663 réponses à ce sujet

[Allan Schumacher]

Nearly to a person, those involved in gaming as developers or professional (paid by gaming websites or earning their income through reviewing games) don't ever even touch on the actual plot elements (or lack thereof) of the end. It's like their opinion of the game totally omits the scene with the Illusive Man and the God Child entirely

Well, it'd be silly if every post (or at least thread) I comment on I always included my precise thoughts on the ending.

My first post (a wall of text) I did discuss the Catalyst. I didn't really touch on TIM though because for me things didn't start to get strange until after reaching the Crucible.

[Eterna]

Drogonion wrote...

I went red, and felt like a genocidal betrayer.  This was after I tried everything to kill the starchild-reaper.  I never believed a word the starchild said from the start, and the game railroaded me into the "choices."  I was pissed.

I'm sorry, but at it's core the mass effect series always forces you to make choices, I don't see the point you're trying to make. Choosing between the endings is no different than choosing to kill the geth or quarians.

Modifié par Eterna5, 18 avril 2012 - 06:29 .

[frypan]

Allan Schumacher wrote...


The reason why I'm asking these questions in a directed way is because this topic is related to the expectations that some fans felt were established based on the Take Earth Back prerelease trailer.  By the way a lot of people were talking, if we had scenes like that but actually in game, it would have helped contribute to the perception of taking back earth.  Which is interesting because you don't actually see any alien species fighting along side humans in that trailer.  Not even one of Shepard's companions (only Ashley).

So there was a bit of a disconnect between what different groups of people are saying, and I'm not saying if any perspective is more correct or not.  A lot of other people talked about how they would have liked more missions and stuff like that, to help put it on par with Rannoch and Tuchanka.

My leaning is that "more content" would have contributed to the feeling more, but there are certainly a large number of people that make me think that "we don't need more content, just greater reflection of our allies" might be a larger contributor.

I never saw any of the trailers, so my experience ws not based on preconceptions. The idea that only humans would be involved in a land assault was fine but may have needed to be clarified better - for instance by making it clearer that the fleet was the final result of the themes of cooperation. However in some ways the game opened up the involvement of others with the presence of Asari and Krogan in the land troops.

Personally I would have preferred to see something of my sqaudmates instead, each personifying some aspect of their character or role in the story - that wuld have brought home the closure better than the broader scenes. However thats just personal preference and probably too hard to implement.

[xxskyshadowxx]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I know there are some that found Priority: Earth to just kind of fall flat anyways. Trying your best, do people feel that they didn't take Earth back because of the bleakness of the ending and the sequence with the Catalyst, or because you were underwhelmed by the mission.

No doubt some feel both combined into the lack of any "Take Back Earth" feeling. I guess I'm also curious if people felt the ending made people reflect on the Priority: Earth mission more negatively (people are less forgiving when in an upset mood)


My thoughts:
Priority Earth had some good parts and I think I let myself get caught up in the crescendo. The waves of guys didn't bother me since it made sense to me to be fighting hordes of guys. I did enjoy the sequence at the missiles and found it quite challenging as I pretty much blew all my medi-gels trying to survive it. Though I don't feel the ending really stood out in any way compared to other levels, which I can see being some of the expectations people would have had. The climaxes of Rannoch and Tuchanka still stand out to me as being the most memorable and moving parts of the game, including their conclusions, and Earth wasn't quite like that.

As for the Catalyst and endgame, the best there is is a high EMS ending that shows the Reapers either leaving or getting destroyed, meaning that we probably did take Earth back, but the openness of the ending doesn't explicitly remove any uncertainty.

I did feel like I took back earth...just I didn't have a "WOO PARTY WE TOOK BACK EARTH!" more like a "I did it...but it cost a lot to do so". Just how I felt.

I think this pretty much sums up the way I felt.

For my Shepard, if he is telling the truth, which I believe he is, then no option in front of me accomplishes my goal to stop "The Cycle". If you couldn't tell, I really hate the ending............

Why wouldn't the Control ending break the cycle? I've seen people write that Synthesis wouldn't necessarily prevent the creation of new synthetics, but if Shepard truly maintains the ability to control the Reapers, then they bend to his will. It would seem like the cycle would only not break if Shepard decided he wanted to go and do some Reaping, which seems unlike Shepard (especially Paragon Shepard).




Cheers.

