9 réponses à ce sujet

[yukon fire]

 One of the main pillars of Mass Effect means nothing in the end? Its lazy that the war assets mean nothing all of them deserved their moment. Instead we get a few pictures with no text or dialogue? Thats it? Five Years? Nothing? Your better than that. 

[Ratham]

Not anymore

[saracen16]

Wow, do you have such a short attention span. Where were you the last 90+ hours of the game?

[hurricaneez2]

I wouldnt know my character got slaughtered by the Rachni I thought I eliminated in ME1. Oh wait...that must be the "artistic integrity" Im always hearing about.

[Omanisat]

Based on empirical evidence, they're not.

[ElectronicPostingInterface]

It turned into math which turns into EMS which turns into your ending results.

[iggy4566]

Bioware Just wants art.

[yukon fire]

saracen16 wrote...

Wow, do you have such a short attention span. Where were you the last 90+ hours of the game?

I was Auto dialogued out of it

[PreciousIsland]

The OP is right. Everyone was waiting for their choices to payoff in ME3. ME2 had a lot of foreshadowing of ME1 choices effecting ME3. It didn't happen and things got railroaded and the EC didn't change that. The war assets seemed like a cool idea and an interesting build-up of unique consequences only to be reduced to a numerical value that gave you pre-determined endings.
Even some clips spliced into the last mission with Jack and her students crushing things with biotics or Zaeed throwing grenades or Grunt getting killed. Maybe even make their participation effect your gameplay experience? Is it that unfeasible? Even for just one mission to have some variables?

BTW Grunt didn't get an "I died" slide at the end of my Destroy play through. No respect, haha.

[Sousabird]

Actually if you use your brain and think about the endings after what is shown, you can see a lot of things did matter. Who is alive at the end to pick up the pieces? What species remain? Who fought and who hid on the sidelines?