4048 réponses à ce sujet

[WhereEternityEnds]

I too am one of those people Blue Storm. Their handling of this entire debacle is appalling to be quite honest. That's all any of us can do at this point: vote with our wallets. Bioware ain't getting another cent from me. The only reason I'm still on this damnable site still is to let them know it as much as possible.

[chevyguy87]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Honestly, this ME3 should have been ME3: The Reaper War Part 1. There was no way to actually do a decent job of the story in one game.

I said this exact same thing 20 pages back so no you are not the only one thinking that. 

"Personally, and in my own opinion Mass Effect should not have been a trilogy, it should have at bare minimum been at least 4 games. The universe is too large and the story is too expansive and detailed to cut it down to 2.9 games." 

I would have been fine with waiting an additional year for a possible tri-disc setup or expansion packs or something of the sort. It is rather obvious that ME3 has so many things missing from it. Which is what happens, when one chooses to do too many things at once. ME3 just doesn't feel like it belongs in the series, due to the following two reasons.

1) Too much content missing. 
-Lack of any sort of character devlopment, no further explanation of past events, an almost complete disconnect from the Arrival (which I thought it was supposed to be a bridging DLC), good ideas replaced with ones that make us sit back and scratch our heads and wonder why, Reaper lore and backstory.

2) Poor delivery of what was contained in the game.
The Crucible (although not needed in the first place) gets thrown at us from left field with no past explanation of it at all, all of a sudden the Reapers are invincible gods, Cerberus turned into a full fledged army overnight, Killing off Kal Reegar in a damned email, ballet dancer Kai Leng, the endings and their revisions of course, and poor use and execution of war assets, (I could go on for days with what ME3 does wrong) 

After seeing how badly they balked Shepard's story, I no longer have trust in Bioware. In my opinion, they are not the same company anymore.

[BlueStorm83]

---  The Crucible's biggest problem as a MacGuffin is that we never feel like we really NEED it.  Our only real "defeat" was on Thessia, and that was a minor defeat.  I never felt like I was on borrowed time.

Many occasions of the game went like this.  Shepard goes on Mission.  Oh no, A REAPER!  Shepard Escapes/sneaks past/KILLS that Reaper.  Reapers are CLEARLY nothing compared to our hero, Shepard, who has made a career out of saving the Galaxy.

Honestly, after Shepard tells the Starboy to screw off, he should fire his Carnifex a ton of times to get it really really hot, then use it to cauterize his wounds.  Then Shepard charges down into the Citadel, meets up with Jacob, Kolyat, Bailey, Conrad, Kelly, Dr. Michel/Chakwas, any other Citadel Specters who happen to be on the Citadel, and takes the Citadel back.  Then they use the citadel (which is a big ol' mass relay) in conjunction with the Crucible (The Duracel of Doom) to just fire things at the Reapers.  Like, even a single grain of sand, with enough of a Mass Effect Field, should blow a hole clear through a Reaper.  Codex from ME1 supports this in theory.

---  If they wanted the Reapers to be seen as Invincible and Godlike, they needed to show us more of them.  Like, maybe we can't win because of how horribly outnumbered we are.  Show our huge-ass victory fleet, then zoom out and show the Reaper fleet as, like, 40 times the size.  And have more Reapers keep showing up.  Instead, we have to assume that our commanders smoked some Derpweed before going into battle.  Reapers are NOT designed for space battle.  They're big as all hell, which means they'll need a LOT of mass effect-ing to lower their mass to reduce their intertia for turning and things like that.  And the majority of them have ONE gun that's only forward facing.  In fact, only Harbinger seems to have multiple weapons.  Menacing on the ground, against teeny little antlike mans, but in space?  Surrounded by more manouverable weapons platforms?  No, honestly, we have the advantage.

Look up the "Siafu."  It's a species of ant.  They swarm anything in their way and kill them.  They occasionally kill people.  How?  ASPHYXIATION.  They get inside and CLOG THEIR LUNGS.  Sometimes, the "big strong" whatever has a horrible disadvantage because they can't react fast enough.

---  And yeah, BioWare's handling of this kinda sucks.  They're all over the place in their responses and routinely contradicting each other.  I mentioned that to a relative, and she said to me "Sounds like a split in the company."

