234 réponses à ce sujet

[ld1449]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

Like they did for DA2 right

What do u mean by that?

He's saying that people will always buy DLC regardless.

I am responding with sarcasm. Pointing at DA2 like it was a sucess when in reality it was doing so poorly they canceled their DLC plans after the second release because it simply wasn't selling. So people don't just "always buy DLC"

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Rovay wrote...

Forgive me if I'm going off-topic here, but what exactly would this DLC have to do to renew your interest in replaying the game? Completely change the ending or just add more to it? Or perhaps something else?

Now if they actually got serious and wrote an entirely different and better ending like they're capable of doing -- such as they did with Dragon Age Origins and make it Total Military Assets based instead of EMS based -- I'd pay for the new ending. You know the one: Shepard is the hero and survives but ME3 still ends Shepard's story arc in the ME3 universe; no Starbrat, no red green or blue. The Action Movie ending, because by that point the role playing is done and it's time to kick some reaper ass. Hell just get to and hit the fire button on crucible. Take my money.

Then they can come out with all the DLC they want from now until the 360 becomes defunct and I'll buy it. Take my money.

Why? Because the rest of the game and series is good.

[Rovay]

ld1449 wrote...

Rovay wrote...



Forgive me if I'm going off-topic here, but what exactly would this DLC have to do to renew your interest in replaying the game? Completely change the ending or just add more to it? Or perhaps something else?

I know that the question isn't dirrected at me, so sorry for butting in. But I'm fairly certain that I can speak for most of the people still angry that the DLC should involve either

A) An entirely new option for how to end the game.

A legitimate refusal option based on EMS

C) Other.

Basically people don't want to deal with the starchild or his options (One of which makes so little sense I'd feel like Jar Jar binks could offer me the secrets of philosophy after hearing it a few times.)

Okay, I honestly don't understand people's fixation on this whole 'Refusal should allow conventional victory' thing. Am I really the only one who, after seeing the end of ME 2, thought that there is no way in hell Reapers could be defeated conventionally? I mean, every chance the games get they try to hammer it the fact we don't stand a chance in a normal war. The Crucible was the only logical conclusion to how this would end.

And as for the Catalyst... Suppose it was properly foreshadowed or introduced earlier (like during Rannoch or Thessia). Would it change your perception on the ending? Would it make it plausable enough to like it? Or let's say that the upcoming pre-ending DLC does that. Would that change anything?

Sorry for all these questions, but I'm just curious as to where, in fans opinion, Bioware made this so-called critical mistake that completely destroyed the series.

[Jadebaby]

DA2 > ME3, easy.

[Jadebaby]

ld1449 wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

Like they did for DA2 right

What do u mean by that?

He's saying that people will always buy DLC regardless.

I am responding with sarcasm. Pointing at DA2 like it was a sucess when in reality it was doing so poorly they canceled their DLC plans after the second release because it simply wasn't selling. So people don't just "always buy DLC"

Now I really want a Banner to tell BioWare I purchased Marl of the Assassin and Legacy, and that I'm a loyal consumer, should they treat me right, which they haven't.

I think your interpretation is correct. This one purchased DA2 dlc but will not purchase ME3 dlc.

HOWEVER, I was going to make another thread for this but I'll just put it here seeing as though it's on topic...

http://www.youtube.com/watch

These are the kind of fans BioWare are trying to appeal to now, I don't mean that by their demographic, I mean that by their dedication. The kind of fans that are so young they will eat up anything that "looks cool" even if it doesn't make any sense.
This is why ME3 dlc will sell better than DA2, it was advertised more and the people buying it aren't paying for it themselves, their parents are.

[Iakus]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

DA2 > ME3, easy.

Yup.

If nothing else, Hawke lived, and could do so without killing a companion.

[Taboo]

You will see light in the darkness
You will make some sense of this
And when you've made your secret journey
You will find the love you miss
You will see light in the darkness
You will make some sense of this
You will see joy in this sadness
You will find this love you miss

[ld1449]

Rovay wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

Rovay wrote...



Forgive me if I'm going off-topic here, but what exactly would this DLC have to do to renew your interest in replaying the game? Completely change the ending or just add more to it? Or perhaps something else?

