257 réponses à ce sujet

[WhiteKnyght]

To add a cutscene for every war asset would require more time, money, and resources than the entire trilogy did. And would have a filesize of like 50gb(Extended Cut, for all the cutscenes it added, was nearly 2 gigabytes.)

Not to mention, not all of your assets go to Earth.

Take the Kakliosaurs for one. They're needed to aid the Krogan on toxic worlds, because they're the only thing besides them that can breathe there. They're irrelevant on Earth.

[Ghost]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

To add a cutscene for every war asset would require more time, money, and resources than the entire trilogy did. And would have a filesize of like 50gb(Extended Cut, for all the cutscenes it added, was nearly 2 gigabytes.)

Not to mention, not all of your assets go to Earth.

Take the Kakliosaurs for one. They're needed to aid the Krogan on toxic worlds, because they're the only thing besides them that can breathe there. They're irrelevant on Earth.

This is true.

[silverexile17s]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

To add a cutscene for every war asset would require more time, money, and resources than the entire trilogy did. And would have a filesize of like 50gb(Extended Cut, for all the cutscenes it added, was nearly 2 gigabytes.)

Not to mention, not all of your assets go to Earth.

Take the Kakliosaurs for one. They're needed to aid the Krogan on toxic worlds, because they're the only thing besides them that can breathe there. They're irrelevant on Earth.

Not every single war asset. That's just not possible.
But one or two for each general, overall catagory (one or two for the turian catagory, one or two for the quarian, one or two for the krogan, one or two for the geth), are a better chance, no?
Like say, get a cutscene that the krogan are either kicking ass because you built up their War Asset catagory, or getting killed because you neglected it. Wouldn't that be easer to create?

Modifié par silverexile17s, 04 décembre 2012 - 10:05 .

[AshenSugar]

Ironically I posted about the possibility of a revamped Priority: Earth yesterday, how strange....

http://social.biowar...4642/1#15151282


In any case I can't help but feel that during the planning stages of ME3, they likely had something similar in mind - an ambitions plan to develop a mission in which you get to see all the war assets you accumulated in action, and your EMS contributing to the effectiveness of those forces - else, why even have the war assets in the first place?

Unfortunately, I think it probable that these plans were revised due to time/budget constraints, and replaced with the generic three-squad shooter mission we have now.

They likely did all the preliminary work on the game, creating the assets, and then outlined the plans they had to make use of these assets to the grey-suited EA executives; who rejected it out of hand as 'too time-consuming' - and sent them away with stern instructions to put the time and effort into multiplayer instead - forcing Bioware to re-write the final sections of the game.

The current Priority: Earth has all the hallmarks of something that was quite rushed, tacked onto the end of the game in a hurry, with an "Oh well that will have to do" mindset.

I do feel that a revamped Priority: Earth in the form of DLC, in which war assets were represented on-screen as part of the battle would help create the ME3 that should have existed if Bioware had been given more time and resources to develop it properly.

Modifié par AshenSugar, 04 décembre 2012 - 10:31 .

[Funkdrspot]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

To add a cutscene for every war asset would require more time, money, and resources than the entire trilogy did. And would have a filesize of like 50gb(Extended Cut, for all the cutscenes it added, was nearly 2 gigabytes.)

Not to mention, not all of your assets go to Earth.

Take the Kakliosaurs for one. They're needed to aid the Krogan on toxic worlds, because they're the only thing besides them that can breathe there. They're irrelevant on Earth.

They don't even have to have a cutscene for every war asset, just have them IN  ACTION as we're fighting through London. That's how I  envisioned it. Each group you would either see close up or fighting in the distance. Heck, take it a step further and let the player dole out instructions to the different assets like the ME 2 suicide mission.

It was the end of a trilogy and it was the end of a story arc that COULD  have been this generations' Star Wars. Instead, they kinda cheapened out and now their entire franchise is back at square one.

IMHO, all the free stuff from the MP  was fun but I didn't buy the game for that. The EC was great but then again it should have came like that. They need a revamped Priority: Earth to put a proper cap on such a great game. I wouldn't even mind paying. Add 3 extra hrs of game play and I'll chip in $10 for it.

Modifié par Funkdrspot, 04 décembre 2012 - 10:44 .

[Xellith]

Just give each faction its own EMS score. Lets say you obtain 80% of the avaliable Blue suns assets then you get the blue suns in your cutscene. Whether you get a good CS or not would be dependant on your actual EMS score.

So basically 1-3 different cs per faction.

Modifié par Xellith, 04 décembre 2012 - 10:47 .

[BioticArm]

SUPPORT

[silverexile17s]

Xellith wrote...

Just give each faction its own EMS score. Lets say you obtain 80% of the avaliable Blue suns assets then you get the blue suns in your cutscene. Whether you get a good CS or not would be dependant on your actual EMS score.

So basically 1-3 different cs per faction.

That's basically what I said, too. Give each of the main catagories of War Asset (turian, krogan, qurian, geth, asari, salarian, alien, alliance, crucible, ex-cerberus, ) their own cutscene that is either good or bad, depending on how high it's value was. As well as giving Citadel DF an EMS too, so that the survival of the Council and Citadel population depends on how high it's value is.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 04 décembre 2012 - 09:21 .

[AlanC9]

AshenSugar wrote...
They likely did all the preliminary work on the game, creating the assets, and then outlined the plans they had to make use of these assets to the grey-suited EA executives; who rejected it out of hand as 'too time-consuming' - and sent them away with stern instructions to put the time and effort into multiplayer instead - forcing Bioware to re-write the final sections of the game.

I doubt the italed bit. The effort and time for MP came from outside Bioware Edmonton -- if anything, MP subsidized SP with the N7 maps. I suppose it's conceivable that Bio staff who would have worked on ME3 were put to work on TOR, though. Or that EA thought the overall  projected SP budget was excessive and demanded cuts; that still wouldn't have anything to do with MP since MP generates revenue.

Modifié par AlanC9, 04 décembre 2012 - 09:34 .

[brummyuk19]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

To add a cutscene for every war asset would require more time, money, and resources than the entire trilogy did. And would have a filesize of like 50gb(Extended Cut, for all the cutscenes it added, was nearly 2 gigabytes.)

Not to mention, not all of your assets go to Earth.

Take the Kakliosaurs for one. They're needed to aid the Krogan on toxic worlds, because they're the only thing besides them that can breathe there. They're irrelevant on Earth.

We don't want cinimatics or cutscenes of every single war asset. Just the ones that follow you to earth. Where are the geth? Where are the quarians? Where is the Salarian fleet? Where are the mercs? Where is captian Kirahee? I could go on and on, but I won't.

We don't just want cinimatics, we want to see our forces fighting beside us, we want to deal out orders to our war assets like we did to our team in the suicide mission. The success, or failure of priority Earth should depend on your choices.

Modifié par brummyuk19, 05 décembre 2012 - 11:14 .

[silverexile17s]

AlanC9 wrote...

AshenSugar wrote...
They likely did all the preliminary work on the game, creating the assets, and then outlined the plans they had to make use of these assets to the grey-suited EA executives; who rejected it out of hand as 'too time-consuming' - and sent them away with stern instructions to put the time and effort into multiplayer instead - forcing Bioware to re-write the final sections of the game.

I doubt the italed bit. The effort and time for MP came from outside Bioware Edmonton -- if anything, MP subsidized SP with the N7 maps. I suppose it's conceivable that Bio staff who would have worked on ME3 were put to work on TOR, though. Or that EA thought the overall  projected SP budget was excessive and demanded cuts; that still wouldn't have anything to do with MP since MP generates revenue.

I have to actually agree. I don't see how multiplayer takes away from SP funding when EA and BioWare get money from the ammount of bandwith used by the servers. More people on MP, more money.

[silverexile17s]

brummyuk19 wrote...

The Grey Nayr wrote...

To add a cutscene for every war asset would require more time, money, and resources than the entire trilogy did. And would have a filesize of like 50gb(Extended Cut, for all the cutscenes it added, was nearly 2 gigabytes.)

Not to mention, not all of your assets go to Earth.

