Aller au contenu

Photo

You are missing the point bioware


  • Ce sujet est fermé Ce sujet est fermé
159 réponses à ce sujet

#126
Cyberstrike nTo

Cyberstrike nTo
  • Members
  • 1 721 messages

Shepard Cmdr wrote...

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

Shepard Cmdr wrote...

-Skorpious- wrote...

We all paid for a complete game. Was it what we expected? No. Was part of it due to Bioware's misleading press statements? Yes.

Bioware attempted to address our concerns with the EC, so I have moved on from any desires to see the ending changed. But what hasn't changed - what no DLC can change - is an admittance from Bioware developers that their misleading comments have reasonably upset their fanbase.

We don't need a new ending - we need honesty and humility.

In my case and obviously quite a few others the EC did nothing to fix the ending it simply polished the turd.  If they were to simply add in a conventional victory for example it would fix quite a few problems with the game, because then your choices could matter, depending on how they do it, also they could implment the EMS in a better fashion.  An apology would go quite a way, but they can and should fix the ending.


The Alliance tried a conventional victory and lost at the start of the game. Plus it's stated several times:
"You can't the Reapers conventionally" this stated by Hackett, Liara, and Shepard. The EMS is for guarding the Crucible and Hammer ground forces that is all.

So either you turn Shepard, Liara, and Hackett into morons who don't know what the hell they're talking about and turn the Reapers from a serious threat into a joke, or accept that you can't beat them conventionally.

I'll take the latter because it makes more sense, then the former two. Hell the Catalyst's logic makes more sense then this constant whinning about a so-called "conventional victory" crap.  

read this thread
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/12878011



From the first page less than half-way down:

saracen16 wrote...

What emotional chest-pounding. The monkey may try to make itself look frightening, but that's not going to stop predators from eating it. I also read these Codex entries:

"The Reapers are technologically superior to the organic species of the galaxy -- but the degree of that superiority is a matter of debate in the intelligence community.
The Reapers' thrusters and FTL drives appear to propel them at more than twice the speed of Citadel ships. Estimates of their location in dark space suggest they can travel nearly 30 light-years in a 24-hour period.

Reaper power sources seem to violate known physical laws. Reapers usually destroy fuel infrastructure rather than attempting to capture it intact, indicating that Reapers do not require organic species' energy supplies. Consequently, the Reapers attack without regard for maintaining supply lines behind them, except to move husks from one planet to another. Unlike Citadel ships, Reapers do not appear to discharge static buildup from their drive cores, although they sometimes appear wreathed in static discharge when they land on planets.

The main gun on a Reaper capital ship dwarfs that of the Alliance's Everest-class dreadnoughts. No dreadnought has yet survived a direct hit from the weapon. Estimates put its destructive power anywhere from 132 to 454 kilotons of TNT. Even if the target is hardened, as in the case of a surface-based missile silo, the gun can instead bury the target beneath molten metal. Precise targeting computers and correctors also give the Reaper weapons a longer effective range than organics' dreadnoughts or cruisers.

The kinetic barriers on a Reaper capital ship can shrug off the firepower of a small fleet. Weapons specifically designed to overcome shields, such as the Javelin, GARDIAN lasers, or the Thanix series, can bypass the barriers to some degree. The difficulty is getting close enough to use them -- the surface-mounted weaponry on Reaper ships, similar in principle to GARDIAN, presents an effective defense against organic species' fighters."

Don't forget the storyline: a single Reaper can wipe out 4 turian companies in less than an hour. The devastation they laid upon Palaven and Menae is unbearable. They've already laid waste to Dekuuna and Irune. They've also controlled MANY sectors irrevocably on the galaxy map, and even some sectors such as Sentry Omega are not even close to accessible (mentioned in the news overheard on the Citadel). Thessia fell as a result of failed guerilla tactics. Which brings me to these:

"The assault on Thessia did not go as smoothly as the Reapers' strikes against other races. While other species met the Reapers head-on, the asari resorted to dangerous hit-and-run tactics to harass their attackers. By engaging in guerilla strategies--blast a Reaper ship, then jumping to FTL where they could not be tracked--the asari forced the Reapers to remain on the defensive.
Unfortunately, the Reapers' greater numbers allowed them to accept certain losses, so they soon ignored the attacks against them and began orbital bombardment of Thessia. This in turn forced the asari to defend their homeworld with a more traditional stance, facing the Reaper forces directly. As soon as the Reapers landed on Thessia, the harvesting began.