That got me thinking, maybe that's what this is?  Maybe there's internal drama that they don't want to mention in reality.  Perhaps pretty soon we'll see an offshoot company, like when the Final Fantasy guys got sick of churning out billions of half-sequels and left to form Mist Walker and gave me Lost Odyssey (Kaim Argonar is a ****ing PIMP.  Also, his wife is probably the hottest immortal magical nerd girl from a parallel universe ever.  Though that's a small club...)  In the event that an offshoot company does form, keep your eyes on it.

[V-rcingetorix]

3DandBeyond wrote...


There is much that isn't known about the reapers.  Sovereign says they are independent-Legion backs this up in ME2.  He differentiates the geth from the reapers by saying the geth are interdependent.  But you don't know what the effect might be of destroying capital ships.  The reapers are not resistant to toxins, but the geth are.  So, even if you don't send geth in with cains or to re-program the reapers, send them in to poison them. 

The geth and EDI have abilities that are never used.  They contain reaper code.  The virus that the reapers used to infect the heretic geth was studied by the true geth and they may have some knowledge of how to create something like that that could be used against the reapers.  It could be sent via the indoctrination signal that uses some form of quantum entanglement communication.

Have to disagree here; the Geth in ME2 were not infected by the Reaper code, part of the Geth decided to break off from the group and chase the Reapers. Legion states that the Heretics had been given a choice of staying, or leaving. Evidence continues in that vein when Legion notices that the Heretics had accurate maps of the Geth patrol routes, and can't understand how the two groups became so different (loyalty mission, next to the servers). The code the Heretics were going to use was co-developed by Reapers and Geth, stored on a Reaper quantum computer device.

Legion can re-write the code to reprogram the Geth "nice" but I doubt the Reapers would have let their root kits into the hands of beings so much lower than themselves.

I like the idea about killing the support first...standard RPG tactic.

3DandBeyond wrote...
What's so frustrating is that instead of developing some cool ideas that would show the galaxy has all these independent minds that are working together, the writers chose to put the game on auto-pilot, send in one person to determine the fate of the galaxy. 

When has Shepard ever made a choice without consulting anyone else?  Rewrite or destroy the heretic geth?  What do you think Legion?  Fight or not?  What do you think Grunt?  Tell the Admirals about your father?  What do you think Tali?  Ready to fight the Collectors?  What do you think Jacob?  Cure the genophage?  What do you think Mordin?  Make a galaxy changing choice based on what the god controller of our enemies says?  I got this one.

Here, I agree 100%. No dialogue, no give/take, not even a witty badinage. Even the "inspiring speeches" were below ME2 quality.

Example: ME2: "This isn't how we planned this, but this is where we're at....no one is coming out of this without scars (Grunt slams fists)...Make me proud. Make yourselves proud!"

ME3: "We've gone through a lot together, we;ve been soldiers..friends..."

Kinda goes out with a whimper. Nice try, but whimper.

[chtyla]

so shep is alive in a pile of rubble we dont se him saved or anything but we see everything fixed. Hmm must be in the only pile of ruble in the universe they didnt check while they were fixing everythimg

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

The end times will come, my friends, not with a bang, but with a sigh.

[Zan51]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Too bad my Shepard's conscience wouldn't let her choose those so she will never see those futures.

She wouldn't look forward to being the god of serial killers that have eaten people.  And wouldn't want to have to allow reapers to fight back if some people try to destroy them.
She woudn't force unnatural internal alterations upon all people in the galaxy and deny them the gift of learning, instead giving them knowledge from the perspective of a demented AI.
She wouldn't commit genocide and kill someone she helped find life (EDI) for the sake of expediency.
I wouldn't allow her to cause the deaths of trillions of people and to commit suicide in choosing the middle finger option of Bioware.

My Shepard's goal was the destruction of the reapers and an adherence to her values-concern for all life and not just those the writers say deserve to live.  She doesn't think that people that can't self-determine and are under reaper control of any sort are really alive.  She does think choosing one of her enemy's choices is wrong.

