especially since my PC can only barely manage ME3.

[Korubrus]

How can I replay a game that I know 'no matter what I will do, the storey ends the same way'.

I see no enjoyment in making all the sacrefices and choices if I already know the answer and the result. The purpose of RPG is so we dont know the consequences or what the ending will be like.
As a result playing through this game again, making different choices only to end up with an identical save is absolutely pointless.
And if they are not identical saves - then why isn't this reflected in the ending cinematics?
So what? We must wait for future DLC (if there is any) to see the choices we made actually meant something ?

[InvincibleHero]

Korubrus wrote...

How can I replay a game that I know 'no matter what I will do, the storey ends the same way'.

I see no enjoyment in making all the sacrefices and choices if I already know the answer and the result. The purpose of RPG is so we dont know the consequences or what the ending will be like.
As a result playing through this game again, making different choices only to end up with an identical save is absolutely pointless.
And if they are not identical saves - then why isn't this reflected in the ending cinematics?
So what? We must wait for future DLC (if there is any) to see the choices we made actually meant something ?

So if you replayed ME and ME 2 I guess you invalidated your own argument.

[InvincibleHero]

AndroLeonidas wrote...

They specifically stated there woul dbe no A, B or C ending to ME3. That came from Casey himself. All we got was an A, B or C ending. And while each choice the ending left the universe in a different state, the Mass relays were all destroyed, which according to the DLC Arrival would have destroyed the system the Relay was in. That is the canon they established with Arrival and the Mass relays. So every major world and population center not already ravaged by the Reapers is now toast. Interstellar travel has been reduced to the darkages of FTL drives and unless you turn everyone into a machine with the Synth ending... many of those left in the Sol system will starve or die.

There was no choice here. Where do you see choice I wonder? Relays destroyed. ME universe basically comes to an abrupt end. No option to tell the star child to go ****** off... which is what most people's shepards would have done. There is no choice.

You liked the ending and saw no problem with it. Many more do not adhere to your view.

I think you misinterpreted the end state of the universe. The free DLC will address that. You can reference the sticky thread above if you want to know more.

What good would that do? Shepard knows things we don't. He knows the crucible is the only way to beat the reapers so he picks from the choices he is given. Players are not always privvy to all the info. BW has their reasons and if I had to specualte it was open-ended/vague to set up the next game.

No my preferred choice is not among those yet I accept them.

[Korubrus]

InvincibleHero wrote...

Korubrus wrote...

How can I replay a game that I know 'no matter what I will do, the storey ends the same way'.

I see no enjoyment in making all the sacrefices and choices if I already know the answer and the result. The purpose of RPG is so we dont know the consequences or what the ending will be like.
As a result playing through this game again, making different choices only to end up with an identical save is absolutely pointless.
And if they are not identical saves - then why isn't this reflected in the ending cinematics?
So what? We must wait for future DLC (if there is any) to see the choices we made actually meant something ?

So if you replayed ME and ME 2 I guess you invalidated your own argument.

Dont see how that is the case.

I finished Mass Effect 1 - 3 times. Renegade, Paragon and Mixed.

I used these saves in Mass effect 2 - things were altered in each of the worlds from importing. Again, I finished this once with each import.

I go into mass effect 3 - the finale, to finally see the choices made from the imports take shape.

I have gone through ME3 with Paragon and Renegade once each and the simularities in the ending has made me seriously consider "Why have I wasted so much time in making so many different choices when I get the same endings anyway".

All I was asking for is some cinematics on my LI, few crew mates - and depending on some decisions made would depend on who/what/where I am reveared as a tyrant/hero.

Or even a monument on earth when could be visited by certain people with writing on the headstone that will have a Commander Shappard quote - picked by your choices and demeanor during the 3 games.

What do I get? Facepalmed.

Edit:
It also doesn't help replayability if there is no codex entries on how this godchild came to be, or even how he is incharge of the reapers. I like sci-fi because they made a set of logical rules and laws to follow.
ie: Mass Effect - its sci-fi through and through, but it makes sence in Mass Effect because it is explained in the game, and everyone is like "Thats cool".

But what is not cool is introducing 'godchild' into the game with space magic and give us no information on how the previous laws and rules dont apply anymore.

Modifié par Korubrus, 11 avril 2012 - 05:26 .

[InvincibleHero]

Korubrus wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

Korubrus wrote...

How can I replay a game that I know 'no matter what I will do, the storey ends the same way'.

I see no enjoyment in making all the sacrefices and choices if I already know the answer and the result. The purpose of RPG is so we dont know the consequences or what the ending will be like.
As a result playing through this game again, making different choices only to end up with an identical save is absolutely pointless.
And if they are not identical saves - then why isn't this reflected in the ending cinematics?
So what? We must wait for future DLC (if there is any) to see the choices we made actually meant something ?