A swift and brutal slaughter of the asari ground forces followed. Resistance from trained biotics barely slowly the attackers down. In the end, Thessia's minimal military forces, combined with unpreparedness in the face of an overwhelming enemy, resulted in the fall of the planet."

"The Reapers' first attack on turian space followed an age-old maxim: hit them where it hurts. A populous colony dating back centuries, Taetrus was already embedded in the turian psyche as the site of the worst terrorist attack in turian history. Wounds were still raw from the Vallum Blast, in which a separatist revolutionary slammed a starship into the colony's capital, killing more than a hundred thousand turians. Hierarchy forces responded with a massive invasion of the planet to stamp out the separatist movement. It was a catharsis for the turians, reassuring them that heroes would always triumph over evil. And so the Reapers struck Taetrus first.
By the time Taetrus went dark, the turians had already learned that the batarians and humans were under attack. The Hierarchy responded with what they believed was overwhelming force, only to walk into a trap. Reaper ships were waiting on the other side of the relay to Taetrus, and they released devastating firepower the moment the fleet emerged. Turian leaders observing the one-sided battle were faced with a choice: reinforce their side of the relay to defend against a Reaper invasion, or throw more resources into an offense. With soldiers and civilians alike clamoring for retribution against the Reapers, the turians continued the assault. The Hierarchy sent warp bombs through the relay to clear a path, fighting tooth and talon to inflict casualties against the Reaper fleet. It was a valiant effort, but doomed. The Reapers emerged victorious from the relay and began broadcasting a signal to turian comm buoys-- images of Vallum, Taetrus's capital, once again a smoking wreck. The fight for turian space had begun."

The organic civilizations are fighting a losing battle by the end of the game before Priority - Earth. Don't forget the codex entry about allied dreadnoughts: all number less than 100. The Reapers vastly exceed this number, having been created for countless cycles before.

So, no, conventional victory is IMPOSSIBLE.



Checkmate

Modifié par Cyberstrike nTo, 04 août 2012 - 06:19 .


#127
Eryri

Eryri
  • Members
  • 1 850 messages

-Skorpious- wrote...

 
The funny thing about this whole situation is that Bioware can diffuse it with a simple, honest admittance of fault; a recognition that ME3 let many fans down and failed to live up to expectations. Being honest isn't a sign of weakness or ineptitude - it is a sign of maturity and respect, an indication that you care and value the people who have been negatively affected by your actions, even if you disagree with them.

Why Bioware has yet to do so is beyond me.


Sadly corporate culture is a bit like political culture. Apologies, and U-Turns are admissions that your decision was in some way less than perfect - and therefore an admission of weakness. They feel that sort of thing might spook the shareholders (or voters). So they feel thay have to press on regardless, no matter how daft the decision.

It's unfortunate, but that's how they seem to think. A bit more openness and a bit less PR speak would make me feel a lot happier.

#128
The Angry One

The Angry One
  • Members
  • 22 246 messages

LinksOcarina wrote...

there is a quote by Neil Gaiman that I am sadly going to have to paraphrase. He was in a movie called "The People vs George Lucas" which is pretty much all about, well, this fan-creator disconnect that exists in popular media. 

And quote is regarding fan-made products and why he won't change his work. 

"I like fan-made works. It is an absolutely legitemate and really cool response to the art. But I also don't believe that these fans have the right to go and knock on my door and say, "well I didn't like this and I think you should remove that character from your story." because it's like no, I got to make this, this came out of my head, leave me alone."


Sorry, but if that work is bad then we have the right to say it's bad.
If Walters refuses to recognise that what he wrote was bad, then I won't have anything more to do with it.