My Shepard says that she'd rather get a game over and won't let me buy any DLC or future ME product that does not allow her to find a valid way to win against the reapers in this galaxy and at this time. 

My Shepard may be bossy, but she isn't evil.

Once again, nail on the head. My Shepard believes what Hackett said way back in the beginning, "Dead Reapers is how we win this." Not synthethis, or control, but Destroy!

Modifié par Zan51, 25 juillet 2012 - 04:37 .

[V-rcingetorix]

BlueStorm83 wrote...


Honestly, after Shepard tells the Starboy to screw off, he should fire his Carnifex a ton of times to get it really really hot, then use it to cauterize his wounds.  Then Shepard charges down into the Citadel, meets up with Jacob, Kolyat, Bailey, Conrad, Kelly, Dr. Michel/Chakwas, any other Citadel Specters who happen to be on the Citadel, and takes the Citadel back.  Then they use the citadel (which is a big ol' mass relay) in conjunction with the Crucible (The Duracel of Doom) to just fire things at the Reapers.  Like, even a single grain of sand, with enough of a Mass Effect Field, should blow a hole clear through a Reaper.  Codex from ME1 supports this in theory.

Forget ME1 (the developers evidentally did), check the codex for the CAIN in ME2. That fires only a tiny particle to make a big boom...evidentally big enough to destroy a Hellfire (sp?) anti-space gun.

BlueStorm83 wrote...
---  If they wanted the Reapers to be seen as Invincible and Godlike, they needed to show us more of them.  Like, maybe we can't win because of how horribly outnumbered we are.  Show our huge-ass victory fleet, then zoom out and show the Reaper fleet as, like, 40 times the size.  And have more Reapers keep showing up.  Instead, we have to assume that our commanders smoked some Derpweed before going into battle.  Reapers are NOT designed for space battle.  They're big as all hell, which means they'll need a LOT of mass effect-ing to lower their mass to reduce their intertia for turning and things like that.  And the majority of them have ONE gun that's only forward facing.  In fact, only Harbinger seems to have multiple weapons.  Menacing on the ground, against teeny little antlike mans, but in space?  Surrounded by more manouverable weapons platforms?  No, honestly, we have the advantage.

Soverign showed having multiple weapons back in ME1 (fired from their leg tips). But, skipping ME1, the Reapers have more accurate long-range weapons, with higher damage potential. Plus, their drone-thingys (last seen guarding the Omega Mass Relay) seem to have maneuverability equal to that of Alliance fighters.

But this raises an interesting question; where's the chaff? Way back in WWI/II navy ships had smoke machines to confuse the air, and used AA guns to fire more of it at incoming aircraft. Now, I don't want to go to the point of "Don't Woosh!," but wouldn't a few metric tons of sand, even unaccelerated, provide a smoke cloud? And if accelerated (even at a planet), wouldn't it cause damage? Earth's atmosphere collects a few tons of particles from space every year. A little more won'd hurt it.

[Twistedfaith]

I still believe the cannon ending was to destroy the reapers; ergo, the red one. I also believe that the extended cut was well thought through and created, personally, I am pleased with what they did; a saving grace, so to speak.

Yes, the game should've been atleast 4, but I still think this is just that start. Look what the those who created Halo did, make us all think Chief' died, and what do you know? Halo4. - I think it could go one of three ways from here on out.

1. An MMO.
2. BW carry on from where we left off from the destroy ending, you know, Shepard surviving; a new story ensued.
3. A follow-up from the grandpa and kid waaay in the future, said child growing up and trying to find traces of Shepard's legacy. An interesting arc when the kid finds out Shep' wasn't acctually 'sacrificed/or dead' and again choosing what I stated to be the 'cannon' end, as come on, we've all been lead along to destroy the reapers from the start.

That's just my hope/thoughts.

Modifié par Twistedfaith, 25 juillet 2012 - 05:31 .

[V-rcingetorix]

How do EDI/Geth survive, in your opinion?

[Twistedfaith]

If you want to pull that one, you should've said/asked "how did Commander Shepard survive", being part synthetic too, but apparently, should that be him/her taking a breath in the rubble on earth, who know's.

Modifié par Twistedfaith, 25 juillet 2012 - 06:02 .

