342 réponses à ce sujet

[Chaotic-Fusion]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Ice Cold J wrote...

How the heck do you figure millions-billions of Reaper ships?

Not trying to sound like a DB, but that sounds as made up a number as you can get with nothign to back it up.

The Reapers alone are billions of years old and we also know that the Levianthans are older then them.

Ice Cold J wrote... 

1. What reality? And why ignore the original poster's premise and still post in the thread?

Its ironic when Bioware is getting ignored here.

Ice Cold J wrote... 

2. Granted, I have not closely examine the codex from ME3. But I don't see much evidence of our being labelled "outnumbered" until a good way through the Batle of Earth, when I'm assuming we sustained heavy casualties.

Then you clearly didn't pay attention to Sovreign and Harbinger.

Billions of reaper ships? Are you serious?

The reapers make one capital ship per cycle. Assuming 1 billion years:

They have 20000 reaper capital ships give or take.
Plus maybe 1 hundred thousand destroyers.

[DecCylonus]

Ice Cold J wrote...

1. What reality? And why ignore the original poster's premise and still post in the thread?

I didn't ignore the OP's premise. I disagreed with it. Those are two completely different things.

The "reality" that I spoke of is the "reality" that Bioware created in the Mass Effect fiction. The Citadel Council and galactic governments chose to ignore the evidence and Shepard's warnings. They convinced themselves that Sovereign was just a Geth construction. That is made abundantly clear in Mass Effect 2. You can't argue that the galaxy did any serious preparations when everything in the cutscenes and the codex says otherwise. Sure, there are hints in the opening of ME3 that the Alliance was making half-hearted preparations in the six months after Arrival. They still wasted 2.5 years though, and no other government did anything. Our cycle wasted the chance the Protheans gave us.

2. Granted, I have not closely examine the codex from ME3. But I don't see much evidence of our being labelled "outnumbered" until a good way through the Batle of Earth, when I'm assuming we sustained heavy casualties.

The codex, Hackett, Anderson, Liara, and numerous other characters tell us we are outnumbered, outgunned, and losing. The victories we do win only slow the Reapers down, not stop them. They are harvesting us and destroying our manfucturing and food production. The galactic economy is collapsing. Fleets that engage the Reapers are either forced to retreat or destroyed. It is well established in ME3 that conventional victory is not possible in any form, and it was hinted at in previous games.  

[Blueprotoss]

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

Billions of reaper ships? Are you serious?

Harbinger is one of the oldest before Leviathan and now "he" the oldest Reaper other then the Reaper AI after the Levianthan DLC.  Harbinger's age is in the billions and its not that hard to notice that.

Chaotic-Fusion wrote... 

The reapers make one capital ship per cycle. Assuming 1 billion years:

The Capital ships that are made focus on the most powerful race, which is why the humans were picked in this cycle.  Either way there are still Dreadnaughts and smaller classes that are made dring each cycle that can range in the hundreds.

Chaotic-Fusion wrote... 

They have 20000 reaper capital ships give or take.
Plus maybe 1 hundred thousand destroyers.

There are millions of Reaper ships varying in size and shape.

[InvincibleHero]

It may have failed you but not everyone agrees with that. It was a commercial success and critically acclaimed game so by defintion a non-failure.

People are up in arms becasue it deviated from hero wins has happy ending they are used to from BW made games. People cannot accept that.

Now the evil path may have more undesirable outcomes but most don't play that route. You should have seen what some "paragon" players proposed as consequences for renegade actions before ME3 was made. They expected they would continue in a sugar-coated universe where paragon= win and win big.

I play all paths to get the most out of my games. It is enjoyable for me and I experience all of the content.

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

Binary_Helix 1 wrote...

By failed I mean the fan backlash at a time when the  trilogy was suppose to be at it's apex it hit it's low point instead.

ME3 didn't need PTSD sequences, nihilism, an unbeatable foe, or transhuman nonsense, it just needed a conventional victory with a few varying end choices based on player morality. Nothing fancy but who cares? Stick with what works.

Exactly.  Not to mention, the kind of game experience you describe is precisely what player's expected when they pre-ordered the game.  When they didn't get it, they were p***ed.

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

InvincibleHero wrote...

It may have failed you but not everyone agrees with that. It was a commercial success and critically acclaimed game so by defintion a non-failure.

People are up in arms becasue it deviated from hero wins has happy ending they are used to from BW made games. People cannot accept that.

Now the evil path may have more undesirable outcomes but most don't play that route. You should have seen what some "paragon" players proposed as consequences for renegade actions before ME3 was made. They expected they would continue in a sugar-coated universe where paragon= win and win big.