Speaking of George Lucas, even Lucas recognised that Jar Jar was a mistake, and toned him down. He didn't yell and scream that  his work was his art and how dare we complain.
Sure, you may think Jar Jar's role in the second movie was a take that to the fans, but if it was it was a subtle take that. When George Lucas is beating you at subtlety.. it's time to re-evaluate.

In the end, those who create works like this really don't have to be on the beck and call to anyone, because it is their work. You as a consumer can not like their work and not support it, thats fine. But why complain about it? Why say, "oh, i'll give BioWare money for this team because they are better, in the hopes they will remove this guy I hate?" That undermines your own cause, in my opinion, because you still support the artists, you still support the authors and their work, because the studio is the one reaping the benefits and dispersing the rewards to everyone in the end.


I will support games that please me and nothing more. BioWare has already earned my caution, but if DA3 turns out to be great I see no reason to not to buy it, even if I'll never preorder from BioWare again.
This is not "in the hopes that they'll get rid of Walters", it's seperating what I like and don't like.

#129
robertthebard

robertthebard
  • Members
  • 6 108 messages
Gotta love the misinformation age. "I'm not gonna quote 'em, but this is what they said...". You should probably quote what he said, instead of pulling one paraphrase out of context. It simply fuels rage in people that are already raging, and for people like me, just makes me think of my infamous got me banned video. I can't link it any more, it's considered off topic to post videos of the ultimate whiner in a whine thread, but I can still remember it and laugh.

#130
tonnactus

tonnactus
  • Members
  • 6 165 messages

Shepard Cmdr wrote...

 So in his now infamous lockdown post yesterday that I will not quote here, Chris Priestly said that we, the "unhappy" fans should take our business elswhere.  There are a few problems with that the first being that there is no equivalant to bioware, no one else makes games of the caliber that bioware used to,


You are wrong. Obsidian, Cd Project, Eidos Montreal...
Those studios are at least equal compared to Bioware even before the downfall began.

#131
The Angry One

The Angry One
  • Members
  • 22 246 messages

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

Checkmate


Tell me that you did not just attempt to use saracen's notoriously dishonest cherrypicking to win an argument for you.

#132
The Angry One

The Angry One
  • Members
  • 22 246 messages

tonnactus wrote...

You are wrong. Obsidian, Cd Project, Eidos Montreal...
Those studios are at least equal compared to Bioware even before the downfall began.


Obsidian are currently wasting their time on a South Park game (of all things).
I'll be interested in the other two when they understand what "female main character" means. Until then, no, they're not the equal of BioWare before their fall.

#133
LinksOcarina

LinksOcarina
  • Members
  • 6 536 messages

The Angry One wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

there is a quote by Neil Gaiman that I am sadly going to have to paraphrase. He was in a movie called "The People vs George Lucas" which is pretty much all about, well, this fan-creator disconnect that exists in popular media. 

And quote is regarding fan-made products and why he won't change his work. 

"I like fan-made works. It is an absolutely legitemate and really cool response to the art. But I also don't believe that these fans have the right to go and knock on my door and say, "well I didn't like this and I think you should remove that character from your story." because it's like no, I got to make this, this came out of my head, leave me alone."


Sorry, but if that work is bad then we have the right to say it's bad.
If Walters refuses to recognise that what he wrote was bad, then I won't have anything more to do with it.

Speaking of George Lucas, even Lucas recognised that Jar Jar was a mistake, and toned him down. He didn't yell and scream that  his work was his art and how dare we complain.
Sure, you may think Jar Jar's role in the second movie was a take that to the fans, but if it was it was a subtle take that. When George Lucas is beating you at subtlety.. it's time to re-evaluate.

In the end, those who create works like this really don't have to be on the beck and call to anyone, because it is their work. You as a consumer can not like their work and not support it, thats fine. But why complain about it? Why say, "oh, i'll give BioWare money for this team because they are better, in the hopes they will remove this guy I hate?" That undermines your own cause, in my opinion, because you still support the artists, you still support the authors and their work, because the studio is the one reaping the benefits and dispersing the rewards to everyone in the end.


I will support games that please me and nothing more. BioWare has already earned my caution, but if DA3 turns out to be great I see no reason to not to buy it, even if I'll never preorder from BioWare again.
This is not "in the hopes that they'll get rid of Walters", it's seperating what I like and don't like.