Allan


EDIT:
I had to add this:

1: A D-Day type invasion into London. Call it the Normandy Invasion if you will

Well played.  Opportunity missed by the writers there for sure! 

The only thing I liked about the take earth back mission was the conversations with Shepard's squadmates, Shepard's rallying speech and the conversation with Shepard and Anderson after TIM is done away with. Everything else up to and including the banal ending scenario wasn't all that great, and until someone explains the space magic behind the relay explosions that are allegedly different explosions from all the codex entries...I don't feel earth was taken back at all. It was simply destroyed.

Why wouldn't the Control ending break the cycle? I've seen people write that Synthesis wouldn't necessarily prevent the creation of new synthetics, but if Shepard truly maintains the ability to control the Reapers, then they bend to his will. It would seem like the cycle would only not break if Shepard decided he wanted to go and do some Reaping, which seems unlike Shepard (especially Paragon Shepard).

Control on the whole just annoys me because like two minutes prior, Shepard was arguing that it was a bad idea (same thing with Synthesis in ME1) and then he/she just buys into a Reaper's claim that it's a solution. But what really is annoying is how ill thought the concept is. How exactly will it end the cycle? Shepard dies in the control ending....the Reaper kid says so. You can't "control" things when you are dead...ask anyone who has died at the wheel, or while operating machinery how challenging it was for them to continue operating. The lack of answer they will be able to provide will solidify that point I'm sure. So Shepard can say I dunno "Stop Reaping and go away." or whatever...then he/she dies and the Reapers are no longer controlled...they can simply go back to their merry Reaping way. Horrible, horrible choice...for many reasons in my opinion.

[FatalX7.0]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Fans would have enjoyed it for sure, but I'm not sure it would have contributed much to the question of "Do you feel like you took back Earth?"

Yes, it would have. It shows everything we put together, all the people we gathered and the team we've come to know over the last 5 years. It shows that what we did actually mattered.

Seeing our War Assets in action, seeing our team fighting together, kicking ass, is the kind of emotional impact that people really want.

Just imagining the Rachni fighting, or the Turians and Krogans fighting together, protecting each other, all the races working together. It gives me goosebumps and makes me feel damn proud.

Okay.  Just so I'm clear, would Priority: Earth felt like you were "taking back Earth" if you happened to see the Rachni, Turians, and Krogans all fighting along side you in the levels provided (i.e. no new levels, no new cutscene).

I think it's a hard question personally haha (and one that we can't really answer definitively unfortunately since it's not the case of what's in the game)

So wait..

Do you mean, like..actually seeing other races fighting as you play?

This seems difficult to get into words. I think I know what you mean, but I've never thought about it like that. That would be cool, though, having your war assets actually fight with you.

It could also bring about a better sense of urgency, make things seem more lively.

Modifié par FatalX7.0, 18 avril 2012 - 06:33 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Eterna5 wrote...

Allan, while I don't think that having cutscenes of the rachni or Turians would have made it feel like we were taking back earth; it would have added more to that final battle. Supposedly we have the whole galaxy with us, but for the most part we only see humans.

I think that this a fair comment and I don't begrudge anyone for feeling this way.  It's just about seeing if there are actually separate issues at play, or if there are some "spill over" and that some of the disappointment with not feeling like they took back earth is actually motivated by a stronger, underlying cause.

[Allan Schumacher]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Okay.  Just so I'm clear, would Priority: Earth felt like you were "taking back Earth" if you happened to see the Rachni, Turians, and Krogans all fighting along side you in the levels provided (i.e. no new levels, no new cutscene).

I think it's a hard question personally haha (and one that we can't really answer definitively unfortunately since it's not the case of what's in the game)

So wait..

Do you mean, like..actually seeing other races fighting as you play?

This seems hard to get into words. I think I know what you mean, but I've never thought about it like that. That would be cool, though, having your war assets actually fight with you.

It could also bring about a better sense of urgency, make things seem more lively.

Yeah.  I'm just examining if lack of seeing our allied forces is really two separate (but related/complementary) issues, or if it is really the same issue.

What I meant by my example was more along the lines of: "If you didn't receive an additional second of extra content, whether it be playable or in a cutscene, but you saw your allies fighting at various points during the level, is that something that makes you feel more like you're taking Earth back, or is it just something that's awesome to see?"

[frypan]

"or is it just something that's awesome to see?"

