149 réponses à ce sujet

[Michale_Jackson]

You just need a War strength of 76% or above, or an EMS rating of over 5,000 to get the so called "good" ending, which is technically getting the 3 choices instead of 1 choice at the end. You still have to chose the right color or you won't see the "good" ending.

Key: "good" = sh!t ending, because there is no good ending in ME3 period. Don't believe the hype!

[bjdbwea]

The main issue with the multiplayer mode in ME 3 is that the development consumed resources and time that would have been better spent on the singleplayer mode. If EA hadn't insisted on that feature, maybe the developers would have been able to create a proper ending for ME 3 instead.

[MichaelSD]

Kaelef wrote...

I don't understand all the consternation about not being able to get "the best ending". Literally the only difference between the non-MP best ending and the MP best ending is a couple of seconds suggesting that Shep somehow survived the massive explosion of the Citadel. That's it. People have speculated that possibility even without seeing those few, precious seconds.

There are so many other things you can complain about... This really strikes me as a non-issue.

Agreed, the "different ending" are .. not so different at all.

[MonkeyLungs]

The endings all re-used as much assetts as possible. The cutscenes were largely the same. And the scene with Shep breathing in the conrete rubble looks like he/she is on Earth which is never explained in any way shape or form. Neither is it explianed how your squadmates got off Earth and onto the Normandy, etc. etc. ....

The endings are ripped off straight out of Deus Ex anyway.

[Krogangreetings]

MichaelSD wrote...

Kaelef wrote...

I don't understand all the consternation about not being able to get "the best ending". Literally the only difference between the non-MP best ending and the MP best ending is a couple of seconds suggesting that Shep somehow survived the massive explosion of the Citadel. That's it. People have speculated that possibility even without seeing those few, precious seconds.

There are so many other things you can complain about... This really strikes me as a non-issue.

Agreed, the "different ending" are .. not so different at all.

Not the point we're trying to make

[Acidrain92]

wasted 70 dollars? ME3 was never about the multiplayer anyway. just dont play it lol buy the infiltrator app and get your EMS up that way instead =P or suffer through a few multiplayer matches. Its not big deal.

dont be all butt hurt because you feel inferior to ME3 multiplayer competitors.

[Krogangreetings]

Acidrain92 wrote...

wasted 70 dollars? ME3 was never about the multiplayer anyway. just dont play it lol buy the infiltrator app and get your EMS up that way instead =P or suffer through a few multiplayer matches. Its not big deal.

dont be all butt hurt because you feel inferior to ME3 multiplayer competitors.

again not the point we're making

have you considered people maybe don't have internet connections? or that they don't have iphones? or maybe the fact that EA said it's possible without any of that stuff and it isn't?

[Acidrain92]

Krogangreetings wrote...

Acidrain92 wrote...

wasted 70 dollars? ME3 was never about the multiplayer anyway. just dont play it lol buy the infiltrator app and get your EMS up that way instead =P or suffer through a few multiplayer matches. Its not big deal.

dont be all butt hurt because you feel inferior to ME3 multiplayer competitors.

again not the point we're making

have you considered people maybe don't have internet connections? or that they don't have iphones? or maybe the fact that EA said it's possible without any of that stuff and it isn't?

right, but saying he wasted 70 dollars because he has to suffer through a few multiplayer matches (multiplayer in this game is great btw. You get to play as aliens. Nuff said.) for no more than an hour? Thats being a little overdramatic.

though, you do make a good point about people without internet connections. But honestly who owns a gaming console but lacks an internet connection nowadays? That seems silly to me.

[JPVS]

Why not just alter the Coalesced file and have certain war assets provide 10x more points? Easiest way to avoid multiplayer and to avoid waiting for BioWare to fulfill their promises (which isn't likely to happen)
Assuming, of course, you have a PC

Modifié par JPVS, 12 mai 2012 - 10:34 .

[Krogangreetings]

Acidrain92 wrote...

Krogangreetings wrote...

Acidrain92 wrote...

wasted 70 dollars? ME3 was never about the multiplayer anyway. just dont play it lol buy the infiltrator app and get your EMS up that way instead =P or suffer through a few multiplayer matches. Its not big deal.

dont be all butt hurt because you feel inferior to ME3 multiplayer competitors.

again not the point we're making

have you considered people maybe don't have internet connections? or that they don't have iphones? or maybe the fact that EA said it's possible without any of that stuff and it isn't?

right, but saying he wasted 70 dollars because he has to suffer through a few multiplayer matches (multiplayer in this game is great btw. You get to play as aliens. Nuff said.) for no more than an hour? Thats being a little overdramatic.

though, you do make a good point about people without internet connections. But honestly who owns a gaming console but lacks an internet connection nowadays? That seems silly to me.

overdramatic is the internet way of life LOL , plus this is justifiablly a sore issue for many here due to EA silence it's the fact that it's being forced while we're being told otherwise

as for lack of connection some areas just don't have the broadband (or wireless) strength to sustain online gaming so even if they wanted to they couldn't, or some people just don't like the multiplayer as you said you enjoy it for the fact you can be aliens which is great, but for me it was a dull repetative largely pointless addition and playing as an alien didn't  lift it out of the dullness for me,

[crazyrabbits]

Acidrain92 wrote...

right, but saying he wasted 70 dollars because he has to suffer through a few multiplayer matches (multiplayer in this game is great btw. You get to play as aliens. Nuff said.) for no more than an hour? Thats being a little overdramatic.

though, you do make a good point about people without internet connections. But honestly who owns a gaming console but lacks an internet connection nowadays? That seems silly to me.

