6432 réponses à ce sujet

[plfranke]

schwarzaj wrote...

I agree with the OP completely. What's worse is that a DLC like Leviathan could have changed everything. I'll try not to spoil here, but the entire argument for a conventional military victory over the reapers jumps from statistically plausible to a sure fire option with in the span of about a minute. Simply put, Bioware has once again stumbled by refusing to change the endings and will now suffer the consequences with dismal DLC sales.

Good one, rEApers!

the funny thing is though that nothing changes at all you don't even get to see anything from Leviathan make a difference.

[devSin]

AlanC9 wrote...

Yeah, I remember. I'm wondering when the wasteland idea came up, though.

Final Hours includes the flowchart they had for the plot calling out that the Crucible will cause a galactic dark age.

Something that was there for the entire team to see, I'll add, since you like to promote the idea that nobody had the same idea about what the story was.

[Warrior Craess]

dreman9999 wrote...

drayfish wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Baa Baa wrote...

The poster was polite, nondemanding, and respectful in how he worded it.
But you probably didn't even ****ing read it.

It doesn't matter. It still is a shelfish post.

Are you being serious?

(Not about the 'shellfish' thing - I presume that was a miss-type)

Are you genuinely discounting another human being's opinion because it doesn't align with yours?  I don't even know where to begin responding to that.  Surely that's not your level of discourse anywhere else in life?

No. I'm  discounting it because it won't change anything and it's ignoring the other parties wish.

Really, optional DLC is somehow ignoring pro-ender choices? 

Is there some inevitable rule that states  that all DLC will be down loaded by all players? 

The only ones here trying to ignore another's opinion, and to mandate how they play seems to be people like you dreman9999.

Tell me in explicit detail why a new ending (or a further revision of the EC) DLC would impact your game play? Dr Who doesn't have the Tardis, to conviently go back to the release of ME3 and make the DLC a part of game play. So how exactly is a DLC that you have to take an active step (and possibly pay for) to gain, going to change your game? You don't actually have to do anything, and you get just what you want. The current Endings. 

[robertthebard]

drayfish wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

drayfish wrote...

At this point I have to just accept that you are being intentionally, needlessly contrarian.

Harbinger tries to shoot a giant space lazer at Shepard's face to blow her up, killing every one of the ground forces sprinting for the beam, but then backs off when a ship with all of her comrades are floating around at eye-level? 

I think it's fair to say that your vision of your ending satisfies you.  Everything else is and should be up for discusion.

Listen to what youjust wrote....

"
Harbinger tries to shoot a giant space lazer at Shepard's face to blow her up ..."

This a weapon that one shots ships.....Why do you think it did not kill Shepard?
And when it did not, why didn't harbinger finish Shepard off?

Thank you for the laugh.  I had thought you were serious before.

As much as I hate to do this, you do realize this is one of the reasons I end my games the way I do?  Ok, sometimes I get killed by Marauder Shields, but mainly, I can't see surviving a blast from a laser that rips cruisers in half.  My initial thought, when the white light flashed, was that I was fixing to get the credits, even though somewhere inside I knew better, because I couldn't see that ending causing all that much uproar.  After reading here a bit, I came to realize that it would indeed have caused that kind of uproar, but...

[MegaSovereign]

I fully expected the Reapers to win in ME3.

Simply because at the end of ME2 we had no ****ing idea how we were gonna fight the Reapers. By we I mean Shepard, 12 mercenaries/criminals, and an indoctrinated TIM. The rest of the galaxy still thought the Reapers were Geth ships.

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 31 août 2012 - 03:15 .

[plfranke]

MegaSovereign wrote...

I fully expected the Reapers to win in ME3.

Simply because at the end of ME2 we had no ****ing idea how we were gonna fight the Reapers. By we I mean Shepard, 12 mercenaries/criminals, and an indoctrinated TIM. The rest of the galaxy still thought the Reapers were Geth ships.

Haha I cracked up at this post

[MegaSovereign]

plfranke wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

I fully expected the Reapers to win in ME3.

Simply because at the end of ME2 we had no ****ing idea how we were gonna fight the Reapers. By we I mean Shepard, 12 mercenaries/criminals, and an indoctrinated TIM. The rest of the galaxy still thought the Reapers were Geth ships.