That is the issue - it might look good but would it give emotional closure on the idea. We have to "feel" that we took back earth which can be acheived in much smaller ways by evoking emotions- big bombastic scenes can just end up unfocussed a la Michael Bay films..

[HansODST]

After the enormous scorched remains of the exploded Citadel fall from orbit onto Earth(Destroy ending), the huge armada I summoned to Earth now being stranded at our burning planet with likely not enough FTL fuel to get anywhere and being doomed to starvation, and my EMS rating really just being a number and not having any significant impact on the final L4D2 style mission.......no, I don't really feel like I took Earth back.

[bobafett007]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Okay.  Just so I'm clear, would Priority: Earth felt like you were "taking back Earth" if you happened to see the Rachni, Turians, and Krogans all fighting along side you in the levels provided (i.e. no new levels, no new cutscene).

I think it's a hard question personally haha (and one that we can't really answer definitively unfortunately since it's not the case of what's in the game)

So wait..

Do you mean, like..actually seeing other races fighting as you play?

This seems hard to get into words. I think I know what you mean, but I've never thought about it like that. That would be cool, though, having your war assets actually fight with you.

It could also bring about a better sense of urgency, make things seem more lively.

Yeah.  I'm just examining if lack of seeing our allied forces is really two separate (but related/complementary) issues, or if it is really the same issue.

What I meant by my example was more along the lines of: "If you didn't receive an additional second of extra content, whether it be playable or in a cutscene, but you saw your allies fighting at various points during the level, is that something that makes you feel more like you're taking Earth back, or is it just something that's awesome to see?"

I see what you are saying and I think for the most part, that stuff would lean more to the cool side, than an actual feeling of taking back Earth. Though, if it were the races it would make the assets feel more important or real. But most of the feeling of not taking back Earth comes from post Star Child. In my opinion anyway. It's really your final actions that should feel like you took back Earth and defeated the Reapers. I think a lot of that discussion about Priority: Earth is more the fact that it didn't feel the scale it was supposed to be, which for the most part I was fine with as long as the ending delivers.

[Arik7]

No, I actually expected to fight the Reapers, not their pawns.  It could have been done beautifully if Shepard could get inside of a missle launcher or control the Normandy in a space battle.  Alas, the only Reaper we actually fight in the whole trilogy is the Rannoch Reaper.

Modifié par Arik7, 18 avril 2012 - 06:45 .

[FatalX7.0]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Okay.  Just so I'm clear, would Priority: Earth felt like you were "taking back Earth" if you happened to see the Rachni, Turians, and Krogans all fighting along side you in the levels provided (i.e. no new levels, no new cutscene).

I think it's a hard question personally haha (and one that we can't really answer definitively unfortunately since it's not the case of what's in the game)

So wait..

Do you mean, like..actually seeing other races fighting as you play?

This seems hard to get into words. I think I know what you mean, but I've never thought about it like that. That would be cool, though, having your war assets actually fight with you.

It could also bring about a better sense of urgency, make things seem more lively.

Yeah.  I'm just examining if lack of seeing our allied forces is really two separate (but related/complementary) issues, or if it is really the same issue.

What I meant by my example was more along the lines of: "If you didn't receive an additional second of extra content, whether it be playable or in a cutscene, but you saw your allies fighting at various points during the level, is that something that makes you feel more like you're taking Earth back, or is it just something that's awesome to see?"

Alright, I see.

Yes, even if we do not recieve extra content or cutscenes, seeing my allies fighting during the level will make me feel as if we are actually taking back Earth. I'm seeing the people I worked for, the people that I united, fighting together against the threat we've been preparing against for three games. It makes me feel like everything I did mattered to some extent and that it is actually doing something. But, while some extra NPC's on the battlefield may be a nice little touch, that's just what it is, a little touch.


The issue is that we don't see our war assets at all, in any form.


I'm taking this from the Deviant Art of Arkis.

"We want to see those War Assets fighting. The Destiny Ascension
obliterating a Reaper with it's main gun before being swarmed over by
Destroyers, the Geth armada pulling along side to save her. The Salarian
STG calling in a biotic artillery strike on cluster of Reaper troops.
Wrex and Garrus, on the front sharing a  stern moment in cover, before
nodding to each other, brothers in arms, before charging over the
barricade. Back to back, they face down hordes of husks, Wrex shouting
defiantly, "You think you can take our future!? You think YOU CAN TAKE
MY CHILDREN?!"
We want to see the Quarian flotilla scrambling, all
guns blazing, trying desperately to form a battleline, as one of the
admirals quietly turns to their crew, signalling his ship all ahead
full. "For the homeworld. Keela..." their words cut off as the live-ship
rams a Reaper, exploding spectacularly and damaging two others. We want
to see the Normandy frantically weaving through the wreckage, Joker and
EDI yelling warnings to one another as the fleets explode around them.
We want Tali leading a charge of Geth Primes against a Cannibal gun
line. Rachni drones swarming over a Reaper Destroyer by the thousands,
pulling it apart from the inside. We want to see Grunt wrestle a brute
to the ground and unload his shotgun into his head.