Take the Kakliosaurs for one. They're needed to aid the Krogan on toxic worlds, because they're the only thing besides them that can breathe there. They're irrelevant on Earth.

We don't want cinimatics or cutscenes of every single war asset. Just the ones that follow you to earth. Where are the geth? Where are the quarians? Where is the Salarian fleet? Where are the mercs? Where is captian Kirahee? I could go on and on, but I won't.

We don't just want cinimatics, we want to see our forces fighting beside us, we want to deal out orders to our war assets like we did to our team in the suicide mission. The success, or failure of priority Earth should depend on your choices.

Indeed, I could not have said it better myself. Cutscenes for the major factions and characters are all that would be needed. At least make you feel that it was worth it to make sure that even if you don't survive stopping the Reapers, you made sure everyone else does.

[Maxster_]

[quote]silverexile17s wrote...

@Fawx9
I'm just tired of people like Maxstor_ saying that ME3 was utter garbage at every second at that it's totally unsavable, when that is not the case. He is a troll, as he says that BioWare closing down is what they deserve and that he doesn't support the game anyway.
More then anything, I want him to let it go. [/quote]
Pathetic.
You just ignored everything i said, and made up "my" points i never stated, and then started to argue with that.
I'll answer a few of your "points".

[quote]30. It means the core of the Reaper fleet - including Harbinger - are at Earth. Those would likely be the oldest, largest, and strongest of the Reapers.
Did you really think anyone but Shepard could possibly make it through something like that alive?
31. Did you not hear James say that he saw Reapers a "whole lot bigger" then the Sovergien-class on Earth?
He says that on Palaven, not long after you land, Meaning that several Reapers around the size of Harbinger, who is bigger then a Sovergien-class, are on Earth, if Vega is to be believed. Not to mention, do you not remember the hundreds of Reapers seen in the end of ME2? I serously doubt that the Reapers seen in game were the only types out there. Especally comapired to that ending scene in ME2.
[/quote]
Blah-blah-blah.
Now you inventing something never existed in game. Not a first time, yeah.
Especially idiotic is a phrase about Shepard. But, i guess, it is pointless to even describe this stupidity to you. I've had enough of that crap debating with dreman.
[quote]
32. You are the one that speaks false.
(1)
When the Crucible enters the Sol System, there needs to be a seperate fleet bringing it in, and keep it safe, beacuse there is no assurances that the Citadel arms will be open on secudule.
(2). Not according to the "Reaper Vunerabilaties" codex. It says that several frigates combined can take on a Sovergien-class. Besides, there are less Sovergien-class then Destroyer-class.
[/quote]
Prove that.
Also, completely irrelevant to my point.
[quote]
(3) That does not work, as the Reapers can just simply shut off the beam at th Citadel end. So no point to that tactic of yours. Besides, shuttles delivered Hammer, not frigates. If they detected anything like a swarm of frigates, they would have considered it a possible threat, and shut the beam off then and there.
[/quote]
No, it is right tactic for any sane person with basic knowledge about tactics.
You are basically saying, that reapers are retarded, so they haven't turned the beam of because of the idiotic ground assault, which posed no threat to the beam.
So, Anderson and Hackett just sacrificed entire ground forces for a completely unneeded operation, in a premise that reapers do not turn the beam off, because that idiotic ground assault pose no threat to them.

Wow does not even cover that © smudboy

[quote]
There were dozens of Reapers centered at London. And there was little-to-no room for any other tactic. Take it slow, and you are just a target. Split up and work around, and you get swarmed by the enemies sheer numbers.
Fast and hard was a tactic that the Reapers would expect the least, and would get the troops through the quickest, minimizing losses as best as one could. There really was no other option. The Reapers would have had the same level of forces and bad terain in all the 365 degrees of area surrounding the beam. Anderson himself said that there was no good part of the area to go through, so it would have been the same no matter what.
Nothing short of an "I win" bomb would have made it work any other way.
[/quote]
Bwahahahaha.
So, reapers have the beam, which they can turn off any moment(actually turning off in cutscenes).
They can turn it off any moment, so, the longer operation continues - the greater probability that reapers turn the beam off.
Any sane person(obviously not you) would have devised a plan to minimize that probability.

And you are proposing to greatly increase that probability, stating obviously false assertion, that it will decrease that probability.

Also, reapers outnumbers ground forces, and longer the operation continues,- so greater would be losses. So, to minimize losses you proposing to increase losses.
Man, you are really inadequate.
I know, you just arguing for the sake of arguing, but stating obviously retarded ideas as genius ones - is really too much.

[quote]
33.
Harbinger started his decent as soon as he "felt" (sensed) the Destroyer fall.
If a fleet of frigates had decended, he would have landed a lot sooner. Then no one, Shepard included, would have made it.
Going in with shttles rendered him unaware of what Shepard was doing until the end. But, ever arrogant of himself, instead of shutting off the beam, he decided to personally show Shepard his true power, and how pointless fighting him was.
[/quote]
You are really pathetic.
First, you stated that a several frigates can defeat sovereign class reaper.
And now you stating that they can't defeat a single reaper.

So, to "prove" your "points", you stating opposite assertions in single post.

I'm not even saying about frigates being faster than dreadnoughts - thus creating a window of opportunity. Such complex concepts, obviously, are over your head.
It is like "debating" with dreman.

But, ever arrogant of himself, instead of shutting off the beam, he decided to personally show Shepard his true power, and how pointless fighting him was.
This was really retarded. So, a billion old year spaceship, now consindering Shepard a threat. Riight. As if reapers wasn't already destroyed as antagonists.
Especially funny, when Harbringer forgots about his main gun.


[quote]34. No. This can be done without ever touching them
Please leave your personal bias of the endings out of this.

35.
Again I say, the endings do not need to be touched at all for this to work. Nither does anything need to be as redesigned as you keep thinking.
[/quote]
Ending being badly written(as ME3 as a whole) is a fact, not an opinion.
And, any cutscenes that don't change epilogue and endings are meaningless.

Well, given almost everything you said is nonsensical self-contradicting gibberish - no surprise there.
[quote]
36. You are fooling yourself if you thought total victory against this was possible. Did you not see what Sovergien alone did to the Citadel fleet? Total victory like that is just as ridiculous as the "speac magic" that you think the endings are. It's not that they need more effort. It's that people like you are too used to fary-tale happy endings for everything.
Shakespere didn't need any of that stuff to make good plays. Why does every game need a total victory happy ending all the time? Victory like in Star Wars: Return of the Jedi isn't possible. Not against something like this.

ME3 didn't fail. That's just you personally being butthurt over the games endings. And only that.

Everyone else said that ME3 was a great game. Some even thought that just the ending was the problem, and that Priority: Earth had no major problems.
[/quote]
You have no idea what i said in my quote.
But of course, you need to say something, or butthurt would be too great.

ME3 is a tale of unconditional surrender to an insane entity, it contradicts everything ME1 and ME2 was about. It changes themes, it destroys lore, it assassinates characters, nullifies its prequels.
It is utter stand-alone gabage.

And of course, ME3 is a failure. It hadn't failed finansically, due to pre-release lies of EAWare, but it destroyed their fanbase, and greatly damaged their reputation, already severely damaged with SWTOR and DA2 failures.

Everyone else said that ME3 was a great game. Some even thought that just the ending was the problem, and that Priority: Earth had no major problems.

And now you are just lying.
No surprise.
[quote]
37. Again, that is your butthurt doing the talking.
ME3 is nowhere beyond repair, when so many of the people said tha the EC would have lessened the fan complaints greatly had it been included. That right there is indication that it is not beyond repair, if so many outraged fans quited down after EC was released. They said it was much better then the original. That more then disproves your statement that it is beyond repair.
With so many variables to keep track of, there was no other way they could take it othe rthat the tally system of the EMS.
[/quote]
You have no proof of your generalized obviously false assertions.
You know, saying that you proved something, - is not actually proving anything. It just demonstrates that you incapable of discussion, and can't debate without lying and demagogy.

Of course, after Extended Crap, most of former Bioware fanbase just written them off. Look at BSN, comparative sales of DLCs - bsn is dying, Leviathan and Omega sold worse than Pinnacle station.
There is a lot of indirect proof supporting my point, and you have none.