I know that the question isn't dirrected at me, so sorry for butting in. But I'm fairly certain that I can speak for most of the people still angry that the DLC should involve either

A) An entirely new option for how to end the game.

A legitimate refusal option based on EMS

C) Other.

Basically people don't want to deal with the starchild or his options (One of which makes so little sense I'd feel like Jar Jar binks could offer me the secrets of philosophy after hearing it a few times.)

Okay, I honestly don't understand people's fixation on this whole 'Refusal should allow conventional victory' thing. Am I really the only one who, after seeing the end of ME 2, thought that there is no way in hell Reapers could be defeated conventionally? I mean, every chance the games get they try to hammer it the fact we don't stand a chance in a normal war. The Crucible was the only logical conclusion to how this would end.

And as for the Catalyst... Suppose it was properly foreshadowed or introduced earlier (like during Rannoch or Thessia). Would it change your perception on the ending? Would it make it plausable enough to like it? Or let's say that the upcoming pre-ending DLC does that. Would that change anything?

Sorry for all these questions, but I'm just curious as to where, in fans opinion, Bioware made this so-called critical mistake that completely destroyed the series.

I knew that Reapers were gonna need a Deus Ex to be beaten just by what happened with Sovereign and how he was kicking our asses.

BUT since the ME team has proven that they're willing to break their lore, and their logic with the starchild and synthesis alot of fans just say "**** it. Might as well have something that makes SOME semblance of sense with suspension of disbelief because the options infront of me arent exactly pinnacles of literature mastery.

In other words, for lack of anything genuinely good they're vying for an option that will make the game feel as good as ME1 and ME2 did when Shep beat the odds.

I can't speak for all fans regarding how palatable the Catalyst would be.

But I could have accepted the ending of the game with the Catalyst if you change a few KEY things.

Firstly, that the Catalyst isn't the Citadel. At least not the Citadel by itself.

If the Catalyst is the sheer "power" of the crucible combined with the nearly arcane technologies of the Citadel I could accept the Catalyst. That's why this thing was never able to be introduced beforehand because it didn't exist before that moment. The crucible is both power source to the weaponry and to the Citadel that mannages to crate an AI. Therefore this brat doesn't invalidate ME1's entire plot just by existing.

And the second thing they would have to change is it controling the reapers. WHY make it so it controls the reapers? That just completely invalidates the reapers ferocity and their intimidation. Sure you can level entire fleets but at the end of the day a child is your lord and master. There isn't simbolysm there its just plain old stupid.

If the Catalyst would have been an AI of the Citadel "Trapped" or Hiding from the reapers, waiting for a cycle that could conceivably beat them in order to reveal itself I would accept it. This cycle is hardly advanced enough or unified enough to break the reapers outright. Basically this guy was watching and waiting helplessly age after age as the Reapers did their thing until finally the crucible offered the races the means on how to beat the reapers.

But as it stands he's just plain old infuriating and completely idiotic.

[DistantUtopia]

Rovay wrote...

Okay, I honestly don't understand people's fixation on this whole 'Refusal should allow conventional victory' thing. Am I really the only one who, after seeing the end of ME 2, thought that there is no way in hell Reapers could be defeated conventionally? I mean, every chance the games get they try to hammer it the fact we don't stand a chance in a normal war. The Crucible was the only logical conclusion to how this would end.

Unless I'm mistaken, this is only hammered into us in ME3.  ME1 and 2 had given me the impression that they could (albeit at a terrible loss, but still could).

Rovay wrote...
And as for the Catalyst... Suppose it was properly foreshadowed or introduced earlier (like during Rannoch or Thessia). Would it change your perception on the ending? Would it make it plausable enough to like it? Or let's say that the upcoming pre-ending DLC does that. Would that change anything?

Sorry for all these questions, but I'm just curious as to where, in fans opinion, Bioware made this so-called critical mistake that completely destroyed the series.