Haha I cracked up at this post

I bet the datapad that Shepard was looking at at the end of ME2 was a rough draft of his terms of surrender that he planned to give to Harbinger.

[AlanC9]

devSin wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Yeah, I remember. I'm wondering when the wasteland idea came up, though.

Final Hours includes the flowchart they had for the plot calling out that the Crucible will cause a galactic dark age.

Something that was there for the entire team to see, I'll add, since you like to promote the idea that nobody had the same idea about what the story was.

"Dark Age" and "wasteland" aren't the same thing, of course. But I suppose the script wouldn't show what they figured "dark age" means. I'm concerned with the specifics.

Modifié par AlanC9, 31 août 2012 - 03:27 .

[Moirai]

plfranke wrote...

schwarzaj wrote...

I agree with the OP completely. What's worse is that a DLC like Leviathan could have changed everything. I'll try not to spoil here, but the entire argument for a conventional military victory over the reapers jumps from statistically plausible to a sure fire option with in the span of about a minute. Simply put, Bioware has once again stumbled by refusing to change the endings and will now suffer the consequences with dismal DLC sales.

Good one, rEApers!

the funny thing is though that nothing changes at all you don't even get to see anything from Leviathan make a difference.

Indeed. Which is the fundamental problem with any 'filler' DLC, or prequel game for that matter.

None of it makes the slightest difference in the end. So, other than a bit of additional gameplay distraction, what's the point? If Bioware are sticking to their guns and will not be producing any ME games set after ME3's timeframe, none of it matters because we'll never get to see the payoff from anything.

Take back Omega! Why?

Er, like Leviathan, you'll probably get some EMS points...

Yeah, that's like...totally worth it.

And prequels? Okay, if I read a book where, say, the main character dies at the end, why would I be interested in buying a prequel about his/her childhood. It's not as if I can become emotionally invested in the character again when I already know how, where, when and why they die.

Same with the ME universe. It's effectively 'dead' after ME3, save for a rampant amount of headcannon, so why would I care what happens elsewhere beforehand now?

New characters, new emotional investment! Probably all dead in the Reaper war, and if not, you can make something up yourself...

Yeah. Great. I'll just go get my wallet...

[AresKeith]

AlanC9 wrote...

devSin wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Yeah, I remember. I'm wondering when the wasteland idea came up, though.

Final Hours includes the flowchart they had for the plot calling out that the Crucible will cause a galactic dark age.

Something that was there for the entire team to see, I'll add, since you like to promote the idea that nobody had the same idea about what the story was.

"Dark Age" and "wasteland" aren't the same thing, of course. But I suppose the script wouldn't show what they figured "dark age" means. I'm concerned with the specifics.

well you could look at Arrival, which was also written by Mac

[devSin]

AlanC9 wrote...

"Dark Age" and "wasteland" aren't the same thing, of course. But I suppose the script wouldn't show what they figured "dark age" means. I'm concerned with the specifics.

There is no "script". There are only designer notes (communication between the writers and level and cinematic designers) and dialogue.

There is no dialogue about what happens after the ending, and there are no gameplay scenes that take place after the ending, so there is nothing they will have written down about it.

As for what they felt it means, I think the original ending was clear enough. Relays destroyed (and cannot be repaired), fleets stranded, and space travel essentially eliminated. In other words, galactic dark age.

[AlanC9]

AresKeith wrote...

well you could look at Arrival, which was also written by Mac

Meaning that he likes to break stuff, right.

[AresKeith]

AlanC9 wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

well you could look at Arrival, which was also written by Mac

Meaning that he likes to break stuff, right.

he shows you what happens when a Relay is destroyed or severely damaged

[Mr Worms]

We asked for a simple ending instead we got extended Sh*t

[Hudathan]

Moirai wrote...

And prequels? Okay, if I read a book where, say, the main character dies at the end, why would I be interested in buying a prequel about his/her childhood. It's not as if I can become emotionally invested in the character again when I already know how, where, when and why they die.

Yes. Just because you know the end to a story doesn't mean that the story itself can't be interesting anymore. That's why sequels don't automatically make previous installments irrelevant. Are you saying that A New Hope isn't worth watching anymore because we know what happens at the end of Jedi?