Happy or sad, we just want to see those decisions play out. We want to
see that what we did mattered. And as the battle unfolds, you are left
with the Choice. Do you think you have enough? As Shepard bleeds out,
watching all he/she loved go up in flames, do you take the risk?
Provided you have enough manpower, can you break the back of the Reaper
fleet, though at horrendous cost? Once the battle is over, and the truth
of what the Illusive Man discovered is revealed, the remaining
survivors get the word out that there is a way to disrupt the Reaper
signal, scatter the Reaper armies."


And of course, it's also about the emotional impact.

Just imagining scenes like that sends chills up my spine and makes me feel proud and accomplished.

But then it makes me feel very sad because that isn't what we had.

Modifié par FatalX7.0, 18 avril 2012 - 07:02 .

[ogj835]

bobafett007 wrote...
Also, based on what I'm seeing on the forums, I don't think the DA team should be punished cause we are upset over something the ME team did. I will still buy DA3.

This is opening up a whole other can of worms but you did play DA2 right? If you can't agree that there are similarities going on with having certain outcomes on the endings between the two games no matter what you choose to do during them, I don't know what you'll agree with. It's because of this that if the ME team doesn't pull things together for ME3, i'm pretty much done with BioWare as a whole.

[frypan]

bobafett007 wrote...

I see what you are saying and I think for the most part, that stuff would lean more to the cool side, than an actual feeling of taking back Earth. Though, if it were the races it would make the assets feel more important or real. But most of the feeling of not taking back Earth comes from post Star Child. In my opinion anyway. It's really your final actions that should feel like you took back Earth and defeated the Reapers. I think a lot of that discussion about Priority: Earth is more the fact that it didn't feel the scale it was supposed to be, which for the most part I was fine with as long as the ending delivers.

I hadnt thought about it that way - there are mixed messages in what the final objective is - saving earth, or the final choices. More cutscenes of creatures fighting alongside humans would look good but may not give the necessary closure unless it was made clear what they achieved, something that was lost at the end.

Was trying to avoid discussing the last moments but they do affect how the elements leading up to it are interpreted.

[sorentoft]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I know there are some that found Priority: Earth to just kind of fall flat anyways. Trying your best, do people feel that they didn't take Earth back because of the bleakness of the ending and the sequence with the Catalyst, or because you were underwhelmed by the mission.

Actually the ending has nothing to do with my disappointment with the Priority: Earth missions. As I played it I thought at first it was kind of cool, I mean the fleets coming in and fighting the reapers, pretty damn awesome. But as I played the following missions I got kind of underwhelmed. Two missions whereas the last (and presumably the most important) not only lacked a boss fight but was all about waiting for a stationary truck to shoot a reaper while the reaper just did not seem to care or at least make sure the stationary truck posed no threat. I felt like it was rushed at that point, I honestly felt that Priority: Earth could have used at least another big mission to flesh it out (I mean both Tuchanka and Rannoch had at least 3 missions).

That is one reason why it felt underwhelming for me, but also that it seemed as though the developer team had decided not to bring in the elements of the Suicide Mission where you pick what people goes on what job. I know, that is not Shepards job but from a gameplay perspective it is damn fun and it brings up at least the illusion that your choices matter. To further clarify: I want the war assets to be the squad members in this case. I also felt like Shepard just rolled around isolated from the actual battle, like we never actually got to see humanity and allies roll forward on the ground.

I think that is at least a couple of reasons why the Priority: Earth missions did not work for me and it had nothing to do with the ending (that I will not discuss in this thread).

[bobafett007]

ogj835 wrote...

bobafett007 wrote...
Also, based on what I'm seeing on the forums, I don't think the DA team should be punished cause we are upset over something the ME team did. I will still buy DA3.