ME3 is beyond repair because it is horrible written - fairytale garbage like Crucible, Cerberus Empire and Catalyst - have no place in ME universe, and scifi in general.

[quote]
38. It's called "you have a butthurt bias."
Serously, with all the bad reactions to the games original ending, the money they had to pay out of their own pocket, and EA's, to make the EC and the MP packs, chaos caused by the retiring of their founders, and the dumping of the project, the DLC, and the entire series, onto the Montreal branch, it's no surprise that Omega didn't live up to the hype. And butthurt trolls like you giving them an even harder time with hate-rage instead of constrcutive critisism, doesn't help, or give them incentive to try harder, as people like you only convince them that you are not worth the effort.

That about sum it up?
[/quote]
Illustration of common sense by silverexile17s:

You bought hamburger at McDonalds. You didn't liked it.
So, you must buy more hamburgers, so eventually they become better. Or not.
But, saying that hamburger sucks, and you won't buy anymore hamburgers(or even everything) from McDonalds - is a butthurt bias.

Wow does not even cover that © smudboy


Even *facedesk* will not demonstrate fully the idiocy of that post. I really have no words.

Sure, blaming customers for company's failures - is a sound business strategy. It always works.
[quote]

39. Because of your rageing. Serously, constructive critisism is one thing. Trolling like yours is another.
There were curcumstances for this, caused in part by fan rage. Failure is caused by many things. Any failing to acknolodge yourself as part of it isn't doing anyone any favors. They proved they still have in in them with Leviathan. But the trolling like yours is hardly giving them a reason to put effort into it anymore, as they feel like you will never be satisfied.
[/quote]
As i said, i don't care for their justification of their failures.
Also, it is no matter what justification is - failure is still failure.
And blaming customers for company's failures - will never work.
With ME3 garbage writing - there is no reason to think that their products will not be garbage written. You know, 3 failures in a row - enough for prognosis.
And past achievements do not guarantee the future success.

Oh well, i know already, that you have no idea what common sense is.

[quote]
40. Again, butthurt trolling.
ME3 was widely considered to have failed only in the ending. The rest of the game was exactally what we expected. The many posts here prove that no one really shares your extreme view on ME3 as a whole. Just the endings.
[/quote]
Another lie from you.

[quote]Admit it. This is all because you are aring a personal grudge on the endings.[/quote]
No, it is valid complains about garbage product i got.
[quote]
And again. That is personal bias. DA2 wa just a build up for DA3. Just as ME2 was.[/quote]
Pathetic.
DA2 was obvious failure, sales numbers, stopping of DLC production, negatively acclaimed by community.
ME2 was a success.

So, you lying again, to "prove" your "point".
[quote]
ST:TOR is an MMO. That happens to them all, so that is not a valid point you can use, especally since LucasArts and EA shares ownership of the game's development. You cannot force-feed the blame souly on BioWare.
[/quote]
Really pathetic.
SWTOR was a obvious failure, it hadn't even compensated their expenses. And it is already F2P.
Compare that to EVE.
So, your justification for SWTOR not being a failure - because there is some MMO that also failed.
Lol.
[quote]
Haters like you are the reason that the company might fall apart. Any bad games will end up falling on your own head, as no company can survive without a fan base. Since you are clearly not a BioWare fan of any sort anymore:

Kindly get the hell out of here, troll.
[/quote]
You are pathetic.
You blaming failures of a company on their customers, just like EAWare.

And who is troll?
To "prove" your "points", you use plain lies, false statements, plain nonsense and gibberish. You arguing for the sake of arguing, you unable to prove any of your assertions, nor you haven't even tried.
You basically saying that all your statements is true, because they are true.

[quote]41.
Not according to this very thread. This thread exists for people that want Priority: Earth to be improved. It has nothing to do about the endings, and is about the prospect of improving the final mission, without touchiing the ending subject, so kindly take your hate-gripes to another thread. And if you have written them off so utterly, you are not really a fan anymoe, meaning you have no place here.

So again, kindly get the hell out of here, troll.
[/quote]
Compare that thread with threads about endings in march - and you get the idea. Or not, in your case.

As for who should get out, troll - you came to this thread with your nonsensical gibberish, and turned this thread into another EAWare defenders topic.
So it is you who should get out of here, spew your nonsense somewhere else.


[quote]42. That was no more space magic then a race of giant, billions of years old starships coming back to kill everything, or a giant telepathic talking plant, or a 50,000 year-old beacon that zaps the memories of an entrie race into your head, or biotics and eezo in gereral, or cyber-zombie husks, or the race that originated the Reapers still being alive.
It's a space-opera thriller. "Space magic" things are kind of a given.
And the helmets and suits are the same. They still seal up in hostile condidtons or vaccums.
[/quote]
ME1 was a soft scifi, ME3 is nonsensical fairytale.
So, because ME1 had some very unplausible things, it is considered by as a carte blanche for garbage writing.
No surpise from a pro-ender.


[quote]46. What makes it a false statement? You refuse to see anything that affects the narrative or story ponts as a gameplay element. It always has to affect combat for it to be considered a gameplay elements for you.[/quote]
It is simple - i never said what you implied i said.
You just changed theme to a your invented one - and then started bashing something that wasn't my point, but was made up by you.
It is demagogy method.

[quote]
47. That right there proves that you are a butthurt troll. A hater that cannot let go. Someone willing to ignore all the good game content that BioWare made. And still can.
Honestly, this is ment to be feedback that could improve the game, if someone tried it, not a place for you to air your little grudge. Its' like a child throwing a tantrum for no reason other then the fact he thinks he's right, and nothing else.

So, for a third time, kindly get the hell out of here, troll.
[/quote]
What a bull****.
I'll just repeat myself
Illustration of common sense by silverexile17s:

You bought hamburger at McDonalds. You didn't liked it.
So, you must buy more hamburgers, so eventually they become better. Or not.
But, saying that hamburger sucks, and you won't buy anymore hamburgers(or even everything) from McDonalds - is a butthurt bias.

Wow does not even cover that © smudboy


Even *facedesk* will not demonstrate fully the idiocy of that post. I really have no words.

Sure, blaming customers for company's failures - is a sound business strategy. It always works.

[quote]
48. Again, you did not refute the pointhttp://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/wizard.png
What makes it false? Most sahre the opinion that the games only failing was the ending. So far, you are the only one I have seen that has been so extreme in thinking the game was bad.
[/quote]
Your generalization is false, and you have no proof other than So far, you are the only one I have seen that has been so extreme in thinking the game was bad., which 1) not a proof of your assertion 2) made only in next post.

[quote]
49. The Force in Star Wars invaladates that that "space magic has no place in sci-fi" BS of yours. As does the magics of Final Fantasy.
The Death Star in Star Wars, the Star Forge of Star Wars: KotOR, and the Helilos A.I. of Deus Ex invaladate your claims of reality/life affecting machines not having a place in sci-fi.
And Cerberus becoming the empire when they had a place like Omega to farm an army from, and a plentaful soucre of Reaper tech from the nearby Omega-4 Relay, makes more sense then you think is possible.
Besides, KotOR's Revan cropped up a sith amry rather quickly, did he not?

We knew ahead of time we'd be on Earth, because of Shepard's trial over the Arrival events.
And I don't see how it was all that different then the monolouge at the start of ME1, or the scene with the Illusive Man and Miranda in ME2. And the Cerberus Coup is no better or worse then any other plot-line in the series.
[/quote]
Star Wars is not a scifi.
And repeating garbage EAWare writing is not proving anything.

So, to prove that space magic have a place in scifi, you provided example of Star Wars - obviously not a scifi title.

Riight.

Why i even care about this debate? It is obvious now that you have no idea what you talking about.

[quote]
51. A different BioWare branch is in control now. And besides, this is "just in case." You don't support it, don't comment. Simple as that.
[/quote]
You are in no place to give me orders, i'm afraid. I go where i like, and do whatever i like.