The original point may be melodramatic, but its intent is correct: if you have to play a tie-in game to get the "best ending" for your product, that is a tacit admission that your core product wasn't complete in the first place. There will come a time when all the apps become unavailable to download (whether due to the servers shutting down for good or being taken off the BW/app sites), and the multiplayer servers will shut down, and the only recourse for people who want to see the "Shepard Lives" scene will be to mod their own game.

While most of the world is internet-connected, there are still many regions and places in the world where owning internet is a luxury, not a necessity. Let's ignore for a minute the fact that all people who have to be connected online to play the game do so at the whim of EA's servers, which can (and do) go down for any number of reasons - packet loss, server maintenance, server crashes, etc.

This is not the first time EA has pulled this, and it certainly won't be the last. With every one of their releases, they test the waters to see how far they can get away with distributing optional/essential game components on a piecemeal or DLC basis. We haven't hit the mountaintop yet.

Modifié par crazyrabbits, 13 mai 2012 - 02:34 .

[lillitheris]

Acidrain92 wrote...

right, but saying he wasted 70 dollars because he has to suffer through a few multiplayer matches (multiplayer in this game is great btw. You get to play as aliens. Nuff said.) for no more than an hour? Thats being a little overdramatic.

Imagine you purchase a game that advertises a great multiplayer experience, and you love multiplayer. When you start the game, it doesn’t actually have multiplayer at all.

It’s like that.

[ile_1979]

xsdob wrote...

What's so bad about multiplayer again? most of the people are silent and will try to help you win so that your ems goes up. The only way you could lose would be either playing on too high a dificulty, not attempting to get the hang of multiplayer teamwork or combat, and not aknowledging that you aren't good at it and not sticking close to someone else while they're playing. There is the factor of not having an xbox live account but you don't seem to actually be in this camp so I can't see how that affects your experince.

You only need to get your percent up to 60 to get the good destroy ending, and that's just 3 matches on bronze. Plus it's fun to roleplay with your multiplayer character, like I did for my ex SIU batarian sentinel, an exiled freedom fighter forced to work with what's left of the hegemony's forces for the sake of the galaxy.

The greatest thing about MP and MMO is that it is great working with others and fun interacting with like-minded individual from across the world. The bad thing is that sometimes or some people don't want this. Strange eh?

[ccfunk72]

I agree that itis fun working in multiplayer, especially when people want to talk, and help each other out. Usually people don't talk on MP. Some people on multiplayer talk a bunch of garbage (to include racist and bigoted garbage), so I just leave. We can do that.

Bioware makes a good product, but they missed a lot of opportunity when it comes to game play. I would have liked to see squad formations of perhaps 8 to 16 players, come in on a drop ship and are assigned with taking a heavily defended positions of 100 or so Reapers/Geth/whatever. This could have been done using infantry/ground vehicle assault, air assault, artillery or atmospheric bombardment, things like that. Multiplayer teams (a group of friends) could be formed with unique combat unit identifiers, with unit ratings to boot. Your entire unit family could grow from common infantry to Elite. The higher your combat effectiveness rating is, the more cash flow you get to aquire vehicles and weapons, as a combined unit.

[ccfunk72]

bjdbwea wrote...

The main issue with the multiplayer mode in ME 3 is that the development consumed resources and time that would have been better spent on the singleplayer mode. If EA hadn't insisted on that feature, maybe the developers would have been able to create a proper ending for ME 3 instead.

I agree. As a fledgling 3D animator, it is a B!tch to deliver a finished, workable product under strick timelines from (probably) EA. EAs gotta make a profit and hit their milestones for delivery. I think occasionally creativity can suffer from the animators/artists/programers. Then you gotta look at EA/Bioware's budget: do you hire more staff to hit these deadlines or just continually rely on cut scenes to effectively tell the story (so you can get your product "out the pipe")?

ME3 gives us a MASSIVE, awesome world to play in, larger to some extent than the HALO universe. Combat probably as good as HALO franchise (exept for vehicle combat). But in a project like this, it's all about money and resources. You can't deliver a game and go overbudget or miss deadlines....you gotta make money for the business. I think thats the trap game that Bioware has to deal with. Personnally, I feel that Bethesda is able to get around this, because their games feel MUCH deeper and involved. The first time a fought a Banshee, I was nervous.....the first time I fought an ancient Dragon in a random encounter.....I was peeing my pants.