Of corse you have the right to say its bad. No one ever said you didn't. 

You don't have the right to demand changes from it.  Thats the key difference that many seem to not understand. That is the point that Gaiman is trying to make, because most fan-edits he refers to do just that; they change what fans percieve as the bad stuff in what they consider their version of the movie. And it's allowed, which is something BioWare has allowed too.

#134
xsdob

xsdob
  • Members
  • 8 575 messages
Why did you not include the quote? I just read it and it made a lot more sense and was a lot more humbler than your version of it.


"I answered this. There will be no more new endings. I used the "quotes" as we consider the Extended Cut the ending, the finale, the stop whatever you want to call it of the ending of Mass Effect 3. We do not plan to make new endings, give more closure to the endings, adding or subtracting to or from the endings, etc. We are done with the endings.

That said, we are working on some very cool downloadable story based single player content. In these DLCs there will certainly be elements that will effect the end of the game. As Mike Gamble already said, depending on what you
do in Leviathan there will be new dialog with the Catalyst at the end of the game. These sorts of elements are definitely possible for future DLC as well.

And for all those stating "Well if you don't X I am not going to buy another game/DLC/etc from BioWare again". I'm sorry you feel thht way, but I understand it. That is your ability as a consumer. If a company (us, a burger joint, a shoe store, etc) does not live up to your expectations, you go elsewhere. I get it and I do the same thing. I do not fault anyone for feeling this way. Hopefully, the DLC we come up with or a future BioWare title will make you want to give us another try.

However, if you don't like it, feel free to leave. I'm sorry we have disappointed you and as I said, we'll try to make better content or games in the future that you will hopefully enjoy. No one if forced to be here. You don't like it, feel free to take your business elsewhere and stop trying to ruin the funn and enjoyment for those people who do enjoy ME3 and the DLC."

Modifié par xsdob, 04 août 2012 - 06:31 .


#135
RiouHotaru

RiouHotaru
  • Members
  • 4 059 messages
Honestly, Chris is right. If all you're going to do is sit around on the forum and whine and complain about things you KNOW won't change, then what are you doing here?

Even if you say you're a diehard fan, you're still just whining and complaining. Using the "I do it because I love the series" isn't a good enough excuse either.

And no, before anyone cherry-picks or jumps to a conclusion, I'm not saying you have to kiss Bioware's feet either, but there IS a middle ground. Express your discontent in a manner that's polite, in a manner that's constructive and concise.

Don't just go making posts about how the company has fallen about how the writers have betrayed their fans, etc, etc, because hyperbole like that is silly and obviously untrue.

If the only way you can express yourself is by lashing out, then you really should move on.

#136
LinksOcarina

LinksOcarina
  • Members
  • 6 536 messages

The Angry One wrote...

tonnactus wrote...

You are wrong. Obsidian, Cd Project, Eidos Montreal...
Those studios are at least equal compared to Bioware even before the downfall began.


Obsidian are currently wasting their time on a South Park game (of all things).
I'll be interested in the other two when they understand what "female main character" means. Until then, no, they're not the equal of BioWare before their fall.


Oh how dramatic.

Maybe play the South Park game before you judge it, by the way. superficial takes on a game like that is dangerous. It may not be your cup of tea, but it doesn't mean you should dismiss it outright. Like, I hate sport games, but I recognize a good one when I see it. 

Truthfully though,Obsidian's only problem is they have poor leadership and can't QA anything, yet they still make games worth playing, and have depth to them, something Bethesda can't do yet, and something that BioWare does but is usually blatant about it. 

#137
Ghost

Ghost
  • Members
  • 3 512 messages

DirtySHISN0 wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

Ithurael wrote...

This thread is not going anywhere nice real fast...

Shame that the fan base is fighting each other more than discussing the content of the game. :(

This makes me a sad panda


These forums have been awfully vicious lately.


With the force of a thousand suns, this ↑



#138
RiouHotaru

RiouHotaru
  • Members
  • 4 059 messages

-Skorpious- wrote...