[quote]52. Not true at all. To do that, the game would have needed to be twice as big as it is now. And with all the veriables already in the game from imports, there was no way a system like yours would have been possible for anyone.
You cannot be angry at them for being unable to do something that was impossible. Don't forget that Mass Effect was not the only game they were working on. There was DA and TOR as well. They could not focus all their resources on one spicific project. They are still their own company. This is their pocket, not EA's really.
[/quote]
Your assertion is not truth. You have no proof.
And i don't care for your or their excuses for their failure.
[quote]
53. Oh, please. That's just blowing smoke.
If MP wasn't in the game, would that suddenly have made the endings any better? Do you expect me to believe that tearing out MP would suddenly fix everything that people thought was wrong with the endings? MP is about all that keeps the game going right now, until the next DLC.
Even if MP was not part of the game, you still woul not like the game. There would be other reasons you would gripe over about the choices being worthless. The MP doesn't affect anything right now. You don't HAVE to import, and you can get the same level without doing so. The MP boost to SP is at present, unless my idea is taken, just cosmetic. So no, MP has nothing to do with why you consider choices invaladated. Especally when it's an optonial feture.
[/quote]
Gibberish.
You know, a bunch of baseless assertions is not a proof.
And, game was designed to shoehorn multiplayer into singleplayer from the start of the development process.
And this design decision, put a severe restrictions on everything war assets related.
And of course, it is completely irrelevant to the current state of MP-SP relations.

[quote]
54. The Normandy was literally right above London, since the battle was near the Citadel, which was centered right over London. And in ME1, we saw how fast the Normandy SR1 could decend through planitary atmosphere.
[/quote]
Just wow.
I guess it is pointless.
I'm not going to discuss orbital mechanics with another dreman.
[quote]Also, whose to say that the ship was in the battle at the time, and not following Harbinger after the Allies noticed the Reaper's decent? Joker could have been trying to stall Harbinger and his back-up group all the way down, for all we know. It's open to speculation, but certinly not open enough to be considered a plothole.[/quote]
It is a plothole. Normandy going from space battle in orbit to a precise point near surface in less than 5 sec- it is impossible without FTL.
And if it is possible(and it is not) - it will be another reason why ground assault was completely unneeded.
[quote]
Also, if a fleet of shuttles could be targeted by those Hades Cannon Destroyers, how the hell were firgates supposed to get through. They would have all been cut to ribbons without any of them landing. Or, the Reapers would notice the large ammount of ships heading for the conduit and just shut it off. The tiny shuttles were not considered a major threat. A swarm of frigates however, they would have decended on like birds of prey.
[/quote]
Now shuttles are better defended than frigates.
You are really pathetic, you just making up things.
So, to lessen losses of ground forces, which are needed to get into the Citadel, not to die on useless ground assault, you proposing that they should be delivered in less protected craft without assault capabilities.
So, to lessen losses, we send them in unprotected and without support, so more then half of them die before landing.
You really have no idea what military tactics is.

Especially funny, when you just contradicting yourself in one point.
So, you said(this is of course another false statement from you) - we have frigates that can descend from orbit in less than 5 seconds. So no reapers defence will even have time to react.
But, to lessen our losses - we will send slow, unarmed and unprotected craft instead. And lose them all.

I have no words, this is so unbelievably stupid...
[quote]
Either way, if they had sent frigates in, they would have been too large a force to escape the notice of the Sovergien-class Reapers, or Harbinger. And then they are destroyed, and you lose your entire ground force, and a large portion of space-fight capable ships.
[/quote]
Sure sure, instead of sending armed, armored and shielded fast craft to drop ground forces to the point from which they can fastly get into the Citadel - we will send slow, unarmed and unarmored craft, so reapers can finally have some target practice.


[quote]
Not to mention, with kenitic barriers that can take fire from over four dreadnoughts before breaking, and armor that was likely tougher then even a Sovergien-class Reapers, do you really think Harbinger had that much to worry about from the Normandy? It was a fly that wasn't worth swatting to him. Not to mention that the Normandy firing would have caused a backblast shockwave that would have flattened Shepard, as well as any other surviving members of Hammer. Or damaged the conduit - you know, the only way up into the Citadel?
[/quote]
Frigates are faster than dreadnoughts. And there was no Harbringer at the beam at the start of prioity:earth.
Thus we have a window of opportunity.

Also, you again contradicting yourself.
First you stated, that Harbringer descended to personally show Shepard his true power, and how pointless fighting him was.
And then you stated that the Normandy firing would have caused a backblast shockwave that would have flattened Shepard, as well as any other surviving members of Hammer
So, Harbringer is now have less powerful guns than Normandy.

Ah yes, i forgot, Harbinger deliberately lowered power of his guns and forgot about his main gun, because he wanted to personally show Shepard his true power, and how pointless fighting him was.
And accidentaly(or deliberately) flattening Shepard as well as Hammer, is of course would not be good, because Shepard will not see his true power, and will not see how pointless fighting Harbringer was.
I just can't...

No, really that was unbelivably retarded.
To defend EAWare garbage writing, you just making up self-contradicting "explanations". Really pathetic.

[quote]Also, the tool I refrenced was the conduit. Harbinger going all out would have devastated the conduit that, as we see in the cutscenes, they only just got operatonial.
[/quote]
So he is retarded, because he could just turn it off.
Also, you have no idea what "conduit" is - it is just asspull magic which have no place in the lore.
Your assertions based on things you just make up to "prove" your "point" - have no weight.
[quote]
It would have been inefficant and annoying for him to have to start over on building it. Also, Harbinger is extremely arrogant. He wants to break Shepard as much as he wants to kill the Commander, so he decides to show his true power, in order to show Shepard how futile it is to face him. To show that without even trying, he can wipe out the forces Shepard gathered, and there is nothing Shepard can do to stop him.[/quote]
Sure, that is why he forgots about his main gun and lowers power of his other guns.
[quote]
Or, if you want a simpler explination, the ground forces getting to the beam is the top consern, not a ship that can't get through it. The Normandy is just an annoyance, and not one that will fire, for risk of damaging the only way to the Citadel, or flattening Shepard with the backblast of the attack, so it's not worth shooting out of the sky. Harbinger's priority is Shepard, and the secondary is the ground forces trying to get to the beam.
[/quote]
Ah yes, 400kt tnt equivalent kinetic impact explosion is too powerful.
And Harbringer prefers fair play.

Especially funny that 2km tall billion years old spaceship considers a small human a threat, but prefers not to use his main gun. He is just too kind and honest to use his advantage.
I know, it is pointless to expect any logic from you. You are just mindless EAWare defender, what should i had to expect?.
[quote]Either way, Harbinger considers it impossible that anything more then him is needed for this, hence why in his arrogance, he doesn't just switch off the conduit.
[/quote]
Bwahahahaha.
I really have no words.


And of course, point was about teleporting Normandy plothole. And you just said that it is not a plothole, because it is not a plothole. Well, such discussion method is a standart for you.
[quote]
55. That much raw power? Of course it's going to be devastating to most machines. Besides, they knew it would release massive ammounts of power. Just not what that power would do exactally. And that they sure would not risk waiting to find out.
No, they still didn't know how the Crucible would work. But they weren't going to stay and risk finding out at the possible cost of the lives of everyone who was on a ship.
If you may have just armed a giant doomsday bomb, are you just going to sit
there like an idiot and wait for it to go off and hit you, just because there is a possibilaty that maybe it won't kill
you? Would you really take that risk with the ships of every raceout there?
The retreat was a simple thing called "common sense" telling them to play it safe and not risk the death of everyone currently aboard a ship to find out otherwise.
[/quote]
So, they had no idea what Crucible does, but then somehow they knew how it works.


It is now a giant doomsday bomb. But no, Catalyst says it is battery.
Who cares, Hackett just consulted fortune teller.

Your attempts at justifying garbage writing are really pathetic.
[quote]

56.
Whose to say that was Shep's comm unit and not Anderson's? Or that they could see Anderson's vitals flat-lined, and Hackett called out just hoping that Shepard was there to answer?
Not everything is as narrow-minded and straightforward as you head-cannon yourself into thinking it is.
[/quote]
I just can't
So, you just made up another asspull, to "prove" your "point".