Still doesn't change the fact that the options it provides requires in-game Shepard to believe in an implied flawed AI.  Being foreshadowed or introduced earlier won't change that.  Maybe if the decisions (destroy/control/synthesis) themselves were foreshadowed it wouldn't be quite so bad but the fact of the matter is the decisions at the end shift the main theme to Organics vs. Synthetics when during ME1-2 it was not.

[dsl08002]

if bioware could at least give the possiblilty that if you buy all the future DLC and those war asset points something that is different in the end.

like if you get a very high war asset points after all dlc:s then you might only destroy the reapers, geth and edi survives, and that there will be a reunion on screen if you take destroy then that is very compelling.

that is what the problem is for me, if they allow the war asset points have a meaning.

if they did something like this then i would happily buy future dlc

Modifié par dsl08002, 16 juillet 2012 - 09:09 .

[Xellith]

ld1449 wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

Like they did for DA2 right

What do u mean by that?

He's saying that people will always buy DLC regardless.

I am responding with sarcasm. Pointing at DA2 like it was a sucess when in reality it was doing so poorly they canceled their DLC plans after the second release because it simply wasn't selling. So people don't just "always buy DLC"

I believe they were meant to be making a Dragon Age 2 Ultimate Edition but no retailer wanted to stock it and so the plans were shelved. 

Yeah my memory serves me well.

n4g.com/news/964789/dragon-age-ii-ultimate-edition-wont-exist-due-to-retailer-disinterest

[Jadebaby]

Taboo-XX wrote...

You will see light in the darkness
You will make some sense of this
And when you've made your secret journey
You will find the love you miss
You will see light in the darkness
You will make some sense of this
You will see joy in this sadness
You will find this love you miss

And as the world was turning
It rolled itself in pain
This does not seem to touch you
He pointed to the.. breath scene frame.

[Rovay]

@Distant Utopia
Well, two of three endings are foreshadowed throughout the game. Only Synthesis comes completely out of the green (sorry, couldn't resist). And wasn't Organics vs. Synthetics present in all games? I mean, wouldn't the most basic example of that be Shepard and organics vs. Reapers? And as for games hammering 'you can't win', I admit its mostly ME 3 that does that, but isn't the revelation of how Reapers create more of themselves, coupled with how long they have existed, just scream 'you're screwed in every possible way unless you find some handy miracle to off them all in one go'?

@Id1449
Yeah, I can somewhat agree with what you said. The very concept of Catalyst and endings is good, but its just presented in a messy and illogical manner. Bioware probably could've saved themselves a lot of bashing if they just changed a few key points.

[crimzontearz]

Rovay wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

Rovay wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Leviathan will likely add new dialogue to the Catalyst section.

and probably change nothing really

Like every other DLC so far?

me1&2 had endings that made me want to replay the game immediately....every DLC added to the replay experience....ME3 ends with a kick in the balls pre-ec and with a middle finger post-ec....sooo yeah the only dlc that would have a point for me is a dlc that made me WANT to replay the game solving the problem I have with it

Forgive me if I'm going off-topic here, but what exactly would this DLC have to do to renew your interest in replaying the game? Completely change the ending or just add more to it? Or perhaps something else?

to be honest with you all it would take fit me right now is a reunion scene....after which Ii would be gad to give Bioware my money again

[stonbw1]

In light of controversy and the unlikelihood that DLC will affect the ending, BW should really combine all their DLC into one standalone. Think RDR: Undead Nightmare or DA: Awakening (from what I've heard). The amount of gameplay for the price will really drive the purchase.

[DistantUtopia]

Rovay wrote...

@Distant Utopia
Well, two of three endings are foreshadowed throughout the game. Only Synthesis comes completely out of the green (sorry, couldn't resist). And wasn't Organics vs. Synthetics present in all games? I mean, wouldn't the most basic example of that be Shepard and organics vs. Reapers?

I'll give you that, control and destroy are foreshadowed throughout ME3, but to me they were presented horribly through the Catalyst.

As for the Organics vs. Synthetics, yes, it was present in all games, but not as the overall driving theme.  Not to me, and apparently quite a number of the BSN (based on the number of threads going about).