 
The funny thing about this whole situation is that Bioware can diffuse it with a simple, honest admittance of fault; a recognition that ME3 let many fans down and failed to live up to expectations. Being honest isn't a sign of weakness or ineptitude - it is a sign of maturity and respect, an indication that you care and value the people who have been negatively affected by your actions, even if you disagree with them.

Why Bioware has yet to do so is beyond me.


Uhhh, why would they admit something they don't think is true?

You're asking them to say something that the FANS believe is true.  What if the staff doesn't?  What if the writers honestly believe what they presented us was an amazing story?  What if the programmers feel the mechanics they constructed were what they wanted to give us?

This is exactly the sort of attitude that bugs me.  You act like it's a proven fact ME3 was "bad", and that BW should admit to your subjective opinion as fact.

#139
AresKeith

AresKeith
  • Members
  • 34 128 messages

RiouHotaru wrote...

Honestly, Chris is right. If all you're going to do is sit around on the forum and whine and complain about things you KNOW won't change, then what are you doing here?

Even if you say you're a diehard fan, you're still just whining and complaining. Using the "I do it because I love the series" isn't a good enough excuse either.

And no, before anyone cherry-picks or jumps to a conclusion, I'm not saying you have to kiss Bioware's feet either, but there IS a middle ground. Express your discontent in a manner that's polite, in a manner that's constructive and concise.

Don't just go making posts about how the company has fallen about how the writers have betrayed their fans, etc, etc, because hyperbole like that is silly and obviously untrue.

If the only way you can express yourself is by lashing out, then you really should move on.


and don't put everyone who doesn't like ME3 as whiners or haters, because some of us are well-spoken and mostly calm about it

and asking people why they are still here is pointless, because not liking ME3 and not liking the Mass Effect series are two different things

#140
Eryri

Eryri
  • Members
  • 1 850 messages

LinksOcarina wrote...

Of corse you have the right to say its bad. No one ever said you didn't. 

You don't have the right to demand changes from it.  Thats the key difference that many seem to not understand. That is the point that Gaiman is trying to make, because most fan-edits he refers to do just that; they change what fans percieve as the bad stuff in what they consider their version of the movie. And it's allowed, which is something BioWare has allowed too.



I don't think many people are "demanding" that Bioware change the ending. We can't force them to do anything.

However we can and should give them honest feedback. We can also make suggestions as to what we would like to see in the future regarding DLC.

Bioware aren't fools, they want to hear what the fans want and don't want so they can tailor DLC that sells well. For many that would be DLC that improves the ending.

#141
babachewie

babachewie
  • Members
  • 715 messages

Eryri wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Of corse you have the right to say its bad. No one ever said you didn't. 

You don't have the right to demand changes from it.  Thats the key difference that many seem to not understand. That is the point that Gaiman is trying to make, because most fan-edits he refers to do just that; they change what fans percieve as the bad stuff in what they consider their version of the movie. And it's allowed, which is something BioWare has allowed too.



I don't think many people are "demanding" that Bioware change the ending. We can't force them to do anything.

However we can and should give them honest feedback. We can also make suggestions as to what we would like to see in the future regarding DLC.

Bioware aren't fools, they want to hear what the fans want and don't want so they can tailor DLC that sells well. For many that would be DLC that improves the ending.

um...wasnt there a whole group called "Demand a  better mass effect ending" with at least 60,000 like on facebook? Sounds like many people to me. 

Modifié par babachewie, 04 août 2012 - 06:36 .


#142
Heather Cline

Heather Cline
  • Members
  • 2 822 messages
They won't fix it no matter how much we want them to. Though the OP has put it in words that they should read and take to heart. It still won't change a damned thing but I will continue to rant, rage and tell them how much I am upset and how much I hate them and I will with hold the wallet. I will continue to tell people what shoddy business practices they do and how bad the game is and to never buy a game from BioWare ever. Bad word of mouth is a big business killer. Trust me I know I've seen businesses go down because of bad word of mouth. BioWare and EA will not recover from this ever. Because of how badly ME3 was and DA2 was and new games coming from them will be met with disdain and a lot of skepticism. They won't be lauded by those they pissed off and upset. Instead they will do as I've done and tell their friends, and their friends will tell their friends and family and so on and so forth. In the information age that is these days that can go really far and really fast especially with the internet. They really screwed themselves but won't admit it or do anything about it.