[Mole267]

I haven't even touched the multiplayer. I bought Mass Effect 3 for the singleplayer and the story, not for multiplayer.

THIS is the only reason why ME3 has multiplayer:



Greedy CEO's that just don't know how to live without maximum profit. What are they doing with all that money, anyway? They obviously aren't using it to make better games.

Modifié par Mole267, 13 mai 2012 - 05:59 .

[Gatt9]

Mole267 wrote...

I haven't even touched the multiplayer. I bought Mass Effect 3 for the singleplayer and the story, not for multiplayer.

THIS is the only reason why ME3 has multiplayer:



Greedy CEO's that just don't know how to live without maximum profit. What are they doing with all that money, anyway? They obviously aren't using it to make better games.

Edit:

On second thought,  might not be in my best interests to theorize on this.

Modifié par Gatt9, 13 mai 2012 - 05:58 .

[abaris]

Mole267 wrote...

I haven't even touched the multiplayer. I bought Mass Effect 3 for the singleplayer and the story, not for multiplayer.

THIS is the only reason why ME3 has multiplayer:



Greedy CEO's that just don't know how to live without maximum profit. What are they doing with all that money, anyway? They obviously aren't using it to make better games.

Needs two to play this game. If people weren't eager to pay for hot air, they wouldn't sell hot air.

Not that I like it, but if a company can get away with maximising their profits with minimal effort, it's a sound business plan. So laying the blame on the company is wrong. It should lie with those customers opening their wallets before employing their brains.

As long as this market exists we wil witness a decline in quality noone dreamed of in their wildest nightmares.

[Mykel54]

Producers seem to treat gamers more like drug addicts that as consumers these days. Like: "let´s look how much we can get away with! Let´s give them a bit of taste, then when they are -invested-, we make them pay again!".

Such a ruthless business sense, it´s crappy to see how little ethics matter in our capitalist world, and how the objective of your average joe is accumulate the most wealth.

Games should be made for gamers by gamers, it´s the only way that we as gamers are going to get what we actually want, and not some stripped down to the skeleton aberration.

Modifié par Mykel54, 13 mai 2012 - 06:21 .

[Raizo]

Acidrain92 wrote...

Krogangreetings wrote...

Acidrain92 wrote...

wasted 70 dollars? ME3 was never about the multiplayer anyway. just dont play it lol buy the infiltrator app and get your EMS up that way instead =P or suffer through a few multiplayer matches. Its not big deal.

dont be all butt hurt because you feel inferior to ME3 multiplayer competitors.

again not the point we're making

have you considered people maybe don't have internet connections? or that they don't have iphones? or maybe the fact that EA said it's possible without any of that stuff and it isn't?

right, but saying he wasted 70 dollars because he has to suffer through a few multiplayer matches (multiplayer in this game is great btw. You get to play as aliens. Nuff said.) for no more than an hour? Thats being a little overdramatic.

though, you do make a good point about people without internet connections. But honestly who owns a gaming console but lacks an internet connection nowadays? That seems silly to me.

Broadband isn't available everywhere. Broadband wasn't available where I live until half way through 2010 even then it is substandard and very slow, it took me the better part of 2 hours to download "From Ashes", I appear as a blurry mess in Skype converstations and I shudder to think what the lag for Online gaming might be ( thankfully I have no interest in multi player games ). Did you also know that Online services like XBox Live arn't availabe al over the world, what happens if you are a 360 owner and you own a copy of ME3 for the 360, how are you supposed to get ME3's best ending then. All you've done is highlight how ignorant you really are about anything that does not concern you.

[FoggyFishburne]

Thankfully I play on PC and people are a tad more civilized. Parents should learn how to raise their kids. It's a little more complicated than just giving them a controller and letting the game do their job for them.

[AlanC9]

I mostly agree with that, abaris, but it's not quite correct to say that people who buy that stuff aren't using their brains. Having bad taste isn't quite the same thing as being stupid.

[abaris]

AlanC9 wrote...

I mostly agree with that, abaris, but it's not quite correct to say that people who buy that stuff aren't using their brains. Having bad taste isn't quite the same thing as being stupid.

I haven't said they are stupid, they're simply not using their assets.

And that's something not exclusive to the gaming industry. All too many people don't pause before grabbing for the next shiny piece of nothing.

[AlanC9]

abaris wrote...

I haven't said they are stupid, they're simply not using their assets.

You mean if they were thinking, they'd agree with you about how to value things? I'm sure you don't mean that, so I guess I'm not following you.

And that's something not exclusive to the gaming industry. All too many people don't pause before grabbing for the next shiny piece of nothing.

It's a rational decision to not worry about a $5 expense once a month or thereabouts. This just is not significant money -- assuming you've got a job, that is.It might be rational to think about whether to have another beer or coffee, since those can actually add up to serious money while DLCs just can't.

[MichaelSD]

ME3 looks like a committee decision: tried to make everyone happy, and did not really succeeded with anyone.

Modifié par MichaelSD, 14 mai 2012 - 01:23 .