6432 réponses à ce sujet

[N7 Lisbeth]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Sorry, personally not too keen on playing someone other than Shepard in ME3.

The situation certainly wouldn't be unprecedented considering the fact that you got to do the same thing in ME2.

ME2 wasn't the end of the trilogy (and it took me a few moments to warm up to it -- I found the POV shifting to be very immersion-breaking -- it wasn't until Seth Green started screaming like a little girl that I started laughing and ran with it.)

The focus is on Shepard here, and should not deviate from that. We want closure, not new characters.

Modifié par N7 Lisbeth, 30 septembre 2012 - 10:29 .

[MegaSovereign]

N7 Lisbeth wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Sorry, personally not too keen on playing someone other than Shepard in ME3.

The situation certainly wouldn't be unprecedented considering the fact that you got to do the same thing in ME2.

ME2 wasn't the end of the trilogy (and it took me a few moments to warm up to it -- I found the POV shifting to be very immersion-breaking -- it wasn't until Seth Green started screaming like a little girl that I started laughing and ran with it.)

The focus is on Shepard here, and should not deviate from that. We want closure, not new characters.

This isn't ending DLC. This is a compromise between: those that want the endings to be expanded on, those that want more exposition/lore, and those that want new gameplay/content.

[SpamBot2000]

Well, if the ending does get fixed, I'm all for more gameplay/content. And lore too, unless it's more of the 'yo dawg' variety. So there's no factional antagonism there.

[N7 Lisbeth]

MegaSovereign wrote...

N7 Lisbeth wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Sorry, personally not too keen on playing someone other than Shepard in ME3.

The situation certainly wouldn't be unprecedented considering the fact that you got to do the same thing in ME2.

ME2 wasn't the end of the trilogy (and it took me a few moments to warm up to it -- I found the POV shifting to be very immersion-breaking -- it wasn't until Seth Green started screaming like a little girl that I started laughing and ran with it.)

The focus is on Shepard here, and should not deviate from that. We want closure, not new characters.

This isn't ending DLC. This is a compromise between: those that want the endings to be expanded on, those that want more exposition/lore, and those that want new gameplay/content.

If it's not ending dlc, then I'm not interested. I have absolutely zero interest in any DLC until the endings are fixed.

You go on to say that it is expanded as a compromise. As I said, I have no problems with expanded content (new missions) as long as it addresses the endings. I still have no interest in shifting POVs (e.g., playing a character other than Shepard) and I prefer to utilise my existing squadmates (love interest goes on all of my missions, and I'd rather take a second squadmate like Tali or Garrus or EDI over some new one).

You asked for opinions, that's my opinion.

Modifié par N7 Lisbeth, 30 septembre 2012 - 10:58 .

[DWH1982]

I'm also not a fan of shifting POV. It was okay in ME2 when it was only for a few minutes, and when it was somone from the Normandy crew. But that was very brief. As it should be.

ME is about building your own main character. Which is why autodialouge is one of the things that irritates people so much about ME3. Adding an entire DLC mission that takes us away from our character and our squad doesn't seem right.

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

N7 Lisbeth wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

N7 Lisbeth wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Sorry, personally not too keen on playing someone other than Shepard in ME3.

The situation certainly wouldn't be unprecedented considering the fact that you got to do the same thing in ME2.

ME2 wasn't the end of the trilogy (and it took me a few moments to warm up to it -- I found the POV shifting to be very immersion-breaking -- it wasn't until Seth Green started screaming like a little girl that I started laughing and ran with it.)

The focus is on Shepard here, and should not deviate from that. We want closure, not new characters.

This isn't ending DLC. This is a compromise between: those that want the endings to be expanded on, those that want more exposition/lore, and those that want new gameplay/content.

If it's not ending dlc, then I'm not interested. I have absolutely zero interest in any DLC until the endings are fixed.

You go on to say that it is expanded as a compromise. As I said, I have no problems with expanded content (new missions) as long as it addresses the endings. I still have no interest in shifting POVs (e.g., playing a character other than Shepard) and I prefer to utilise my existing squadmates (love interest goes on all of my missions, and I'd rather take a second squadmate like Tali or Garrus or EDI over some new one).

You asked for opinions, that's my opinion.

Agree.  Give us an ending where Shepard can win (after all, that's what the whole marketing of the game touted), and then I'll buy all the DLC BioWare can make.  Until then, not interested.

[MegaSovereign]

If it's not ending dlc, then I'm not interested. I have absolutely zero interest in any DLC until the endings are fixed.