Rovay wrote...
And as for games hammering 'you can't win', I admit its mostly ME 3 that does that, but isn't the revelation of how Reapers create more of themselves, coupled with how long they have existed, just scream 'you're screwed in every possible way unless you find some handy miracle to off them all in one go'?

Yup, but given Shepard's tenacity and way of uniting the races (which Javik also says may be our cycle's saving throw), I was of the belief Shepard was that miracle (i.e. uniting the races in a glorious battle which defeats the reapers, albeit at a terrible loss), not the reaper off switch we got.

[ld1449]

stonbw1 wrote...

In light of controversy and the unlikelihood that DLC will affect the ending, BW should really combine all their DLC into one standalone. Think RDR: Undead Nightmare or DA: Awakening (from what I've heard). The amount of gameplay for the price will really drive the purchase.

See, if they have to go through THAT much trouble what the hell is stopping them from just giving the players what they WANT??? Why is this so difficult to comprehend?

Artistic integrity? Please, the ending as is does more damage to their art than a change ever could at this point.

[Ridwan]

Mass Effect/Mass Effect 2 ending = The awesome of feeling you get, that translates into a loud "**** yeah!" while you fist pump, which in turn makes you want to experience more of the game like an addict.

Mass Effect 3 ending = What the **** is this ****? Are they serious! No way I'm paying for a DLC when the game ends like this.

[blmlozz]

Well, two of three endings are foreshadowed throughout the game. Only Synthesis comes completely out of the green (sorry, couldn't resist). And wasn't Organics vs. Synthetics present in all games? I mean, wouldn't the most basic example of that be Shepard and organics vs. Reapers?

mentioned? Yes. It was mentioned in the context of side quests twice for ME1, but I never got the feeling that 'this is what one of the game's core values is' I got the feeling that 'this is some filler side quest for the exp and it happens to have A/I's rebelling because that's what they do in the future every once in a while.'

Saying the Luna A/I mission (with NO dialog) and the A/I going crazy after it wanted to preserve it's own life (sound familiar?) does not translate into 'synthetics will kill us all' for me. 
I didn't even get that feeling from the Geth, in actuality I didn't realize they were even synthetics until I started reading up on the codex or talked to Tali, and then it was that they were just plain evil to be evil and wanted to hitch a ride on sovereign just like Saren---you know-- the organic they'd been taking orders from? 

I didn't get the feeling from sovereign because he was millions of years old at that point, If you're suggesting that the only reliable and constant source of the theory that the star-child presents lies in it's own creations, well.. there are more than a few meme's to put imagery to that topic. 

In ME2 I'm struggling to think of any synthetic vs organic conflicts. Shepard's half synthetic at that point is as much as the two mingle iirc. In fact you learn that Legion- a synthetic-- can be trusted. That he's willing to put his people's future in your hands, that he trusts you.

Modifié par blmlozz, 16 juillet 2012 - 10:40 .

[Rovay]

@crimzontearz
I also have trouble understanding that one. I mean, they basically show you everything save the proper scene itself and that somehow causes a ****storm almost as big as the ending was? Is using your imagination at this point so big a problem to warrant such reactions?

@DistantUtopia
Then I think your belief was wrong in this case. But it in itself is not wrong. Against any other kind of enemy or in different setting it would've worked, but when Bioware established Reapers as they are, it could've just ended in one way. But even then it was only possible thanks to Shepard and the miracles he/she did along the way.
 
Also, sorry for interogating you guys that much. At least some of my curiosity is now satiated, but since I need to get up early to get to work and its middle of the night here, I'll take my leave. It's been fun talking to you people!