So if you replayed ME and ME 2 I guess you invalidated your own argument.

Dont see how that is the case.

I finished Mass Effect 1 - 3 times. Renegade, Paragon and Mixed.

I used these saves in Mass effect 2 - things were altered in each of the worlds from importing. Again, I finished this once with each import.

I go into mass effect 3 - the finale, to finally see the choices made from the imports take shape.

I have gone through ME3 with Paragon and Renegade once each and the simularities in the ending has made me seriously consider "Why have I wasted so much time in making so many different choices when I get the same endings anyway".

All I was asking for is some cinematics on my LI, few crew mates - and depending on some decisions made would depend on who/what/where I am reveared as a tyrant/hero.

Or even a monument on earth when could be visited by certain people with writing on the headstone that will have a Commander Shappard quote - picked by your choices and demeanor during the 3 games.

What do I get? Facepalmed.

Did saving the destiny ascension change the second time you did it? How about blowing up the Collector base? Now read your first sentence.

[Korubrus]

InvincibleHero wrote...

Korubrus wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

Korubrus wrote...

How can I replay a game that I know 'no matter what I will do, the storey ends the same way'.

I see no enjoyment in making all the sacrefices and choices if I already know the answer and the result. The purpose of RPG is so we dont know the consequences or what the ending will be like.
As a result playing through this game again, making different choices only to end up with an identical save is absolutely pointless.
And if they are not identical saves - then why isn't this reflected in the ending cinematics?
So what? We must wait for future DLC (if there is any) to see the choices we made actually meant something ?

So if you replayed ME and ME 2 I guess you invalidated your own argument.

Dont see how that is the case.

I finished Mass Effect 1 - 3 times. Renegade, Paragon and Mixed.

I used these saves in Mass effect 2 - things were altered in each of the worlds from importing. Again, I finished this once with each import.

I go into mass effect 3 - the finale, to finally see the choices made from the imports take shape.

I have gone through ME3 with Paragon and Renegade once each and the simularities in the ending has made me seriously consider "Why have I wasted so much time in making so many different choices when I get the same endings anyway".

All I was asking for is some cinematics on my LI, few crew mates - and depending on some decisions made would depend on who/what/where I am reveared as a tyrant/hero.

Or even a monument on earth when could be visited by certain people with writing on the headstone that will have a Commander Shappard quote - picked by your choices and demeanor during the 3 games.

What do I get? Facepalmed.

Did saving the destiny ascension change the second time you did it? How about blowing up the Collector base? Now read your first sentence.

ME1 and ME2's choices had consequences. They are negated by ME3 which proves it doesn't really matter what you chose.

No more relays, no more technology, space ships flood the sol system without a logical way of getting back home, Shepard dies (One breath in a cutscene is NOT life), Joker on Normandy on a garden planet that no one can explain how it got there (or more importantly why it is there).

As I said, ME3 negated the good work from ME1 and ME2 by proving that no matter what you do you are STUCK with the bulk of the ending - irrelevant on the type of Shepard you are. I can tell you - My renegade Shepard would have thrown the god-child into the beam - not himself.

Edit: To put it plainly, you play ME1 knowing there will be a ME2 - thus it's replay value.
You play ME2 knowing there will be a ME3 - thus replay value.
(Ie. You know not all the choices you made will not have immediate effect, but should feature in the following game). 
Which works until you get to ME3, which you need to get to immediate confirmation of your choices upon the ending scenes. To show your choices mattered - otherwise you get what we got with ME3 (Similar endings without cinematics confirming some of the more important decisions made)

Modifié par Korubrus, 11 avril 2012 - 05:38 .

[xenu101]

The first couple of pages of this post are nothing but fanboy lies and deceptions.

[Terror_K]

Choices didn't matter in ME3 as a whole, with or without the endings. We were railroaded with things like the Rachni Queen decision, or things were trivialised, swept under the rug or we got weak substitutions (sometimes all three, such as The Council decision). And when we have Patrick Weekes admitting that they never had the intent of ever giving us proper choices and consequences along the lines of Alpha Protocol or The Witcher games because they weren't going to allow players to miss content due to decisions from previous games, then it just shows that the entire trilogy was founded on nothing but a bunch of lies and a complete waste of time in the end. We get to the third part and instead of our decisions paying off and a really diverse and varied game for each player based on what they did, we all get the exact same experience and events, with it merely being dressed slightly differently.