[V-rcingetorix]

Lol, I think there's a good chance of EDI/Geth surviving, if Shepard did.

Think about it, Shepard is supposed to die due to being synthetic, partially.

EDI was pure starship prior to the Dr. EVA android upgrade; Geth are software programs with backups all over the galaxy.

If Shepard can survive having his pacemaker/synapse connectors/bone marrow splints go offline, why not the pure synthetics?

Technically speaking, the Normandy survived, so wouldn't the software on board survive? People can't calculate physics mentally (okay, they can, but not to the extent a c-drive would require). Geth would probably have at least one solid state hard drive buried somewhere, and the Quarians should remember how to repair the Geth, if not.

[3DandBeyond]

bdamien76 wrote...

I don't know if everything have already been said but i would like to know if Shepard can survive with no romance.
If yes, who have the name plaque in his hands.

I think it defaults usually to Liara or Garrus.

[V-rcingetorix]

Yep. Made a Lone-Wolf file, it defaulted to Garrus for me.

[3DandBeyond]

V-rcingetorix wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...


There is much that isn't known about the reapers.  Sovereign says they are independent-Legion backs this up in ME2.  He differentiates the geth from the reapers by saying the geth are interdependent.  But you don't know what the effect might be of destroying capital ships.  The reapers are not resistant to toxins, but the geth are.  So, even if you don't send geth in with cains or to re-program the reapers, send them in to poison them. 

The geth and EDI have abilities that are never used.  They contain reaper code.  The virus that the reapers used to infect the heretic geth was studied by the true geth and they may have some knowledge of how to create something like that that could be used against the reapers.  It could be sent via the indoctrination signal that uses some form of quantum entanglement communication.

Have to disagree here; the Geth in ME2 were not infected by the Reaper code, part of the Geth decided to break off from the group and chase the Reapers. Legion states that the Heretics had been given a choice of staying, or leaving. Evidence continues in that vein when Legion notices that the Heretics had accurate maps of the Geth patrol routes, and can't understand how the two groups became so different (loyalty mission, next to the servers). The code the Heretics were going to use was co-developed by Reapers and Geth, stored on a Reaper quantum computer device.

Legion can re-write the code to reprogram the Geth "nice" but I doubt the Reapers would have let their root kits into the hands of beings so much lower than themselves.

I like the idea about killing the support first...standard RPG tactic.

I'm sure I did get that kind of twisted but part of the point is the heretics had been contacted by the reapers - Legion says the reapers sought out the heretics.  I definitely remembered the virus wrong and re-did that section of ME2 today before seeing your response here.  I know Legion got rid of the virus, I still do wonder if it theory something similar could have been attempted against the reapers, but probably not unless they'd found a way as you said to access the reapers' rootkit.

[Jym vas Normandy]

Twistedfaith wrote...

I still believe the cannon ending was to destroy the reapers; ergo, the red one. I also believe that the extended cut was well thought through and created, personally, I am pleased with what they did; a saving grace, so to speak.

Yes, the game should've been atleast 4, but I still think this is just that start. Look what the those who created Halo did, make us all think Chief' died, and what do you know? Halo4. - I think it could go one of three ways from here on out.

1. An MMO.
2. BW carry on from where we left off from the destroy ending, you know, Shepard surviving; a new story ensued.
3. A follow-up from the grandpa and kid waaay in the future, said child growing up and trying to find traces of Shepard's legacy. An interesting arc when the kid finds out Shep' wasn't acctually 'sacrificed/or dead' and again choosing what I stated to be the 'cannon' end, as come on, we've all been lead along to destroy the reapers from the start.

That's just my hope/thoughts.

I agree with you here, but if Shepard really is dead......I'll be okay with that. You're right, we all know Shepard was locked in for the person to rid the galaxy of the Reapers. I think everyone knew going into Mass Effect 3, whether they actually realize it themselves or not, that Shepard was probably going to die to end this conflict once and for all. I mean, there is only so many times someone can cheat death and beat impossible odds before everything catches up with them, even when it comes to Shepard.
In a Mass Effect 4 I wouldn't necessarily want a follow up playing as that kid, but rather get to see where everyone is at and what they are up to as maybe a character where we could select species and all that(Would be epic to pick character species right? :happy:). I like this idea of going to find traces of Shepard's legacy though. And it'll be interesting to see what new enemy/conflict they conjure up. (Maybe contact with a new hostile race?)