I play all paths to get the most out of my games. It is enjoyable for me and I experience all of the content.

It was a "commercial success" because people pre-ordered the game believing it would be like the two prior installments.  Customers were fooled.  Moreover, if you bought the Player's Guide before buying the game, that too said "Shepard lives" for the high EMS Destroy ending.  Also misleading. 

Don't get me started about "critically acclaimed."  The "game press" isn't press at all.  They need access to developers to have a job.  Naturally, they suck up to them.  In this case, BioWare put a "game press reporter" into the game.  So what do you think this game would get in the way of reviews?  Of course they were rosy. 

Now, however, the game press has been called out by consumers as a joke. 

So the notion that this is "by definition" a non-failure isn't correct.  That's because the value of the Mass Effect intellectual property has been severely damaged.

[InvincibleHero]

PuppiesOfDeath2 wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

It may have failed you but not everyone agrees with that. It was a commercial success and critically acclaimed game so by defintion a non-failure.

People are up in arms becasue it deviated from hero wins has happy ending they are used to from BW made games. People cannot accept that.

Now the evil path may have more undesirable outcomes but most don't play that route. You should have seen what some "paragon" players proposed as consequences for renegade actions before ME3 was made. They expected they would continue in a sugar-coated universe where paragon= win and win big.

I play all paths to get the most out of my games. It is enjoyable for me and I experience all of the content.

It was a "commercial success" because people pre-ordered the game believing it would be like the two prior installments.  Customers were fooled.  Moreover, if you bought the Player's Guide before buying the game, that too said "Shepard lives" for the high EMS Destroy ending.  Also misleading. 

Don't get me started about "critically acclaimed."  The "game press" isn't press at all.  They need access to developers to have a job.  Naturally, they suck up to them.  In this case, BioWare put a "game press reporter" into the game.  So what do you think this game would get in the way of reviews?  Of course they were rosy. 

Now, however, the game press has been called out by consumers as a joke. 

So the notion that this is "by definition" a non-failure isn't correct.  That's because the value of the Mass Effect intellectual property has been severely damaged.

You can make all the claims you want but it has sold over 2 million units which is a huge success. The OP is wrong in calling it a failure. it o nly fails to meet his/her personal expectations. he/she does not speak for everyone or for reality.

Yes they love video game reviews when they agree with their opinions. So when their personal opinion is afrronted then they get angry as their ego is injured and their every opinion is right so the reviews must be wrong.

Yeah severely damaged LOL. A few hundred die (if that) hard fans on BSN raging that didn't get the ending they wanted so = it is damaged beyond repair. Thanks for the chuckle.

[MegaSovereign]

LOL Their formularrrr for the past two game endings were big ass explosions and epic uplifting music.

[fr33stylez]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

how does one make a bad deus ex machina? isnt that supposed to be the easy way out?

LOL.

[fr33stylez]

InvincibleHero wrote...

PuppiesOfDeath2 wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

It may have failed you but not everyone agrees with that. It was a commercial success and critically acclaimed game so by defintion a non-failure.

People are up in arms becasue it deviated from hero wins has happy ending they are used to from BW made games. People cannot accept that.

Now the evil path may have more undesirable outcomes but most don't play that route. You should have seen what some "paragon" players proposed as consequences for renegade actions before ME3 was made. They expected they would continue in a sugar-coated universe where paragon= win and win big.

I play all paths to get the most out of my games. It is enjoyable for me and I experience all of the content.

It was a "commercial success" because people pre-ordered the game believing it would be like the two prior installments.  Customers were fooled.  Moreover, if you bought the Player's Guide before buying the game, that too said "Shepard lives" for the high EMS Destroy ending.  Also misleading. 

Don't get me started about "critically acclaimed."  The "game press" isn't press at all.  They need access to developers to have a job.  Naturally, they suck up to them.  In this case, BioWare put a "game press reporter" into the game.  So what do you think this game would get in the way of reviews?  Of course they were rosy. 

Now, however, the game press has been called out by consumers as a joke. 

So the notion that this is "by definition" a non-failure isn't correct.  That's because the value of the Mass Effect intellectual property has been severely damaged.

You can make all the claims you want but it has sold over 2 million units which is a huge success. The OP is wrong in calling it a failure. it o nly fails to meet his/her personal expectations. he/she does not speak for everyone or for reality.

Yes they love video game reviews when they agree with their opinions. So when their personal opinion is afrronted then they get angry as their ego is injured and their every opinion is right so the reviews must be wrong.