[RukiaKuchki]

I don't think in any way Mass Effect (even the first one) was an RPG - it was an action game with RPG elements giving you more an illusion of choice rather than real choice. Although you got to customise your Shepherd to some degree with the way he looked and responded to questions, the story you were witnessing was always set in stone, and your task was always about getting from point A to B to C, which were set outcomes that you could not change. If you truely controlled the show, you could do whatever you wanted, go where ever you wanted, pick any ending you wanted (or avoid an ending altogether), but in Mass Effect you were always funnelled in one particular direction. I think if you see the game this way and forget about some of the things Bioware promised (I think there was a lot of optimism, over-excitement and bravado) or indeed some of the things you think Bioware promised, you will see the Mass Effect trilogy for what it is - a damn good action game with RPG elements!

[AndroLeonidas]

InvincibleHero wrote...

AndroLeonidas wrote...

They specifically stated there woul dbe no A, B or C ending to ME3. That came from Casey himself. All we got was an A, B or C ending. And while each choice the ending left the universe in a different state, the Mass relays were all destroyed, which according to the DLC Arrival would have destroyed the system the Relay was in. That is the canon they established with Arrival and the Mass relays. So every major world and population center not already ravaged by the Reapers is now toast. Interstellar travel has been reduced to the darkages of FTL drives and unless you turn everyone into a machine with the Synth ending... many of those left in the Sol system will starve or die.

There was no choice here. Where do you see choice I wonder? Relays destroyed. ME universe basically comes to an abrupt end. No option to tell the star child to go ****** off... which is what most people's shepards would have done. There is no choice.

You liked the ending and saw no problem with it. Many more do not adhere to your view.

I think you misinterpreted the end state of the universe. The free DLC will address that. You can reference the sticky thread above if you want to know more.

What good would that do? Shepard knows things we don't. He knows the crucible is the only way to beat the reapers so he picks from the choices he is given. Players are not always privvy to all the info. BW has their reasons and if I had to specualte it was open-ended/vague to set up the next game.

No my preferred choice is not among those yet I accept them.

I didn't misinterpret anything. Every race that came to the Sol system to assist in the final battle is now stuck. Turians and Quarians can not sustain themselves on human food. Earth is a mess to put it mildly, and there is no way to return to their homewrolds by FTL without it taking centuries for the Quarians at least.

The choices he is given are the same either way you look at it. Relays destroyed. Universe over. Period. No closeure... only open ended holes which can not be explained.

Normandy...
Crew transporting to Normandy...
Star Child AI introduced in last five minutes as the ultimate villian...

If you accept what Bioware gave to us that is your choice. Oh wait... choices don't matter in this game where they are suppose to.

Your reasoning behind why we should accept this is flawed my friend.

[AlanC9]

AndroLeonidas wrote...
 And while each choice the ending left the universe in a different state, the Mass relays were all destroyed, which according to the DLC Arrival would have destroyed the system the Relay was in. That is the canon they established with Arrival and the Mass relays.

It's funny. From what Patrick Weekes said (don't have the thread link handy -- sorry) the writers don't seem to have even considered that players might think that using the Crucible on the relays would blow the system up the same way that crashing an asteroid into a relay would blow the system up.

I'd think the writers were idiots, except that never occurred to me either. It wasn't until I dropped by here that I realized some people thought that was what was supposed to be happening. 

Of course, that might just mean that the writers are idiots but so am I. 

many of those left in the Sol system will starve or die.

Where do people get this idea? The quarians have their liveships (you did save them, right?), and the turians won't be more than a rounding error against that population. Everyone else can eat Earth food. 

No option to tell the star child to go ****** off... which is what most people's shepards would have done.

While you can't actually tell the SC to ****** off -- which is a design mistake -- you can just refuse to do what he asks. And then maybe the next cycle does better.

Modifié par AlanC9, 11 avril 2012 - 05:58 .

[Terror_K]

RukiaKuchki wrote...

I don't think in any way Mass Effect (even the first one) was an RPG - it was an action game with RPG elements giving you more an illusion of choice rather than real choice. Although you got to customise your Shepherd to some degree with the way he looked and responded to questions, the story you were witnessing was always set in stone, and your task was always about getting from point A to B to C, which were set outcomes that you could not change. If you truely controlled the show, you could do whatever you wanted, go where ever you wanted, pick any ending you wanted (or avoid an ending altogether), but in Mass Effect you were always funnelled in one particular direction. I think if you see the game this way and forget about some of the things Bioware promised (I think there was a lot of optimism, over-excitement and bravado) or indeed some of the things you think Bioware promised, you will see the Mass Effect trilogy for what it is - a damn good action game with RPG elements!