Modifié par Jym vas Normandy, 25 juillet 2012 - 01:11 .

[BlueStorm83]

--- It's never been about Shepard surviving for me- though that would be nice. What I really want is, if Shepard really DOES have to die, let it be for something that matters. As it stands now, you can die to Let the Reapers Survive, or you can die to Let the Reapers bring about their actual primary goal, which Starboy says he's tried multiple times, of Synthesis. Can Shepard die to save EDI and the Geth, who are a person and a race that I actually CARE about? No. Can Shepard die to save Anderson? No. Can Shepard die to save the people on the Citadel, who seem to be Derping along with their lives, on taxis and in skyscrapers, as a race is harvested up in the Citadel Tower? No. Instead, we can heroically sacrifice ourselves to shaft the galaxy in three flavors, or we can save our lives to shaft our friends. Neither is even 1/4 of acceptable.

[3DandBeyond]

BlueStorm83 wrote...

--- It's never been about Shepard surviving for me- though that would be nice. What I really want is, if Shepard really DOES have to die, let it be for something that matters. As it stands now, you can die to Let the Reapers Survive, or you can die to Let the Reapers bring about their actual primary goal, which Starboy says he's tried multiple times, of Synthesis. Can Shepard die to save EDI and the Geth, who are a person and a race that I actually CARE about? No. Can Shepard die to save Anderson? No. Can Shepard die to save the people on the Citadel, who seem to be Derping along with their lives, on taxis and in skyscrapers, as a race is harvested up in the Citadel Tower? No. Instead, we can heroically sacrifice ourselves to shaft the galaxy in three flavors, or we can save our lives to shaft our friends. Neither is even 1/4 of acceptable.

Exactly.  Only for me one happier ending that recognizes that Shepard already gave up enough to save everyone else and at long last deserves a life is needed-for me.

I was a teenager in the '70s and prior to that time (and the '60s), most movies had some great ways to a happy ending.  There were very few that ever really pushed the envelope and went for a twist or a bad guys win or the hero dies type of thing.  In my teenage years movies started to end on sad, depressed, bag guys win notes.  Movies that didn't wer the exception and not considered artistic.  Well you know what happened at the end of the '70s.  Biggest movie of the time and for a long time thereafter and you know what worked for it.  It was "dark" enough and it didn't dwell on that.  People needed it to have a happy ending.  Star Wars.  It was predictable, but then so was Rosemary's Baby.  I'd go for Star Wars every time because to me that is entertainment.  And I'd say I'm not alone.  This is what I think Bioware doesn't get.  I'm not saying they need to listen just to a few people, but they do need to take a lesson from all this.  A lot of people say Rosemary's Baby is artistic and great and all it should be.  I'd take Star Wars every time and millions of other people agree.

I do also agree with what you are saying.  If ME3 had some truly awesome endings that showed Shepard sacrificing his/her life for all the others (not in forcing stupid realities on them), I'd play those, but I'd still want some truly "hero" deserves to live ending to go back to as well.  And they didn't understand that either.  Even if one ending was the canon happy ending, so what?  That doesn't mean that people that really "need" that happy ending wouldn't play the others.  And they could have made the happier ending harder to get, not sadistically gratuitously genocidal.

[TGiNcRySiS]

I wonder if Bioware peeps sit and watch this thread grow and laugh at it. I don't think they even comprehend why people that don't like the endings actually don't like them. I really don't want to look back through this thread, does anyone know if anyone from Bioware said anything? I would love someone from Bioware to come out even if its anonymously to say the ending sucked.

I know they know it. They just don't give a crap about the end product anymore. It's dollars and cents. Artistic integrity? Sure..you trying to sell ice to Eskimos? I had this conversation with my gaming mates last night. We are pretty disgusted with ourselves that we purchased a BF3 Premium subscription. We gave more money to the EA monster.

[3DandBeyond]

My standard statement now is they can head canon any further money from me.