[crimzontearz]

Rovay wrote...@crimzontearzI also have trouble understanding that one. I mean, they basically show you everything save the proper scene itself and that somehow causes a ****storm almost as big as the ending was? Is using your imagination at this point so big a problem to warrant such reactions?@DistantUtopiaThen I think your belief was wrong in this case. But it in itself is not wrong. Against any other kind of enemy or in different setting it would've worked, but when Bioware established Reapers as they are, it could've just ended in one way. But even then it was only possible thanks to Shepard and the miracles he/she did along the way. Also, sorry for interogating you guys that much. At least some of my curiosity is now satiated, but since I need to get up early to get to work and its middle of the night here, I'll take my leave. It's been fun talking to you people!

a couple of counters to that





1 to some, including me, headcanon is only one step removed from delusion


2 Bioware has issues with retconning implicit things....look at Dragon age....oghen, the warden, lelliana....and so on. in other words they are not to be trusted AND john helper's faux pas at comicon sis on help at all


3 That scene lacks emotional payoff and does not clarify or expand on the only thing people chose that ending for and quite freaking honestly I hope Casey and Mac are really being demoted/replaced as the rumor says because they need to reap the rewards of their goddamn hubris and grandeur.....and yes the more I stick into these forums the more bitter I get

[blmlozz]

I also have trouble understanding that one. I mean, they basically show you everything save the proper scene itself and that somehow causes a ****storm almost as big as the ending was? Is using your imagination at this point so big a problem to warrant such reactions?

If there has been any reoccurring theme to the game it's that choices are presented with seemingly different but more importantly, clear outcomes. You do all the character loyalty missions in ME2 or people Die. You upgrade the Normandy or people Die. You choose to side with the dalatrass and screw the Korgans so maybe it doesn't end up so well for them. Or you're faithful to laira through all 3 games so here's a little something extra for you. The ending does not follow this theme, you're lead along pre-defined paths based on choices and then asked to make the conclusion what you want of it. For some people this will be fine, the more I take a look at it though the more clear it becomes that while likely necessary, it's simply never going to be totally satisfactory. Fan fiction and Head-cannon are fun, they're exciting, they can provide you with the same emotional satisfaction as the game does, but it's not canon. It will never feel right, it'll feel exactly what it is- a possibility.

I know for a fact no one here goes to a movie to sit through 7/8's of it and then asked to draw stick figures or write 40K word essays on what you want to happen. Bioware's intentions I beleve were good-natured, and they felt their passionate fans would find a way and go into gross detail more than they had the time or energy for and probably do it much better than they ever could. So far I've found this to be true, the headcannon fics I've read have me oggling in front of my monitor after work for hours. That said,it's not the same. It never will be. The best imaganitave piece of work will be just as relevent and possible as it's exact counter-part, and that will always put doubt into my mind, even if it's not on purpose.

Modifié par blmlozz, 16 juillet 2012 - 11:06 .

[ld1449]

Rovay wrote...

@crimzontearz
I also have trouble understanding that one. I mean, they basically show you everything save the proper scene itself and that somehow causes a ****storm almost as big as the ending was? Is using your imagination at this point so big a problem to warrant such reactions?

Why should we settle for something sub par? Why should we just let them say "headcannon the rest guys. You paid us 80 dollars to tell a story and multiple DLC purchases building up to a game that was supposed to be gold and we've given you something thats barely worth the label on it. Keep buying DLC ok."

I mean really we were promised no ABC wildly different conclusions. We have ABC and conclusions that were cookie cutter no matter what your EMS was. Now theres a difference but it still feels like failure. So why the hell should we settle for less. They say they're willing to compromise let them prove it. Because the EC as far as I'm concerned does not fall under the definition of compromise. Its a mollifying act that's barely worth the time or effort both parties threw in considering that so many people are still unsatisfied.

[Blueprotoss]

dsl08002 wrote...

if bioware could at least give the possiblilty that if you buy all the future DLC and those war asset points something that is different in the end.

like if you get a very high war asset points after all dlc:s then you might only destroy the reapers, geth and edi survives, and that there will be a reunion on screen if you take destroy then that is very compelling.

that is what the problem is for me, if they allow the war asset points have a meaning.

if they did something like this then i would happily buy future dlc

I highly doubt that Bioware would release extra content for the ending especially with EC already out.

[sparkyo42]

At the end of the day the major DLC packs for ME 2 were advertised as after the suicide mission and a bridge to ME 3 if I remember right.

Any SP DLC for ME 3 is, "well we couldn't be bothered to give it you the full story for what ever you paid for it so give us €10-€30 extra and we'll give you a couple more hours.

I'd rather keep my money thank you, ME 3 DLC doesn;t serve a purpose.