You go on to say that it is expanded as a compromise. As I said, I have no problems with expanded content (new missions) as long as it addresses the endings. I still have no interest in shifting POVs (e.g., playing a character other than Shepard) and I prefer to utilise my existing squadmates (love interest goes on all of my missions, and I'd rather take a second squadmate like Tali or Garrus or EDI over some new one).

You asked for opinions, that's my opinion.

Okay, thanks for reading my idea anyway.

[Blueprotoss]

Redbelle wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

I said they were there and never were things that sane or unindoctrinated people in the game ever wanted to do.  I forgot that the only other ones wanting synthesis and/or control were reapers.  So, control and synthesis in the games were things that crazy, indoctrinated, or reapers wanted.  They are not goals and as such if they are any kind of themes, they are marginalized because of who wants them.  They are discarded as themes because no "normal" person in the game thinks they are good ideas.  And, people reject them as good things to do.  But destroying the reapers is not rejected by these "normal" people in the game.

Yet Control, Destroy, Synthesis, and Refuse are all themes in ME that happened to be established in ME1. 

AresKeith wrote...

Control didn't start with Sovereign, Sovereign wanted to start the Harvest and Saren talked about slavery before he had full Reaper tech in him. Idea's and Themes are not the same thing. And Twitter is not canon.

Indoctrination is Control even if the Geth worshipped the Reapers as gods.  Never said Twitter was canon, but there is still a lot of canon in ME. 

Ozida wrote...

I am sorry, but how Control even related to Sovering? Control theme is an option of Controlling Reapers. It is closer to TIM then, I guess, while Sovering was controlling/ indocrinating others. The option of Control was not even a possibility in ME1 and was only brought in ME2.
Synthesis didn't work out for Saren, right? So back to 3D's question: Who in their mind would pick it now?

Indoctrination is that simple and Synthesis did work for Saren.  All 4 of the choices do work in ME's universe while its your choice to pick which one you want.

Afraid your going to have to expand a lot on that since whatever thought process drove you to these conclusions is veiled till you open the curtains........... that is tell us how you got to these ideas,.

Ignorance will only breed more ignorance and there should be less blind ignorance around.

[Dragoonlordz]

MegaSovereign wrote...

If it's not ending dlc, then I'm not interested. I have absolutely zero interest in any DLC until the endings are fixed.

You go on to say that it is expanded as a compromise. As I said, I have no problems with expanded content (new missions) as long as it addresses the endings. I still have no interest in shifting POVs (e.g., playing a character other than Shepard) and I prefer to utilise my existing squadmates (love interest goes on all of my missions, and I'd rather take a second squadmate like Tali or Garrus or EDI over some new one).

You asked for opinions, that's my opinion.

Okay, thanks for reading my idea anyway.

I don't think theres any way to help these some people because so stuck in what they want and unwilling to compromise. I liked your idea though the only thing I thought needed bit more work on is the balance of choices worked out because it still was not as balanced as would ideally like in your example. Other than that adding reunion scenes was only other thing missing. Your idea was using the destroy option, which avoided the refuse = win type I feel should never happen. But yeh other than reunion missing in your idea, it was just the balances needed more work.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 01 octobre 2012 - 12:02 .

[AresKeith]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

If it's not ending dlc, then I'm not interested. I have absolutely zero interest in any DLC until the endings are fixed.

You go on to say that it is expanded as a compromise. As I said, I have no problems with expanded content (new missions) as long as it addresses the endings. I still have no interest in shifting POVs (e.g., playing a character other than Shepard) and I prefer to utilise my existing squadmates (love interest goes on all of my missions, and I'd rather take a second squadmate like Tali or Garrus or EDI over some new one).

You asked for opinions, that's my opinion.

Okay, thanks for reading my idea anyway.

I don't think theres any way to help these people because so stuck in what they want and unwilling to compromise. I liked your idea though the only thing I thought needed bit more work on is the balance of choices worked out because it still was not as balanced as would ideally like in your example. Other than that adding reunion scenes was only other thing missing. Your idea was using the destroy option, which avoided the refuse = win type I feel should never happen. But yeh other than reunion missing in your idea, it was just the balances needed more work.

I like how just because a couple of people gave their opinion, you automatically assume its all of us when some of us liked his idea. Some of us even suggestion doing something like this, but in your post yesterday you acted like we never made this suggestion

[GarvakD]

As I said before, I would sure as heck take your idea over nothing at all (so no Dragoon, you are wrong in stating "these people" are not willing to compromise). But, as Dragoon said, reunion part is missing.