I have begun to realize that this ending borrowed even more heavily from 2001: A Space Odyssey than many other sources. Visuals from the movie, ideas that are more fully explained in Clarke's book. The star child in 2001 could be meant to suggest many things-the evolution of organics and their birth into a new state of being, or it represents the beings that advanced organics. These beings ran the gamut of evolution from being organic to being biomechanical to being pure energy. They planted monoliths on Earth and elsewhere in order to advance races and they saw themselves as helping races.

In fact what's really eerie and kind of funny (not) is that Clarke wanted people to more fully understand what 2001 meant through repeated reading of the book and viewings of the movie. But Kubrick found the book to be less and less relevant and didn't want people to refer to it. He wanted the movie ending to be ambiguous and interpreted by the viewer. Sound familiar?

[BlueStorm83]

--- At the current moment, I think that BioWare would need at least 4 unrelated games at top notch quality to get me back as that picture of Fry (Shut up and take my money!) or possibly 3 games in a trilogy that don't fall apart at the end.

--- 2001 ended weird. I read the sequels, and they all were interesting, but as open and ambiguous as the ending of the movie was, it was a movie- a definite narrative that went from Point A to Point Cucumber. There was no variation at any point for different viewers. Kubrick can make the ending's impressions as vague as he wants, it still had an actual definite ending. And if anyone dislikes the movie, they've wasted two hours, not two hundred.

Although there are instances with the 2001 series that, just like Mass Effect, disregards wholeheartedly what happens in the previous installments. For instance, in 2001, the Monolith wasn't floating in space, it was on a Moon. And it wasn't near Jupiter, it was around Saturn. Both were retconned in later books. Clarke said "Assume that they're following similar events in parallel universes," or something to that effect. To me, it was a bull**** cop out, when you make canon, stick to it, even if you dislike that canon later. Or just don't follow up that series.

--- Unrelated note- just had a Weight Watchers egg and cheese on a muffin. Was surprisingly good. Amazing that Diet Food, that I assumed I would be disappointed with, has seriously impressed me, while a quadruple A game series that I assumed would be the best thing ever pooped itself and demanded that I change it's rainbow colored diaper.

[xDeluCx]

A cliff hanger ending for Shepard was a bad move one because cliff hangers are certain suppose to have follow up anything - game, movie, dlc but bioware is not doing any of that I know they are not making a movie because that would be bizzare and I know they won't make a game because they are done with Shepard and they are too stubborn to make dlc so their cliff hanger idea was a failure.

[AresKeith]

xDeluCx wrote...

A cliff hanger ending for Shepard was a bad move one because cliff hangers are certain suppose to have follow up anything - game, movie, dlc but bioware is not doing any of that I know they are not making a movie because that would be bizzare and I know they won't make a game because they are done with Shepard and they are too stubborn to make dlc so their cliff hanger idea was a failure.

but really we already know ME3 ends Shepard story arc, so why leave a open-ended cliff hanger when were not playing as him/her in future ME games. Just show Shepard alive since you can't kill Shep in every ending.

[Iakus]

BlueStorm83 wrote...

--- It's never been about Shepard surviving for me- though that would be nice. What I really want is, if Shepard really DOES have to die, let it be for something that matters. As it stands now, you can die to Let the Reapers Survive, or you can die to Let the Reapers bring about their actual primary goal, which Starboy says he's tried multiple times, of Synthesis. Can Shepard die to save EDI and the Geth, who are a person and a race that I actually CARE about? No. Can Shepard die to save Anderson? No. Can Shepard die to save the people on the Citadel, who seem to be Derping along with their lives, on taxis and in skyscrapers, as a race is harvested up in the Citadel Tower? No. Instead, we can heroically sacrifice ourselves to shaft the galaxy in three flavors, or we can save our lives to shaft our friends. Neither is even 1/4 of acceptable.

If the main character of  a video game where choices matter is to be inevitably killed off, you need a story so incredible that it actually works. I have only seen one such game ever come about:  Planescape: Torment.  A game where you are an immortal trying to become mortal again.

ME3 was no Planescape:  Torment.  

[Iakus]

double post

Modifié par iakus, 25 juillet 2012 - 04:33 .