There's a certain degree of truth to this. It was never quite as freeform as a traditional RPG: you were always Shepard and always a hero trying to stop Saren/The Reapers/The Collectors/The Reapers again and you were always more trying to nudge Shepard one way or another rather than have full control. But the whole thing ended up being executed so poorly in the end because not enough really changed.

The thing is, you can't ignore the factors BioWare promised, because they are key to what the game was supposed to be. Of course there has to be a central narrative that remains largely unchanged, especially in the first two games, because Shepard still needs to get from point A to B to C, as you say. But aside from the fact that the final part should have allowed Shepard to go to not only point C, but perhaps even D, E or F, the choices all ended up being purely cosmetic and rarely had any impact at all. Big choices that should have had major consequences such as The Rachni Queen decision ended up railroading us and not really mattering at all. Same with The Council. In the end the food was the same for everybody, with just a few choices of different sauce, when BioWare promised us a whole table of varied food.

Obsidian proved with Alpha Protocol and CD Projekt with The Witcher games that you can have a really varied game where your decisions change what's going on vastly without screwing with the main narrative. BioWare it seems didn't even try: perfectly happy with weak substitutions, trivialising things that should be a big deal or sweeping them under the rug and ignoring them. And judging from Patrick's comments, they whole philosophy was completely counter to giving us a game with meaningful choices from the get-go, and yet they still kept promising us over and over that our choices would mean something.

They didn't in ME2 that much, and when I said that I had my doubts about ME3, people told me I was being premature and that ME3 will be the game that proves me wrong and where it really does change a lot based on your choices. BioWare themselves tried to claim the same thing, saying they could go nuts and be really varied with the final part since there's no restrictions any more. And what did we get: the most linear, railroading, trivialising, rug sweeping and weak substituting game of the trilogy. ME3 should have been the most varied of the three, but it has the least replay value of all.

And for one example, I remember even saying that after the PS3 version of ME2 came out that things like the lack of choice regarding Gianna Parasini and Shiala would probably bite all players in the rear for the third part, since BioWare are less likely to develop content around characters who in one of the three versions isn't even a factor, even if these two characters are amongst the most popular side characters. What a surprise... ME3 comes out and guess which characters don't even get a cameo, let alone anything more!

And that isn't even going into the massive amounts of autodialogue, the complete lack of dialogue options, the pitiful amount of Charm/Indimidate opportunities, the ME2 DLC squaddie-eque conversation treatment the ME3 squad got, and the complete linearity of the main plot in ME3.

Modifié par Terror_K, 11 avril 2012 - 06:10 .

[streetmark]

InvincibleHero wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

The ending is a small part of the game about .6666% based on ten minutes out of 25 hours.

The ending... E N D I N G

Such a small part...

Put in proper perspective yes. It does not invalidate the enjoyment up till then despite many protestations otherwise on these baodrs. You cannot retoractively remove the joy from your life so people are just doing one upmanship for virtual backslaps from like minded individuals.

Well Mister Lincoln, besides all that, how was the play?

[AndroLeonidas]

AlanC9 wrote...

AndroLeonidas wrote...
 And while each choice the ending left the universe in a different state, the Mass relays were all destroyed, which according to the DLC Arrival would have destroyed the system the Relay was in. That is the canon they established with Arrival and the Mass relays.

It's funny. From what Patrick Weekes said (don't have the thread link handy -- sorry) the writers don't seem to have even considered that players might think that using the Crucible on the relays would blow the system up the same way that crashing an asteroid into a relay would blow the system up.

I'd think the writers were idiots, except that never occurred to me either. It wasn't until I dropped by here that I realized some people thought that was what was supposed to be happening. 

Of course, that might just mean that the writers are idiots but so am I. 

many of those left in the Sol system will starve or die.

Where do people get this idea? The quarians have their liveships (you did save them, right?), and the turians won't be more than a rounding error against that population. Everyone else can eat Earth food. 

No option to tell the star child to go ****** off... which is what most people's shepards would have done.

While you can't actually tell the SC to ****** off -- which is a design mistake -- you can just refuse to do what he asks. And then maybe the next cycle does better.

Please direct me to where anyone has said that destroying the Relays, regardless of how, does not destroy the system it is in. This was established in Arrival and no one from Bioware has debunked this "canon"

How long are the Live Ships suppose to sustain their population and the Turians when things were problematic for the Quarians at best. Sooner or later... the added burden of thousands of Turians will have a negative effect. 

As for everyone else... Earth is a burning hulk of a planet. How exactly is it suppose to sustain hundreds of thousands of survivors, not to mention hundreds of thousands of additional humans in their fleet as well as probably an equal number of Krogans who went to Earth. 

You can't refuse him... you have A, B or C. All the same no matter what. Just different colors.