Modifié par GarvakD, 01 octobre 2012 - 12:00 .

[Dragoonlordz]

AresKeith wrote...

I like how just because a couple of people gave their opinion, you automatically assume its all of us when some of us liked his idea. Some of us even suggestion doing something like this, but in your post yesterday you acted like we never made this suggestion

Okay I will rephrase, (some) people in here. You are right in that it is not all unwilling just some.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 01 octobre 2012 - 12:10 .

[AresKeith]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

I like how just because a couple of people gave their opinion, you automatically assume its all of us when some of us liked his idea. Some of us even suggestion doing something like this, but in your post yesterday you acted like we never made this suggestion

Okay I will rephrase, (some) people in here. You are right in that it is not all unwilling just some.

but I understand where there coming from

[MegaSovereign]

The problem with producing an actual reunion scene is that it would imbalance the endings indefinitely since there would be extended scenes that are exclusive to the Destroy ending.

What I think a lot of people would settle for is a Destroy+ ending that implies that 1)The Geth aren't destroyed (though EDI might still have to go since she is partially Reaper tech) and 2) Shepard will be okay.

They could add audio files to the breath scene. You know, like hearing a rescue team say "I see movement, I found someone!" or something. This minor addition wouldn't infringe any of the current interpretations of the breath scene ("last breath" or Indoc Theory) but it would make it easier for fans to believe that Shepard being (and staying) alive is plausible.

The ending additions I'm proposing would be incredibly cost efficient for Bioware since it approaches the fans concerns through context rather than fully produced extended scenes.

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 01 octobre 2012 - 12:28 .

[Blueprotoss]

MegaSovereign wrote...

The problem with producing an actual reunion scene is that it would imbalance the endings indefinitely since there would be extended scenes that are exclusive to the Destroy ending.

What I think a lot of people would settle for is a Destroy+ ending that implies that 1)The Geth aren't destroyed (though EDI might still have to go since she is partially Reaper tech) and 2) Shepard will be okay.

They could add audio files to the breath scene. You know, like hearing a rescue team say "I see movement, I found someone!" or something. This minor addition wouldn't infringe any of the current interpretations of the breath scene ("last breath" or Indoc Theory) but it would make it easier for fans to believe that Shepard being (and staying) alive is plausible.

The ending additions I'm proposing would be incredibly cost efficient for Bioware since it approaches the fans concerns through context rather than fully produced extended scenes.

I agree except for the Geth since they do have some Reaper tech in them but not as much as EDI and additions being cost effective since voice acting alone isn't cheap.

[MegaSovereign]

Blueprotoss wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

The problem with producing an actual reunion scene is that it would imbalance the endings indefinitely since there would be extended scenes that are exclusive to the Destroy ending.

What I think a lot of people would settle for is a Destroy+ ending that implies that 1)The Geth aren't destroyed (though EDI might still have to go since she is partially Reaper tech) and 2) Shepard will be okay.

They could add audio files to the breath scene. You know, like hearing a rescue team say "I see movement, I found someone!" or something. This minor addition wouldn't infringe any of the current interpretations of the breath scene ("last breath" or Indoc Theory) but it would make it easier for fans to believe that Shepard being (and staying) alive is plausible.

The ending additions I'm proposing would be incredibly cost efficient for Bioware since it approaches the fans concerns through context rather than fully produced extended scenes.

I agree except for the Geth since they do have some Reaper tech in them but not as much as EDI and additions being cost effective since voice acting alone isn't cheap.

They could get literally anyone to voice those lines. They don't need expensive celebrities.

[3DandBeyond]

N7 Lisbeth wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Fall of the Citadel DLC idea:

You get to play as an N7-class character (that you get to customize just like the MP) with Bailey in your squad along with someone else (maybe Aria since the hidden files show that she's still going to be on the Citadel even if she gets Omega back).

While the Reapers are trying to take the Citadel, you discover that the defense systems were shut down/manipulated by an inside source. You and your squad try to find the source (along the way you get greeted by a bunch of Reaper forces) . You then stumble upon a hidden archive left by the Protheans who had starved on the Citadel while they found a way to sabotage the Keeper signal (see ME1). Going through the archives, you learn about the Catalyst/Reaper intelligence that resides on the Citadel and you find out that the Crucible plans originated from the Reapers. The Reapers created the plans so that one day a good-enough cycle could complete and successfully deploy it in order to ensure that the organics are "ready" for synthesis. The classical definition of the word "Crucible" is a "severe test or trial." The Protheans were working on a way to modify these plans to include the Destroy functionality (and it goes without saying, the indoctrinated factions added the Control functionality).