I hope they are happy because the internet and word of mouth will be their downfall.

#143
dirty console peasant

dirty console peasant
  • Members
  • 2 208 messages

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

Shepard Cmdr wrote...

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

Shepard Cmdr wrote...

-Skorpious- wrote...

We all paid for a complete game. Was it what we expected? No. Was part of it due to Bioware's misleading press statements? Yes.

Bioware attempted to address our concerns with the EC, so I have moved on from any desires to see the ending changed. But what hasn't changed - what no DLC can change - is an admittance from Bioware developers that their misleading comments have reasonably upset their fanbase.

We don't need a new ending - we need honesty and humility.

In my case and obviously quite a few others the EC did nothing to fix the ending it simply polished the turd.  If they were to simply add in a conventional victory for example it would fix quite a few problems with the game, because then your choices could matter, depending on how they do it, also they could implment the EMS in a better fashion.  An apology would go quite a way, but they can and should fix the ending.


The Alliance tried a conventional victory and lost at the start of the game. Plus it's stated several times:
"You can't the Reapers conventionally" this stated by Hackett, Liara, and Shepard. The EMS is for guarding the Crucible and Hammer ground forces that is all.

So either you turn Shepard, Liara, and Hackett into morons who don't know what the hell they're talking about and turn the Reapers from a serious threat into a joke, or accept that you can't beat them conventionally.

I'll take the latter because it makes more sense, then the former two. Hell the Catalyst's logic makes more sense then this constant whinning about a so-called "conventional victory" crap.  

read this thread
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/12878011



From the first page less than half-way down:

saracen16 wrote...

What emotional chest-pounding. The monkey may try to make itself look frightening, but that's not going to stop predators from eating it. I also read these Codex entries:

"The Reapers are technologically superior to the organic species of the galaxy -- but the degree of that superiority is a matter of debate in the intelligence community.
The Reapers' thrusters and FTL drives appear to propel them at more than twice the speed of Citadel ships. Estimates of their location in dark space suggest they can travel nearly 30 light-years in a 24-hour period.

Reaper power sources seem to violate known physical laws. Reapers usually destroy fuel infrastructure rather than attempting to capture it intact, indicating that Reapers do not require organic species' energy supplies. Consequently, the Reapers attack without regard for maintaining supply lines behind them, except to move husks from one planet to another. Unlike Citadel ships, Reapers do not appear to discharge static buildup from their drive cores, although they sometimes appear wreathed in static discharge when they land on planets.

The main gun on a Reaper capital ship dwarfs that of the Alliance's Everest-class dreadnoughts. No dreadnought has yet survived a direct hit from the weapon. Estimates put its destructive power anywhere from 132 to 454 kilotons of TNT. Even if the target is hardened, as in the case of a surface-based missile silo, the gun can instead bury the target beneath molten metal. Precise targeting computers and correctors also give the Reaper weapons a longer effective range than organics' dreadnoughts or cruisers.

The kinetic barriers on a Reaper capital ship can shrug off the firepower of a small fleet. Weapons specifically designed to overcome shields, such as the Javelin, GARDIAN lasers, or the Thanix series, can bypass the barriers to some degree. The difficulty is getting close enough to use them -- the surface-mounted weaponry on Reaper ships, similar in principle to GARDIAN, presents an effective defense against organic species' fighters."

Don't forget the storyline: a single Reaper can wipe out 4 turian companies in less than an hour. The devastation they laid upon Palaven and Menae is unbearable. They've already laid waste to Dekuuna and Irune. They've also controlled MANY sectors irrevocably on the galaxy map, and even some sectors such as Sentry Omega are not even close to accessible (mentioned in the news overheard on the Citadel). Thessia fell as a result of failed guerilla tactics. Which brings me to these:

"The assault on Thessia did not go as smoothly as the Reapers' strikes against other races. While other species met the Reapers head-on, the asari resorted to dangerous hit-and-run tactics to harass their attackers. By engaging in guerilla strategies--blast a Reaper ship, then jumping to FTL where they could not be tracked--the asari forced the Reapers to remain on the defensive.
Unfortunately, the Reapers' greater numbers allowed them to accept certain losses, so they soon ignored the attacks against them and began orbital bombardment of Thessia. This in turn forced the asari to defend their homeworld with a more traditional stance, facing the Reaper forces directly. As soon as the Reapers landed on Thessia, the harvesting began.