[quote]
58.
Look at indoctrination. The comunicate through soundwaves. That's how indoctrination works. Not to mention the Leviathans. How do they talk? A form of sub-sonic signal most likely, that the brain receves. You also saw how Shepard's memories gave the Leviathans a form to use as an avatar. This telepathy that let tehm infulence other organics is also most likely the source of their abilaty to communicate, as I doubt their mouth analouges can produce words. This same "psionic" abilaty is most likely the method of communication that they gave the Catalyst when they built it, enableing it to comune with any race the same way the Leviathans themselves do. And the same "imprint" abilaty, in which it can use the others memories as an avatar to use for itself. This is hightened by the echoing of Shepard's voice in the Catalyst's.
It's not an asspull, when this method is proven to exist, curtosy of the Leviathans, who built the Catalyst, and whose essence was used to build the first Reaper, Harbinger, which served as a template for all Reapers.
[/quote]
Wow doesn't even cover that © smudboy.

You know, soundwaves are fluctuations of atmosphere. So if there is no athmospere - there is no soundwaves.
Husks are controlled through implants, and indoctrination is a basically brainwashing - altering of thoughts patterns, alteration of neurons connections.

Also, "proving" plausibility of garbage writing with another piece of garbage writing(leviathan) is not going to work. Space magic have no place in scifi.

[quote]
59.
Or maybe you are unable to let go of petty hatred. No one else seems to think the entire game was as terrible as you keep thinking it is. And Synthesis is the ending that is widely regarded as nonsensicle, as well as imoral. The others are ususally debated over moral grounds only.
[/quote]
Anoter lie from you. No suprise.
You already demonstrated, that you are incapable of discussion - you just making things up, lying, spewing nonsense - all that because you have no proof of your obviously false assertions.
[quote]

60.
Again, wrong on all counts.
Normandy was in the battle that was centered right above London, so it was basically a straight trip.
[/quote]
I won't bother discussing orbital mechanics with someone who have no idea about basic logic. It is pointless.
[quote]
ME1 shows how fast a ship can enter atmospheres thanks to Mass Effect technology reducing/increseing the mass of the ship.
[/quote]
No, it doesn't. Virmire is a perfect example of your assertion being just plain lie.
[quote]
Shepard evac scene is becasue Shepard is not willing to let any more close friends (or lovers) be hurt in this war. Too many have died already, and Shepard will not let any more fall if it can be helped.[/quote]
- Why does this pig fly?
- Because it is a flying pig.

So, in last attempt to bring at least someone to the Citadel, to open it - Shepard now suddenly goes full retard and risking over 100 hundred crew and advanced frigate - to evacuate TWO expendable ground soldiers(and ignore other wounded).
You know, no sane military officer would ever give that order in that situation. And if it is given - such officer will be immediately relived of command(and most likely shot as a traitor) and order will be ignored.

Especially retarded that scene, when EDI is in squad. Then, to evacuate EDI from danger, you endanger EDI.
[quote]
The Catalyst is the hub from which all Reapers are connceted. Control is basically wiping the core clean, then upolading Shepard's memories, and moral template, into it, basically making a new Reaper A.I. repleca/clone of Shepard to serve as the new Catalyst.
[/quote]
I.e. space magic.
[quote]
Synthesis is the only one that I cannot understand in terms of how it works.
[/quote]
Given you have no idea about even basic logic, i think this variant of space magic is perfect for you.
[quote]
Not technacally. Nither the Crucible and Citadel have these options built into them. They are only created when they unite.
[/quote]
Yeah yeah, someone designed unknown device with unknown function, which should interface with another unknown device with unknown function, unknown interface, unknown location and unconfirmed existence or need.
And then, magically these two unknown devices, joined together through unknown interface, somehow producing desired effect.

And of course, Catalyst said that it is just a battery, thus all functionality is built-in into Citadel from the beginning. And this is, of course, yet another plothole created by EC.

So, it is as i said - EC fixed nothing, just added more plotholes.



[quote]61. You cannot say that for sure. No one can. And you are the only one that seems to consider the entire game to be an insult. The majority think that true only for the endings. You are indeed a troll, and most of your comments have been butthurt over being unable to let go of the ending. Your "got what they deserve" BS is proof that you are nothing but a troll.
And again, you only think that because you let your butthurt talk for you.
[/quote]
Care to prove your obvioulsy false assertion?
Well, who is i'm asking...

[quote]
62
. No. The problem is that your comments are targeted/refrenced to spicific members of the fanbase that share your exacting standerds and trolling mentality.
[/quote]
Yeah, and says who? Liar, demagogue, and EAWare defender. You have no credibility for such statements.
[quote]
The majority in general - proven by the dozens of polls an threads on this site - think exactally the opposate of what you do. ME3 was a great game from the start, and ended bad. It had more good then bad. It needed work, but was in no way a bad game.
[/quote]
So, now somehow BSN polls are credible for EAWare defenders. Suddenly.
Care to prove your statement? Oh well, i should have guessed.

[quote]To say no replay value is one thing. To say no play value period is being a trolling, butthurt ****** that only loves to hate. The lowest common denomanator. And it is no longer common, as many seem to be willing to overlook that in exchange of the gameplay itslef.
[/quote]
Many but you have no data on percentage on BSN and entire consumer base.
And you think that i just accept your baseless assertions? I will not.
Also, most of core Bioware fanbase already left the forums.
Those who remains are mostly different kind of EAWare supporters - like ITers(nonliteral pro-enders) or literal pro-enders.
[quote]
Those points you keep stating are only problems if you nitpick every single minute thing. There is no such thing as a perfect game. Come out of your fantasy if you think that.
[/quote]
ME1 was better by orders of magnitude. DAO was better by orders of magnitude.
ME3 is just garbage compared even to recent Bioware games. Even obvious failure DA2 was better.
[quote]
The game itself does no such thing. You are the only one that thinks it renders the others worthless, and that's just because you are trolling.
[/quote]
No, i'm complaining.

And you are trolling in defence of EAWare garbage writing - by lying, spewing nonsense, ignoring common sense, ignoring basic logic, and accusing customers of company's failures.

[quote]
64.
It's called reality in general. Sorry if it doesn't match your headcannon, "everything has to be spot-on, one flaw and it's garbage, and I must nitpick everything so that it matches what I say" fantasy that you live in.
Honestly, get your head out of your a** and grow up. No game is perfect, so stop with the tantrum.
[/quote]
I'm not sorry that you have low standarts, and can't prove your points without lying, demagogy and making up "proof".
It is your problem, not mine.

[quote]
:Now, if you REALLY insist on continuing this brawl, could we please do so over PM? The comment walls you and I are leaving are getting no love from the people that actually want to dicuss this civily.
[/quote]
No, thanks, i had enough of your lies, nonsense, and gibberish.

And to finalize this pointless discussion - you lied numerous times, you making up "proof" as it goes, and by that - you contradicting your statements in one post.
It was really pathetic, you are unable to debate. You are like dreman, but he just spews nonsense, not plain lies. So, you even worse than dreman.

[brummyuk19]

Would you guys PLEASE stop it with the walls of text. Take your damn argument somewhere else.

[Maxster_]

brummyuk19 wrote...

Would you guys PLEASE stop it with the walls of text. Take your damn argument somewhere else.

Ok.
This post will be my last post in this thread. Anyway, i already said all i wanted in this topic, even before that EAWare defender arrived.

I wish you luck with your idea of remaking of Priority:Earth mission.
See ya.

Modifié par Maxster_, 06 décembre 2012 - 12:52 .

[silverexile17s]

Maxster_ wrote...

brummyuk19 wrote...

Would you guys PLEASE stop it with the walls of text. Take your damn argument somewhere else.

Ok.
This post will be my last post in this thread. Anyway, i already said all i wanted in this topic, even before that EAWare defender arrived.

I wish you luck with your idea of remaking of Priority:Earth mission.
See ya.

Honestly, PM me. I told you to do that, instead of clogging the page. Responding to all that is tiresom and annoying to me, and others that have to sift through it. If you want to be a BioWare troll, fine, but don't drag the thread down. My last post against you will repond to your points above.
Besides, @The Gray Nayr and @Ghost1017 agrees that your idea is impossible no matter what, even if it had been done from the get-go, and @Funkdrspot, @Xellith, and @brummyuk19 all agree with me that cutscenes of the major War Asstes and characters fates, dependant on the Catagories of War Asset, would drastically imporve Priority: Earth. So you are not as right as you think about ME3 being hated.