This is opening up a whole other can of worms but you did play DA2 right? If you can't agree that there are similarities going on with having certain outcomes on the endings between the two games no matter what you choose to do during them, I don't know what you'll agree with. It's because of this that if the ME team doesn't pull things together for ME3, i'm pretty much done with BioWare as a whole.

yeah, shouldn't have brought that up. I just appreciate being treated well by them, despite my issues with any of their decisions. At least they will talk to us. If the ME team actually just explained why they did the end that way, and why my crew bounced, I would be fine. They wouldn't even need an extended cut. That's all I wanted was discussion and their point of view in depth.

[frypan]

FatalX7.0 has the right quote there in what would look good and evocative. Maybe that is why the last levels did not feel epic - most of the big moments happened in space, which is interesting as the fleet arrival was the last moment I was emotionally engaged with what was happening.

By contrast, we spent the last few levels grinding through some fairly generic looking warzones. Adding a few rachni or other aliens into the mix wont change that.

Sorentoft has it right too - ME2 should have been the benchmark for the final levels.

[bobafett007]

frypan wrote...

bobafett007 wrote...

I see what you are saying and I think for the most part, that stuff would lean more to the cool side, than an actual feeling of taking back Earth. Though, if it were the races it would make the assets feel more important or real. But most of the feeling of not taking back Earth comes from post Star Child. In my opinion anyway. It's really your final actions that should feel like you took back Earth and defeated the Reapers. I think a lot of that discussion about Priority: Earth is more the fact that it didn't feel the scale it was supposed to be, which for the most part I was fine with as long as the ending delivers.

I hadnt thought about it that way - there are mixed messages in what the final objective is - saving earth, or the final choices. More cutscenes of creatures fighting alongside humans would look good but may not give the necessary closure unless it was made clear what they achieved, something that was lost at the end.

Was trying to avoid discussing the last moments but they do affect how the elements leading up to it are interpreted.

gotcha, yeah, that's just kind of how I see it anyways. I do think your idea would defintely give it the scale and impact the mission needs, and make your war assets emotionally important with the scenes using that symbolism. I couldn't imagine a better way for them to use war assets than use the symbolism behind the games philosophy with them in that final battle. I hope what I'm saying makes any kind of sense.

[the_devils_aid]

 DO i feel like i took earth back? No i dont.

Its not the ending that really makes this a no, im ignoring that for the moment. its the lack of feeling i really did much during the battle. 

it didnt have that epic feel, even for a "dark SciFi". i showed up, fired a Cain with a homing upgrade down a reapers butt, talked to a few guys, talked to my crew, then protected and fired two short missles at a reaper. 

i was expecting, honestly, being part of the marine unit moving towards the objective. i was expecting to play a side gunner during the landing, slaughtering reaper fliers attacking my shuttle, while watching other shuttles getting picked off left and right that i couldnt save. not because they were being attacked by invulnerable enemies that i couldnt shoot, but because i was struggling just to keep my own shutttle in the air. 

i was expecting to be part of the marine convoy, but in a much more soldiery role. which was where i was expecting my war assets to come into play. 

for example, rolling down a street when suddenly we get attacked by mounted guns inside of a building, like what happened in the game. except, im down there with the convoy, fighting the guns AND a wave of badguys

based on what assests i collected, 2 things could happen here. i lose a bunch of troops to the guns after the inital barrage while i take out the guns and the wave myself, OR geth drop in a decimate the gun crew, and turn the guns on the enemy.

instead, i felt as though the whole take back earth part was rushed. it was different than what i expected, and i understand that WAS going to happen. but it just felt...off. like they got to it and where running out of time or resources. like they just wanted the damned thing done and overwith. 

as for the last 15 min, nothing i can say hasnt been beaten to death already. either the ME team got it already or its a lost cause.

[Dracotamer]

NOPE

[GBJ13]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Okay.  Just so I'm clear, would Priority: Earth felt like you were "taking back Earth" if you happened to see the Rachni, Turians, and Krogans all fighting along side you in the levels provided (i.e. no new levels, no new cutscene).

I think it's a hard question personally haha (and one that we can't really answer definitively unfortunately since it's not the case of what's in the game)

So wait..

Do you mean, like..actually seeing other races fighting as you play?

This seems hard to get into words. I think I know what you mean, but I've never thought about it like that. That would be cool, though, having your war assets actually fight with you.

It could also bring about a better sense of urgency, make things seem more lively.