A swift and brutal slaughter of the asari ground forces followed. Resistance from trained biotics barely slowly the attackers down. In the end, Thessia's minimal military forces, combined with unpreparedness in the face of an overwhelming enemy, resulted in the fall of the planet."

"The Reapers' first attack on turian space followed an age-old maxim: hit them where it hurts. A populous colony dating back centuries, Taetrus was already embedded in the turian psyche as the site of the worst terrorist attack in turian history. Wounds were still raw from the Vallum Blast, in which a separatist revolutionary slammed a starship into the colony's capital, killing more than a hundred thousand turians. Hierarchy forces responded with a massive invasion of the planet to stamp out the separatist movement. It was a catharsis for the turians, reassuring them that heroes would always triumph over evil. And so the Reapers struck Taetrus first.
By the time Taetrus went dark, the turians had already learned that the batarians and humans were under attack. The Hierarchy responded with what they believed was overwhelming force, only to walk into a trap. Reaper ships were waiting on the other side of the relay to Taetrus, and they released devastating firepower the moment the fleet emerged. Turian leaders observing the one-sided battle were faced with a choice: reinforce their side of the relay to defend against a Reaper invasion, or throw more resources into an offense. With soldiers and civilians alike clamoring for retribution against the Reapers, the turians continued the assault. The Hierarchy sent warp bombs through the relay to clear a path, fighting tooth and talon to inflict casualties against the Reaper fleet. It was a valiant effort, but doomed. The Reapers emerged victorious from the relay and began broadcasting a signal to turian comm buoys-- images of Vallum, Taetrus's capital, once again a smoking wreck. The fight for turian space had begun."

The organic civilizations are fighting a losing battle by the end of the game before Priority - Earth. Don't forget the codex entry about allied dreadnoughts: all number less than 100. The Reapers vastly exceed this number, having been created for countless cycles before.

So, no, conventional victory is IMPOSSIBLE.



Checkmate

From the OP of that thread

 So I was just browsing the codex in game and happened across a particular codex entry
masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Codex/The_Reapers#Reaper_Vulnerabilities



So conventional victory is possible with a high enough EMS,  also many ships are now equipped with a Thanix Cannon
masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Codex/Ships_and_Vehicles#Mass_Effect_3_2

It also stands to reason that since the Turians reverse engineered them, they would also have thanix cannons on their ships
Edit: I found these war assets as well
masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/War_Assets/Crucible#Interferometric_Array
masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/War_Assets/Alien#Volus_Dreadnought_Kwunu

masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/War_Assets/Salarian#Salarian_Third_Fleet
masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/War_Assets/Alliance#Alliance_First_Fleet
for the alliance one read the part about the SSV Leipzig

Edit:  However this thread is not about the feasability of a conventional victory it is about Bioware missing the point of the fan revolt.  So please return to topic.

Modifié par Shepard Cmdr, 04 août 2012 - 06:37 .


#144
MystEU

MystEU
  • Members
  • 447 messages
"It's OK to express disappointment"

Haven't you all considered that some people want to discuss the game/series without being flooded with anti-BioWare and ending hate around every corner? It's like ****ing impossible to discuss anything on here anymore because most of the "expressed disappointment" is non-constructive babble nowadays and floods every other topic whether you like it or not. That's the kind of crap that causes some of us to say "stop whining and go post somewhere else."

There were many good threads addressing the endings and BioWare. Now it's just deteriorated into nonsense recently.

Modifié par MystEU, 04 août 2012 - 06:38 .


#145
Guest_Catch This Fade_*

Guest_Catch This Fade_*
  • Guests

Grogimus wrote...

aj2070 wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

<snip>

Here's a business 101 tip for any company: don't ****** off your consumers.