If you hate ME3 so much, don't come here, ******.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 06 décembre 2012 - 02:23 .

[silverexile17s]

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

1. Pathetic.
You just ignored everything i said, and made up "my" points i never stated, and then started to argue with that.
I'll answer a few of your "points".

2. Blah-blah-blah.
Now you inventing something never existed in game. Not a first time, yeah.
Especially idiotic is a phrase about Shepard. But, i guess, it is pointless to even describe this stupidity to you. I've had enough of that crap debating with dreman.

3. Prove that.
Also, completely irrelevant to my point.


4. No, it is right tactic for any sane person with basic knowledge about tactics.
You are basically saying, that reapers are retarded, so they haven't turned the beam of because of the idiotic ground assault, which posed no threat to the beam.
So, Anderson and Hackett just sacrificed entire ground forces for a completely unneeded operation, in a premise that reapers do not turn the beam off, because that idiotic ground assault pose no threat to them.

Wow does not even cover that © smudboy

5. Bwahahahaha.
So, reapers have the beam, which they can turn off any moment(actually turning off in cutscenes).
They can turn it off any moment, so, the longer operation continues - the greater probability that reapers turn the beam off.
Any sane person(obviously not you) would have devised a plan to minimize that probability.

And you are proposing to greatly increase that probability, stating obviously false assertion, that it will decrease that probability.

Also, reapers outnumbers ground forces, and longer the operation continues,- so greater would be losses. So, to minimize losses you proposing to increase losses.
Man, you are really inadequate.
I know, you just arguing for the sake of arguing, but stating obviously retarded ideas as genius ones - is really too much.


6. You are really pathetic.
First, you stated that a several frigates can defeat sovereign class reaper.
And now you stating that they can't defeat a single reaper.

So, to "prove" your "points", you stating opposite assertions in single post.

I'm not even saying about frigates being faster than dreadnoughts - thus creating a window of opportunity. Such complex concepts, obviously, are over your head.
It is like "debating" with dreman.

But, ever arrogant of himself, instead of shutting off the beam, he decided to personally show Shepard his true power, and how pointless fighting him was.
This was really retarded. So, a billion old year spaceship, now consindering Shepard a threat. Riight. As if reapers wasn't already destroyed as antagonists.
Especially funny, when Harbringer forgots about his main gun.


7. Ending being badly written(as ME3 as a whole) is a fact, not an opinion.
And, any cutscenes that don't change epilogue and endings are meaningless.

Well, given almost everything you said is nonsensical self-contradicting gibberish - no surprise there.

8. You have no idea what i said in my quote.
But of course, you need to say something, or butthurt would be too great.

ME3 is a tale of unconditional surrender to an insane entity, it contradicts everything ME1 and ME2 was about. It changes themes, it destroys lore, it assassinates characters, nullifies its prequels.
It is utter stand-alone gabage.

And of course, ME3 is a failure. It hadn't failed finansically, due to pre-release lies of EAWare, but it destroyed their fanbase, and greatly damaged their reputation, already severely damaged with SWTOR and DA2 failures.

Everyone else said that ME3 was a great
game. Some even thought that just the ending was the problem, and that
Priority: Earth had no major problems.

And now you are just lying.
No surprise.

9. You have no proof of your generalized obviously false assertions.
You know, saying that you proved something, - is not actually proving anything. It just demonstrates that you incapable of discussion, and can't debate without lying and demagogy.

Of course, after Extended Crap, most of former Bioware fanbase just written them off. Look at BSN, comparative sales of DLCs - bsn is dying, Leviathan and Omega sold worse than Pinnacle station.
There is a lot of indirect proof supporting my point, and you have none.

ME3 is beyond repair because it is horrible written - fairytale garbage like Crucible, Cerberus Empire and Catalyst - have no place in ME universe, and scifi in general.


10. [/quote]
Illustration of common sense by silverexile17s:

You bought hamburger at McDonalds. You didn't liked it.
So, you must buy more hamburgers, so eventually they become better. Or not.
But, saying that hamburger sucks, and you won't buy anymore hamburgers(or even everything) from McDonalds - is a butthurt bias.

Wow does not even cover that © smudboy


Even *facedesk* will not demonstrate fully the idiocy of that post. I really have no words.

Sure, blaming customers for company's failures - is a sound business strategy. It always works.

11. As i said, i don't care for their justification of their failures.
Also, it is no matter what justification is - failure is still failure.
And blaming customers for company's failures - will never work.
With ME3 garbage writing - there is no reason to think that their products will not be garbage written. You know, 3 failures in a row - enough for prognosis.
And past achievements do not guarantee the future success.

Oh well, i know already, that you have no idea what common sense is.

12. Another lie from you.

[quote]Admit it. This is all because you are aring a personal grudge on the endings.[/quote]
13. No, it is valid complains about garbage product i got.

[quote]
And again. That is personal bias. DA2 wa just a build up for DA3. Just as ME2 was.[/quote]
14. Pathetic.
DA2 was obvious failure, sales numbers, stopping of DLC production, negatively acclaimed by community.
ME2 was a success.

So, you lying again, to "prove" your "point".

15. Really pathetic.
SWTOR was a obvious failure, it hadn't even compensated their expenses. And it is already F2P.
Compare that to EVE.
So, your justification for SWTOR not being a failure - because there is some MMO that also failed.
Lol.

16. You are pathetic.
You blaming failures of a company on their customers, just like EAWare.

And who is troll?
To "prove" your "points", you use plain lies, false statements, plain nonsense and gibberish. You arguing for the sake of arguing, you unable to prove any of your assertions, nor you haven't even tried.
You basically saying that all your statements is true, because they are true.

17. Compare that thread with threads about endings in march - and you get the idea. Or not, in your case.

As for who should get out, troll - you came to this thread with your nonsensical gibberish, and turned this thread into another EAWare defenders topic.
So it is you who should get out of here, spew your nonsense somewhere else.



18. ME1 was a soft scifi, ME3 is nonsensical fairytale.
So, because ME1 had some very unplausible things, it is considered by as a carte blanche for garbage writing.
No surpise from a pro-ender.


[quote]46. What makes it a false statement? You refuse to see anything that affects the narrative or story ponts as a gameplay element. It always has to affect combat for it to be considered a gameplay elements for you.[/quote]
19. It is simple - i never said what you implied i said.
You just changed theme to a your invented one - and then started bashing something that wasn't my point, but was made up by you.
It is demagogy method.

20. What a bull****.
I'll just repeat myself
Illustration of common sense by silverexile17s:

You bought hamburger at McDonalds. You didn't liked it.
So, you must buy more hamburgers, so eventually they become better. Or not.
But, saying that hamburger sucks, and you won't buy anymore hamburgers(or even everything) from McDonalds - is a butthurt bias.

Wow does not even cover that © smudboy


Even *facedesk* will not demonstrate fully the idiocy of that post. I really have no words.

Sure, blaming customers for company's failures - is a sound business strategy. It always works.

21. Your generalization is false, and you have no proof other than So far, you are the only one I have seen that has been so extreme in thinking the game was bad., which 1) not a proof of your assertion 2) made only in next post.


22. Star Wars is not a scifi.
And repeating garbage EAWare writing is not proving anything.

So, to prove that space magic have a place in scifi, you provided example of Star Wars - obviously not a scifi title.

Riight.

Why i even care about this debate? It is obvious now that you have no idea what you talking about.

23. You are in no place to give me orders, i'm afraid. I go where i like, and do whatever i like.

24. Your assertion is not truth. You have no proof.
And i don't care for your or their excuses for their failure.

25. Gibberish.
You know, a bunch of baseless assertions is not a proof.
And, game was designed to shoehorn multiplayer into singleplayer from the start of the development process.
And this design decision, put a severe restrictions on everything war assets related.
And of course, it is completely irrelevant to the current state of MP-SP relations.