[Moirai]

AresKeith wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

well you could look at Arrival, which was also written by Mac

Meaning that he likes to break stuff, right.

he shows you what happens when a Relay is destroyed or severely damaged

Polishing his skills on a test run before tackling the end of ME3, I guess. Well, if blowing up one was impressive, how much more so would be...blowing them all up...

Clearly he's a writer of great imagination and ingenuity.

Modifié par Moirai, 31 août 2012 - 03:57 .

[plfranke]

Moirai wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

well you could look at Arrival, which was also written by Mac

Meaning that he likes to break stuff, right.

he shows you what happens when a Relay is destroyed or severely damaged

Polishing his skills on a test run before tackling the end of ME3, I guess. Well, if blowing up one was impressive, how much more so would be...blowing them all up...

Clearly he's a writer of great imagination and ingenuity.

They said destroying the mass effect universe and alienating a huge portion of our fan base couldn't be done. But, they haven't met... the Crucible.

[AlanC9]

AresKeith wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

well you could look at Arrival, which was also written by Mac

Meaning that he likes to break stuff, right.

he shows you what happens when a Relay is destroyed or severely damaged

This again?

Somehow the only two planets we see in the ending are magically not destroyed, but all the planets we don't see are? And according to the maps most garden worlds don't have relays in the first place.

Modifié par AlanC9, 31 août 2012 - 04:11 .

[Killdren88]

schwarzaj wrote...

I agree with the OP completely. What's worse is that a DLC like Leviathan could have changed everything. I'll try not to spoil here, but the entire argument for a conventional military victory over the reapers jumps from statistically plausible to a sure fire option with in the span of about a minute. Simply put, Bioware has once again stumbled by refusing to change the endings and will now suffer the consequences with dismal DLC sales.

Good one, rEApers!

Frustration, More DLC that Bioware makes that makes a conventenal victory possible they will have more backlash...Sarcastically "Next DLC, we will have Shepard discover a prothean Starcrusier with intel on where to hit Repaers causing the most damage. Not only that the star cruiser itself causes devestating damge. Will it change the ending anyway, or provide insight on Indoctrination? Nope for the ending, and maybe for the Indoctrination. Buy the next DLC for more possible clues about Indoctrination, and even more powerful weapons that will not change the ending. All  hail our masters. the rEApers."

Anger, I truly hope this is not the case....

Modifié par Killdren88, 31 août 2012 - 04:15 .

[mrcanada]

 Signed.

[AresKeith]

AlanC9 wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

well you could look at Arrival, which was also written by Mac

Meaning that he likes to break stuff, right.

he shows you what happens when a Relay is destroyed or severely damaged

This again?

Somehow the only two planets we see in the ending are magically not destroyed, but all the planets we don't see are? And according to the maps most garden worlds don't have relays in the first place.

we already been over this and now your trying to bring it back up

[AlanC9]

Eloise K wrote...


Since the first endings were heavely inspired by The Hyperion Cantos it isn't unlikely that the outcome of the choices given by the Catalyst would lead to a very dark age. For instance, in the first book of said saga humanity travels through space using the farcaster network (portals), which permits to travel instantly throughout the galaxy; at the end of the book those portals are destroyed, humanity is stranded and faces a new dark age, et cetera.

Sure. If that's the kind of dark age we're talking about, I'm OK with it. Though Simmons blew stuff up even worse than ME3 in TFOH, what with planets being incinerated from space instead of leisurely harvested, and mass starvation on TC2 and a few others. (And since a dark age worked there, it's hardly surprising Bio thought it'd work in an RPG.)

I don't think you're using "nihilism" correctly. ME3 isn't any more nihilistic than the Hyperion Cantos were.

Modifié par AlanC9, 31 août 2012 - 04:27 .

[AlanC9]

AresKeith wrote...

we already been over this and now your trying to bring it back up

Didn't you bring it up?

But yeah, whatever. We done this already.

Modifié par AlanC9, 31 août 2012 - 04:26 .

[CitizenThom]

ME3's ending is somewhat nihilistic. Nothing you do up to the endings matters much in the end.