At the end of the DLC, you get intel that could upgrade the Crucible:

1) So that way it exclusively targets the Reapers in the Destroy ending.

2) Make it to where the relays don't get damaged in the Control/Synthesis ending. (I added this part to keep the endings balanced. You can't boost one without balancing the other two, right?)


This is just a rough draft ofcourse and some of the details would need to be worked out, but this is one way that Bioware could make a DLC that address all 3 audiences:


1) The audience that wants "new" DLC content (not exclusively ending related).

2) The audience that wants an ending that wouldn't push moral boundaries. ("Destroy+" ending).

3) The audience that wants more exposition on the Crucible's origins/functionality. (They could maybe even add a codex as to how Synthesis works for example.)


EDIT:

The ending dialogue with the Catalyst and Shepard would still be the same. Shepard obviously wouldn't know much about the team that found the Prothean archives on the Citadel, but the Catalyst would not be aware of the Prothean upgrades that were added to the Crucible design. As a result, the Catalyst would still assume that the Destroy ending targets all synthetics even when it doesn't.

I posted this yesterday.

How do you guys feel about this general idea? If I get enough positive feedback I'll make a separate thread expanding on it.

I love new ideas.

That said, I don't like it. In ME3, any DLC should be Shepard's story, it's not the vehicle to be other people. The dichotomy of POVs shifting would be a bad design decision.

I'm also note sure why there's a push for new squadmates; it's unnecessary and adds complications. You'll also divide the reactions even further because people will want to bring their existing squadmates and not these new ones. (I'm a huge fan of Bailey's, but I don't want him as a squadmate. Double goes for Aria. She can keep her One Rule to herself. )

Other than that, the idea of addressing the endings through DLC is a sound one. I'm not very picky this way -- I'd totally accept changed endings even if it was just EMS that influenced them and not gameplay. I'm certainly not against more gameplay if it affects the endings however.

Agreed about wanting to play as Shepard.  This set of games was supposed to be Shepard's story.  I love Bailey and Aria for what they are.

[Warrior Craess]

MegaSovereign wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Fall of the Citadel DLC idea:

You get to play as an N7-class character (that you get to customize just like the MP) with Bailey in your squad along with someone else (maybe Aria since the hidden files show that she's still going to be on the Citadel even if she gets Omega back).

While the Reapers are trying to take the Citadel, you discover that the defense systems were shut down/manipulated by an inside source. You and your squad try to find the source (along the way you get greeted by a bunch of Reaper forces) . You then stumble upon a hidden archive left by the Protheans who had starved on the Citadel while they found a way to sabotage the Keeper signal (see ME1). Going through the archives, you learn about the Catalyst/Reaper intelligence that resides on the Citadel and you find out that the Crucible plans originated from the Reapers. The Reapers created the plans so that one day a good-enough cycle could complete and successfully deploy it in order to ensure that the organics are "ready" for synthesis. The classical definition of the word "Crucible" is a "severe test or trial." The Protheans were working on a way to modify these plans to include the Destroy functionality (and it goes without saying, the indoctrinated factions added the Control functionality).

At the end of the DLC, you get intel that could upgrade the Crucible:

1) So that way it exclusively targets the Reapers in the Destroy ending.

2) Make it to where the relays don't get damaged in the Control/Synthesis ending. (I added this part to keep the endings balanced. You can't boost one without balancing the other two, right?)


This is just a rough draft ofcourse and some of the details would need to be worked out, but this is one way that Bioware could make a DLC that address all 3 audiences:


1) The audience that wants "new" DLC content (not exclusively ending related).

2) The audience that wants an ending that wouldn't push moral boundaries. ("Destroy+" ending).

3) The audience that wants more exposition on the Crucible's origins/functionality. (They could maybe even add a codex as to how Synthesis works for example.)


EDIT:

The ending dialogue with the Catalyst and Shepard would still be the same. Shepard obviously wouldn't know much about the team that found the Prothean archives on the Citadel, but the Catalyst would not be aware of the Prothean upgrades that were added to the Crucible design. As a result, the Catalyst would still assume that the Destroy ending targets all synthetics even when it doesn't.

I posted this yesterday.