26.Just wow.
I guess it is pointless.
I'm not going to discuss orbital mechanics with another dreman.
[quote]Also, whose to say that the ship was in the battle at the time, and not following Harbinger after the Allies noticed the Reaper's decent? Joker could have been trying to stall Harbinger and his back-up group all the way down, for all we know. It's open to speculation, but certinly not open enough to be considered a plothole.[/quote]
It is a plothole. Normandy going from space battle in orbit to a precise point near surface in less than 5 sec- it is impossible without FTL.
And if it is possible(and it is not) - it will be another reason why ground assault was completely unneeded.

27. Now shuttles are better defended than frigates.
You are really pathetic, you just making up things.
So, to lessen losses of ground forces, which are needed to get into the Citadel, not to die on useless ground assault, you proposing that they should be delivered in less protected craft without assault capabilities.
So, to lessen losses, we send them in unprotected and without support, so more then half of them die before landing.
You really have no idea what military tactics is.

Especially funny, when you just contradicting yourself in one point.
So, you said(this is of course another false statement from you) - we have frigates that can descend from orbit in less than 5 seconds. So no reapers defence will even have time to react.
But, to lessen our losses - we will send slow, unarmed and unprotected craft instead. And lose them all.

I have no words, this is so unbelievably stupid...

28. Sure sure, instead of sending armed, armored and shielded fast craft to drop ground forces to the point from which they can fastly get into the Citadel - we will send slow, unarmed and unarmored craft, so reapers can finally have some target practice.



29. Frigates are faster than dreadnoughts. And there was no Harbringer at the beam at the start of prioity:earth.
Thus we have a window of opportunity.

Also, you again contradicting yourself.
First you stated, that Harbringer descended to personally show Shepard his true power, and how pointless fighting him was.
And then you stated that the Normandy firing would have caused a backblast shockwave that would have flattened Shepard, as well as any other surviving members of Hammer
So, Harbringer is now have less powerful guns than Normandy.

Ah yes, i forgot, Harbinger deliberately lowered power of his guns and forgot about his main gun, because he wanted to personally show Shepard his true power, and how pointless fighting him was.
And accidentaly(or deliberately) flattening Shepard as well as Hammer, is of course would not be good, because Shepard will not see his true power, and will not see how pointless fighting Harbringer was.
I just can't...

No, really that was unbelivably retarded.
To defend EAWare garbage writing, you just making up self-contradicting "explanations". Really pathetic.

30. So he is retarded, because he could just turn it off.
Also, you have no idea what "conduit" is - it is just asspull magic which have no place in the lore.
Your assertions based on things you just make up to "prove" your "point" - have no weight.
31. Sure, that is why he forgots about his main gun and lowers power of his other guns.

32. Ah yes, 400kt tnt equivalent kinetic impact explosion is too powerful.
And Harbringer prefers fair play.

Especially funny that 2km tall billion years old spaceship considers a small human a threat, but prefers not to use his main gun. He is just too kind and honest to use his advantage.
I know, it is pointless to expect any logic from you. You are just mindless EAWare defender, what should i had to expect?.

33. Bwahahahaha.
I really have no words.


And of course, point was about teleporting Normandy plothole. And you just said that it is not a plothole, because it is not a plothole. Well, such discussion method is a standart for you.

34. So, they had no idea what Crucible does, but then somehow they knew how it works.


It is now a giant doomsday bomb. But no, Catalyst says it is battery.
Who cares, Hackett just consulted fortune teller.

Your attempts at justifying garbage writing are really pathetic.

35. I just can't
So, you just made up another asspull, to "prove" your "point".


36. Wow doesn't even cover that © smudboy.

You know, soundwaves are fluctuations of atmosphere. So if there is no athmospere - there is no soundwaves.
Husks are controlled through implants, and indoctrination is a basically brainwashing - altering of thoughts patterns, alteration of neurons connections.

Also, "proving" plausibility of garbage writing with another piece of garbage writing(leviathan) is not going to work. Space magic have no place in scifi.


37. Anoter lie from you. No suprise.
You already demonstrated, that you are incapable of discussion - you just making things up, lying, spewing nonsense - all that because you have no proof of your obviously false assertions.

38. I won't bother discussing orbital mechanics with someone who have no idea about basic logic. It is pointless.

39.No, it doesn't. Virmire is a perfect example of your assertion being just plain lie.


40. - Why does this pig fly?
- Because it is a flying pig.

So, in last attempt to bring at least someone to the Citadel, to open it - Shepard now suddenly goes full retard and risking over 100 hundred crew and advanced frigate - to evacuate TWO expendable ground soldiers(and ignore other wounded).
You know, no sane military officer would ever give that order in that situation. And if it is given - such officer will be immediately relived of command(and most likely shot as a traitor) and order will be ignored.

Especially retarded that scene, when EDI is in squad. Then, to evacuate EDI from danger, you endanger EDI.

41. I.e. space magic.

42. Given you have no idea about even basic logic, i think this variant of space magic is perfect for you.

43. Yeah yeah, someone designed unknown device with unknown function, which should interface with another unknown device with unknown function, unknown interface, unknown location and unconfirmed existence or need.
And then, magically these two unknown devices, joined together through unknown interface, somehow producing desired effect.

And of course, Catalyst said that it is just a battery, thus all functionality is built-in into Citadel from the beginning. And this is, of course, yet another plothole created by EC.

So, it is as i said - EC fixed nothing, just added more plotholes.

44. Care to prove your obvioulsy false assertion?
Well, who is i'm asking...

45. Yeah, and says who? Liar, demagogue, and EAWare defender. You have no credibility for such statements.

46. So, now somehow BSN polls are credible for EAWare defenders. Suddenly.
Care to prove your statement? Oh well, i should have guessed.


47.Many but you have no data on percentage on BSN and entire consumer base.
And you think that i just accept your baseless assertions? I will not.
Also, most of core Bioware fanbase already left the forums.
Those who remains are mostly different kind of EAWare supporters - like ITers(nonliteral pro-enders) or literal pro-enders.

48. ME1 was better by orders of magnitude. DAO was better by orders of magnitude.
ME3 is just garbage compared even to recent Bioware games. Even obvious failure DA2 was better.

49. No, i'm complaining.

And you are trolling in defence of EAWare garbage writing - by lying, spewing nonsense, ignoring common sense, ignoring basic logic, and accusing customers of company's failures.

50. I'm not sorry that you have low standarts, and can't prove your points without lying, demagogy and making up "proof".
It is your problem, not mine.

51. No, thanks, i had enough of your lies, nonsense, and gibberish.

And to finalize this pointless discussion - you lied numerous times, you making up "proof" as it goes, and by that - you contradicting your statements in one post.
It was really pathetic, you are unable to debate. You are like dreman, but he just spews nonsense, not plain lies. So, you even worse than dreman.[/quote]
1. You didn't refute any of it.

2. You think that would be any harder to add then the diolouge in the EC? Inventing things to add to that last level is the point of this thread, remember? This is something that can be used to improve Priority:Earth. I'm just stating the possibilaties that can make it work. You are the one that said I spicifically was refrencing things that happened in the game. I was stating things that can be added to the final level without making drastic changes. Don't tell me that all this is because of you going through a communication failure?
You did not respond to anything, or give valid points. Saying "blah-blah-blah" is basically tantimount to not being able to refute it.

3. Can you disprove it? The whole point of Shield fleet was to defend the Crucible as it approached the Citadel, and it started it's approach well before the arms opened. Also, the qoutes show that was a idrect responce to your post.

4. Look at the turians. Their clever flanking tactics didn't do a damn on Palaven. Do you really think that tactics like that would do any better on Earth - which is escentally Reaper Ground-Zero? The shear force of the Reapers make them immune to clever tactics. The
only way to ever break throug is with an all out attack, the last thing
they expect.
And a fleet of frigates, making an attempt at landing right in front of it? Yes, then they would have just shut off the beam. If any of those considerably larger frigates got past the pin-point accurate Hades Cannons.
But a fleet of tiny shuttles landing several blocks away, with heavy Reaper ground defenses on all 365 degrees of terain surrounding it? No. They would never have expected any ground force to get through that.
It was the only option avalible. If they tryed landing frigates right in front of the thing, that would have drawn the Reapers to them instantly, and doomed everything from the start.
I sure am glad you weren't leading that OP. You would have killed everyone in a heartbeat.