This pretty much sums it up.


No company, let alone a game company, are going to please everyone.  Rehashing threads like this is unproductive.  Futile.  They have stated clearly that the endings are there to stay.  Get over it and move on.

Who said that?

#146
Eryri

Eryri
  • Members
  • 1 850 messages

babachewie wrote...

Eryri wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Of corse you have the right to say its bad. No one ever said you didn't. 

You don't have the right to demand changes from it.  Thats the key difference that many seem to not understand. That is the point that Gaiman is trying to make, because most fan-edits he refers to do just that; they change what fans percieve as the bad stuff in what they consider their version of the movie. And it's allowed, which is something BioWare has allowed too.



I don't think many people are "demanding" that Bioware change the ending. We can't force them to do anything.

However we can and should give them honest feedback. We can also make suggestions as to what we would like to see in the future regarding DLC.

Bioware aren't fools, they want to hear what the fans want and don't want so they can tailor DLC that sells well. For many that would be DLC that improves the ending.

um...wasnt there a whole group called "Demand a Mass Effect better ending" with at least 60,000 like on facebook? Sounds like many people to me. 


Fair point. Perhaps "most people" would be more accurate.

#147
RiouHotaru

RiouHotaru
  • Members
  • 4 059 messages

AresKeith wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Honestly, Chris is right. If all you're going to do is sit around on the forum and whine and complain about things you KNOW won't change, then what are you doing here?

Even if you say you're a diehard fan, you're still just whining and complaining. Using the "I do it because I love the series" isn't a good enough excuse either.

And no, before anyone cherry-picks or jumps to a conclusion, I'm not saying you have to kiss Bioware's feet either, but there IS a middle ground. Express your discontent in a manner that's polite, in a manner that's constructive and concise.

Don't just go making posts about how the company has fallen about how the writers have betrayed their fans, etc, etc, because hyperbole like that is silly and obviously untrue.

If the only way you can express yourself is by lashing out, then you really should move on.


and don't put everyone who doesn't like ME3 as whiners or haters, because some of us are well-spoken and mostly calm about it

and asking people why they are still here is pointless, because not liking ME3 and not liking the Mass Effect series are two different things


And yet you have people like TAO who can't do anything but spew fire and brimstone with every post.  Also, the fact people are quote-mining Chris' post to make it LOOK like he's being a jerk is proof people just want an excuse to vindicate themselves.

Bioware isn't some group of malicious developers and moderators.

#148
The Angry One

The Angry One
  • Members
  • 22 246 messages

RiouHotaru wrote...

And yet you have people like TAO who can't do anything but spew fire and brimstone with every post.  Also, the fact people are quote-mining Chris' post to make it LOOK like he's being a jerk is proof people just want an excuse to vindicate themselves.

Bioware isn't some group of malicious developers and moderators.


Oh how cute, are you that starved for my attention that you mention me even though I have little to do with your discussion?

#149
babachewie

babachewie
  • Members
  • 715 messages

Eryri wrote...

babachewie wrote...

Eryri wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Of corse you have the right to say its bad. No one ever said you didn't. 

You don't have the right to demand changes from it.  Thats the key difference that many seem to not understand. That is the point that Gaiman is trying to make, because most fan-edits he refers to do just that; they change what fans percieve as the bad stuff in what they consider their version of the movie. And it's allowed, which is something BioWare has allowed too.



I don't think many people are "demanding" that Bioware change the ending. We can't force them to do anything.

However we can and should give them honest feedback. We can also make suggestions as to what we would like to see in the future regarding DLC.

Bioware aren't fools, they want to hear what the fans want and don't want so they can tailor DLC that sells well. For many that would be DLC that improves the ending.

um...wasnt there a whole group called "Demand a Mass Effect better ending" with at least 60,000 like on facebook? Sounds like many people to me. 


Fair point. Perhaps "most people" would be more accurate.

agreed

#150
Grub Killer8016

Grub Killer8016
  • Members
  • 1 459 messages
Bioware is right. If people don't like the game, leave already.