Yeah severely damaged LOL. A few hundred die (if that) hard fans on BSN raging that didn't get the ending they wanted so = it is damaged beyond repair. Thanks for the chuckle.

You must think Bioware is dumber than I even thought if you believe they developed a free DLC expanding & retconning many things about the endings just to appaise a hundred raging BSN users. LOL.

[Ozida]

I agree with OP. They should've at least run some pre-release tests to see how people would react if they wanted to try something different. It's not even about people liking or disliking endings, it's about expectations.

[Jamie9]

I'd rather they try new things and fail than stick to the same formula forever.

[Blueprotoss]

fr33stylez wrote...

You must think Bioware is dumber than I even thought if you believe they developed a free DLC expanding & retconning many things about the endings just to appaise a hundred raging BSN users. LOL.

Yet you assume that the EC wasn't going to be free, that things were retconned, and a minority of ME fans caused the EC to happen.  It sounds like you shoud get off of that high horse.

Jamie9 wrote...

I'd rather they try new things and fail than stick to the same formula forever.

Really there's no solid formula for ME since ME1 was story focused, ME2 was gameplay focused, and ME3 was the balance.  Either way thats true for most franchises.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 07 septembre 2012 - 07:52 .

[Chaotic-Fusion]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

Billions of reaper ships? Are you serious?

Harbinger is one of the oldest before Leviathan and now "he" the oldest Reaper other then the Reaper AI after the Levianthan DLC.  Harbinger's age is in the billions and its not that hard to notice that.

Chaotic-Fusion wrote... 

The reapers make one capital ship per cycle. Assuming 1 billion years:

The Capital ships that are made focus on the most powerful race, which is why the humans were picked in this cycle.  Either way there are still Dreadnaughts and smaller classes that are made dring each cycle that can range in the hundreds.

Chaotic-Fusion wrote... 

They have 20000 reaper capital ships give or take.
Plus maybe 1 hundred thousand destroyers.

There are millions of Reaper ships varying in size and shape.

What wasn't clear in my original post? Yes, Harbinger is more than a billion years old and the first reaper. Leviathan confirmed they make one reaper capital ship every cycle (rougly every 50000 years).

Hence 1000000000/50000 = 20000 reaper capital ships.

Capital ships are dreadnoughts. 
Destroyers are made of lesser races. Hence there might be 100000 at best.

What the hell is there to discuss. "Millions or billions" of reaper ships is ridiculous.

[Rommel49]

Jamie9 wrote...

I'd rather they try new things and fail than stick to the same formula forever.

As has been frequently said when somebody brings this up, the time to try new things isn't with the finale of a series.

Incidentally, I'm reminded of the end of the Command and Conquer franchise here; a series that had been going on for a decade when the formula changed with its last installment... now if only I could remember who published that trainwreck...

[Blueprotoss]

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

What wasn't clear in my original post? Yes, Harbinger is more than a billion years old and the first reaper. Leviathan confirmed they make one reaper capital ship every cycle (rougly every 50000 years).

Hence 1000000000/50000 = 20000 reaper capital ships.

Capital ships are dreadnoughts. 
Destroyers are made of lesser races. Hence there might be 100000 at best.

What the hell is there to discuss. "Millions or billions" of reaper ships is ridiculous.

Whether or not the ships are Destroyers or Dreadnaughts, the Reapers number in the millions just in a billion years.  Btw nobody has the accurate number for Reaper forces because because we don't know the year that Harbinger was born or the reinforcements/loses for each cycle.

[fr33stylez]

Blueprotoss wrote...

fr33stylez wrote...

You must think Bioware is dumber than I even thought if you believe they developed a free DLC expanding & retconning many things about the endings just to appaise a hundred raging BSN users. LOL.

Yet you assume that the EC wasn't going to be free, that things were retconned, and a minority of ME fans caused the EC to happen.  It sounds like you shoud get off of that high horse.

I'm sorry, but you have serious comprehension problems. What you posted had absolutely nothing to do with my post. You do this a lot, and you're hard to understand.

[Blueprotoss]

fr33stylez wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

fr33stylez wrote...

You must think Bioware is dumber than I even thought if you believe they developed a free DLC expanding & retconning many things about the endings just to appaise a hundred raging BSN users. LOL.

Yet you assume that the EC wasn't going to be free, that things were retconned, and a minority of ME fans caused the EC to happen.  It sounds like you shoud get off of that high horse.

I'm sorry, but you have serious comprehension problems. What you posted had absolutely nothing to do with my post. You do this a lot, and you're hard to understand.

How is that when he was assuming things just like you are now.