Yeah.  I'm just examining if lack of seeing our allied forces is really two separate (but related/complementary) issues, or if it is really the same issue.

What I meant by my example was more along the lines of: "If you didn't receive an additional second of extra content, whether it be playable or in a cutscene, but you saw your allies fighting at various points during the level, is that something that makes you feel more like you're taking Earth back, or is it just something that's awesome to see?"

Wow, so this is a wall of text. Sorry about that.

I think they're two different questions.   The presence of the war assets is about expressing player's choice throughout the game.  The absence of any real difference in how the battle plays out undercut any sense of player agency.   If you kept the Destiny Ascension, it's the same as if you didn't. If Wrex is commanding the Krogan, they fight exactly the same as if Wreav was. etc.  It would be akin to being able to send anybody to do any job in the Suicide mission and have the result come out the same.

The issue regarding "Take Back Earth" for me is about the limited nature of the Earth as a hub world.  There's really one mission on Earth.  This is the first time as a ME player I get to see the what future Earth looks like. Is it like Star Trek? Blade runner? Dark Angel? Jetsons? I have no idea. I'd guess STar Trek based on the few scenes I have before the Reapers attack, but really, I don't know anything. That's a letdown.

From a mission standpoint, Priority Earth doesn't involve a lot of diversity.  Compared with ME2's suicide mission, I don't make a lot of calls and I don't have different objectives.  Creating a beachead on the moon?  Flanking the Reapers? Saving a resistance cell which has vital info? Nope.  I have a Pickett's charge to teleporter to the Reaper's weakspot.  The Reapers become almost Bond-esq. 

Honestly, I think it would be a tough thing to fix in SP. MP might be an easier option. You could create some Sol system/Earthy like battlefields. The Moon, Mars, etc. Mars would be especially easy since you've already designed it for SP).   That might give players a better sense of Retaking Earth without altering the SP structure.   If you had the time to fix it in single player, I'd suggest adding the following:
1. Moon mission with EDI- The moon is EDi's birthplace and where ME1 Shepherd killed/shut her down.  The view of Shepherd looking down on the Moon the way Victus did in the  first act would be fantastic.   Lots of interesting stuff there to play with, I'd imagine.
2. Mars- Rescusing some additional Prothean technology that would give us additional info on the Crucible.  It might even give us some answers why the Reapers are just creating a magical teleportation beam to their achilles heel...
3. Some Earth Location- A clash with Harbinger (doesn't have to end in victory). He's such a well-built up villain. . It seems ashame to waste him.

Just my humble opinion, best of luck with the new DLC.

Modifié par GBJ13, 18 avril 2012 - 07:41 .

[frypan]

bobafett007 wrote...

[gotcha, yeah, that's just kind of how I see it anyways. I do think your idea would defintely give it the scale and impact the mission needs, and make your war assets emotionally important with the scenes using that symbolism. I couldn't imagine a better way for them to use war assets than use the symbolism behind the games philosophy with them in that final battle. I hope what I'm saying makes any kind of sense.

Aye, it didnt take much to get an emotional reaction from me in other moments throughout the series. The bombastic stuff was nice and loud ,but replaced the more meaningful content. We'll see though, if the EC is reviewed by some different writers some of that might sneak back in, guess it depends on what scope they have for change.

I wonder of Allan is taking tips for DA3 by lookng at this thread? Each of the DA games had extended end runs with their own strengths and weaknesses. Its possible that ME3 is a lost cause, but the lessons might have an effect on the ending battles of DA3 .I'm thinking specifically of DAO and the use of various forces to supplement your party. Who knows - DA3  could have the best ending ever as he has plenty of feedback on what people like and dislike!

[bobafett007]

I think he might be. He also just started a thread looking for some specific DA feedback as well: http://social.biowar...862/11#11500399

But I'm thinking the same as you, frypan, that DA3 has the potential to be awesome, and a really well done ending after all this.

[frypan]

Nicely spotted on the other thread, just about the time he stopped posting here. Allan must have been inspired by something someone said about interactivity. All very good for DA3, but come back, we still want to discuss ME3!

The good thing is that many of the same issues seem to have cropped up with DA2 and threads like this on ME3- so yeah, hopefully they take all that on board next time, especially on the endrun.

[Omega Torsk]

I have no freaking idea if I took back Earth. The game doesn't tell me. It just inexplicably stops.

Apparently, the majority of the people posting are having the same problem as well... <_<