How do you guys feel about this general idea? If I get enough positive feedback I'll make a separate thread expanding on it.

you know it's not exactly what I wanted... however I would enjoy that if they gave some good techno babble about how they are going to actually make the synthetic hybrids out of everyone...

[DWH1982]

Honestly, I'd be fine with something that changed the endings only by allowing the Geth - and preferably EDI - to survive destroy. As much as I hate Star Brat, it'd give me an ending that feels a little more triumphant, while letting me do exactly what I've wanted to do since ME1, without adding arbitrary extra casualties. I'd still dislike everything after the standoff with TIM, but perhaps I wouldn't despise it to the extent that I do now.

I'm probably in the minority among people who dislike the ending in that the ambiguity in the breath scene doesn't bother me that much. At least, not as much as the rest of the ending. Yeah, it might be better to have something else, but given the quality of the rest of the ending I'm not 100% sure it'd be well written. And I can just head canon the way Edwin Shepard's reunion goes.

As it stands, I'm not even sure how often I'll see the breath scene. I love Mass Effect, and most of ME3 is still fun, so I plan to keep playing. But before the EC, my policy was to quit the game after the TIM standoff and just head canon what happens next. After I finally see the EC ending for the first time, I might go back to doing that. I guess what happens with the rest of the DLC and ME4 will determine what I do in the long run.

Modifié par DWH1982, 01 octobre 2012 - 01:14 .

[GarvakD]

I believe that there should be more things done to allow Geth and EDI to live. Difficult tasks. Tasks accomplished across the game, more so towards the center of the game (I say that is the end of the Rannoch missions) and the conclusion.
And yes, given this DLC idea, it allows me to stick a big middle finger up to the starbrat and suceed in the process.
And yes, I stop before the end as well. Don't want to sit through all that all the time. In fact, I just started another ME1 Shep twenty minutes ago and am going back to do a sit through for several hours.

[Blueprotoss]

MegaSovereign wrote...

They could get literally anyone to voice those lines. They don't need expensive celebrities.

Voice acting still isn't cheap especially with the voice work that Bioware works with.  Plus there would be a lot of angry people if the voices of their favorite characters were randomly changed.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 01 octobre 2012 - 01:19 .

[MegaSovereign]

The Fall of the Citadel expansion would be a great way to also give some of the ME2 squadmates some screen time.

It could also show off some of the Citadel war assets you've collected at work. There's a lot of potential here.

[Blueprotoss]

MegaSovereign wrote...

The Fall of the Citadel expansion would be a great way to also give some of the ME2 squadmates some screen time.

It could also show off some of the Citadel war assets you've collected at work. There's a lot of potential here.

There is always potenional but its always in the form of postive and negative just like how everything is judged.

[Chardonney]

DWH1982 wrote...

Honestly, I'd be fine with something that changed the endings only by allowing the Geth - and preferably EDI - to survive destroy. As much as I hate Star Brat, it'd give me an ending that feels a little more triumphant, while letting me do exactly what I've wanted to do since ME1, without adding arbitrary extra casualties. I'd still dislike everything after the standoff with TIM, but perhaps I wouldn't despise it to the extent that I do now.

I'm probably in the minority among people who dislike the ending in that the ambiguity in the breath scene doesn't bother me that much. At least, not as much as the rest of the ending. Yeah, it might be better to have something else, but given the quality of the rest of the endingI'm not 100% sure it'd be well written. And I can just head canon the way Edwin Shepard's reunion goes.

As it stands, I'm not even sure how often I'll see the breath scene. I love Mass Effect, and most of ME3 is still fun, so I plan to keep playing. But before the EC, my policy was to quit the game after the TIM standoff and just head canon what happens next. After I finally see the EC ending for the first time, I might go back to doing that. I guess what happens with the rest of the DLC and ME4 will determine what I do in the long run.

For me, the breath scene is what ruins the ending. I'm not that big of a fan of EDI, so her demise doesn't bother me that much. I do, however, hate the fact that I have to sacrifice the Geth. Still, if after all these years Shep could get something much better than a lousy breath scene, I would be able to accept the loss of EDI and the Geth. I could even accept the stupid starbrat. Of course, being able to save the Geth would still be a great option.  

[AresKeith]

Blueprotoss wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

The Fall of the Citadel expansion would be a great way to also give some of the ME2 squadmates some screen time.

It could also show off some of the Citadel war assets you've collected at work. There's a lot of potential here.

There is always potenional but its always in the form of postive and negative just like how everything is judged.

there's nothing negative about seeing our War Assets, everyone wanted to see them in action