5. As I said before, the Reapers are overconfident and arrogant. They are almost taunting the Allies, like they are daring them to come and try it. They never expected the ground forces to get that far, and even then, they never thought for a second that Harbinger would allow anything to pass him, after he went down himself. They literally never saw any need to switch off the beam, as they never even considered the possibilaty that those ground forces would not make it past the Destroyer and all their guard forces, but Harbinger itself. And they were right, as only Anderson and Shepard made it. 
The attempt was ammusing to them, but only became a threat after they were right on top of it, and Harbinger was far top arrogant to consider that Shepard would survive his attack, hense why he never even shut off the beam after leaving, which should have been done just in case. It's been the repated flaw that the Reapers are overconfident, and that it is their downfall. This highlights that flaw.

And high losses are a given in this. By pushing straight through to that beam, as hard and fast as you can, and reaching the Citadel no matter how few make it, you save life everywhere in the galaxy. It's basically "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."
Hammer is the few.
The entire galaxy, and every living thing in it, is the many.
Put that in perspective, why don't you? It's not that hard to figure out. It's no different then sacrificing the entirty of Aralakh Company so save the Rachni Queen on Utukku. Sacrifice the unit, save a species.
The risk of sacrificeing Hammer it to save the known way of life for the entire galaxy.
Any real commander with half a brain would choose the same, especally in circumstances like that.

6. With the mass of Hades Cannons attacking them from below, and Harbinger itself and several other Destroyers, and perhaps Sovergien-classes, decending from above to tear them apart, how do you expect them to fight back, espcally if they are carring thousands of troops and vheicles?!  All the Hades Cannon Destroyers under them, with Harbinger and his Destroyer escort (which we see him head to Earth with) barring down on the from above, there is no way a fleet of  frigates weighed down by the invasion force that would survive.
A group of frigates can take a Sovergian-class.
A group of frigates weighed down by thousands of troops and vheiacles, being attacked by Hades Cannons from below and Harbinger and several others from above, can't.

It really isn't that hard to figure out if you use your brain.
What's pathetic is how I have to deconstruct everything to the lowest, most basic terms, just to get you to unserstand it.
I mean, if shuttles can't dodge the Hades Cannons, what makes you think frigates carring thousands of troops and vheicles would do any better? Especally if they draw the attantion of larger Sovergien-class Reapers down on them can?  And, the UT-47A Kodiak  is equipped with stealth technology, which no other frigate besides the Normandy, and the scant half-dozen Normandy SR1 class frigates there are, have. Another reason why the Shuttles were used. But, since the Reapers have optic capabilaties, they still would not have been able to land right in fromt of the conduit.

Once again, I am so glad you didn't do the planning for this attack.

Also, Harbinger calles Shepard an "annoyance" in Arrival, and the Collectors intrest in Shepard shows that Harbinger considers Shepard quite the threat, as he continually directs his forces to "Stop Shepard." the Reaper on Rannoch said that it knew Shepard's name because Harbinger speaks of the Commander. How much of a threat muct the Reapers consider Shepard, if the First Reaper speaks the Commander like that? Even the Leviathans could see that the Reapers considered Shepard to be a threat. They say so themselves, do they not?

Also, those lasers are Harbinger's main guns, that same as every other Reaper we see. I never saw any other Reaper use a beam that was any different, so what do you mean "forgot his main gun?"
Besides, if he was holding back, it was so as not to damage the conduit thay just finished.

7. I know alot of people that would dispute that. Especally since you have no proof that so many consider the entire game that bad. The ME3 ending being bad is widely considered true. The reasons for that vary. But ME3 as a whole being badly written - only a few people think that.
After all, the posts here, nearly all say to change the ending only. And basically all the protests say that only the ending was bad. The last ten menutes. Meaning that Priority: Earth wasn't even considered as in dire need of alteration.
And again, if people really thought that, no one would visit this page, or the Ec would not have been so well receved by the fans. For so many to say the EC made the ending better, is more then enough proof to disprove your claim of cutscenes that don't change the ending being meaningless.

8. That is only how you see ME3, and that's because you are too used to everything having a happy ending, like a disney movie, or the care bears. Only Synthesis contridicts everything like that, and there are people that consider otherwise. Destroy is "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."
Control is the "ultimate sacrifice"
Synthesis is supposedly the "New age/Utopia"
Weather or not it hurts the game lore is a matter of opinion. And anything lore it really affected was fixed by Leviathan and EC.
Phrryc victory is the only thing that people could have hoped to get from a fight like this. It is not satnd alone garbage. As I said before, that is nothing more then butthurt trolling.
No, its' not perfect. Yes, it has flaws. But the major flaws and plotholes (except for how Syntheisis is possible) are fixed.
Everyone on the BSN seems to think that only the ending needed work. None seemed to think that the entire game was trash. Did it need work?.Sure. Was it a bad game? No. Everyone from fan, to reviewer, corporate and fan reviewers alike, agree that ME3 as a whole is a great game.
(Look up "Angry Joe" on youtube, where agrees. He says that despite the game's flaws, ME3 is a great game -"Don't ever. Get that. Wrong!" - Angry Joe)
I'm not lying. You are are being a troll. The posts here prove that you are wrong about the entire game being hated.
Go ahead and start a poll asking which part of the game people hated. You may be surprised.

9. You are the one with no proof, since many fans agree that the EC was much better then the original. And again, you have no proof of how those DLC's sold. Unless you have their sales records,do not make such a bold claim. The fact that you perosnally write them off doen't apply to everyone, and you have no proof that all fans have done so. You are the one using the false generlizations. The fact that people here are on this thread proves that fans haven't written them off the way you have.
Also, if you have this proof, present it.
ME is only considered by you beyond repair because you are forcing yourself into a narrow-minded view, and because you are so butthurt over the endings that you will rave until the sun sets with nothing, not even a fully re-worked Priority: Earth mission changing your mind. If you want to write the endings off, fine. But don't force that on others, espceally without any direct or indierct proof presented.

10. No. The proper generlization is:
Buy a hamburger as McDonalds's. You don't like it, fine.
You see some other idiot raving at them, telling everyone it's crap before they even try it, and running his mouth in their place of busness about how it's irredmeable garbage and that he hopes they close down, because he thinks that's what they deserve.
He is not giving others a chance to find out themselves, nor is he being open-minded about the possibilaty of it getting better.
You try to stop him from making a bigger idiot of himself, over something that forcing them closed over will not fix.:innocent:

That's the generlization of what happened here.
Baming them for it for all eternity and carring that butthurt around with you every step of the way will solve nothing. Unpleaseable people like you are half the reason BioWare doesn't get the support to keep trying.
So shelve your hate. Don't say they are horrible people and that ME3 is beyond saving when the people on this very thread and others are still tsupporting it with these constructive ideas.

11. Say, if you pay a bill, by depositing it, but the mail doesn't get put through until too late, and you lose your house because the post doesn't put it through. And the courts say that it's your fault, not the posts.
Would you care then?
The point is, things happen. With several other projects working at once, it wasn't a good year. The same happened to Square Einx over MindJack. And Final Fantisy has been hit and miss many times. I'm sure no one thought they would be working on any good games after that.
Then presto! They work with Eidos:Montreal to publish Deus Ex: Human Revolution.
And they worked with Gas Powered Games to make Supreme Commander 2 - a superb RTS game.

Just because a company has a bad year, doesn't mean that it's at making games. Things happen, be they budget cuts, or head writers moving from one game to lead another. If you don't care on the resons, don't bother caring about any company. None are perfect, and good luck trying to find one. (except maybe Quantic Dream)
12. You have no proof of that, I remind you:wizard:
If anything, only the endings were the major down point of the game. No, it wasn't perfect, but according to fan and critic alike, it was far from bad. Think otherwise is just trolling. Many may not like certin things in the game.
It may not be the best game. And depending on user opinion, it may or may not stack uo to it's predicisors. But no one has called a horrible game, the way you think it is.

13. Not according to others. The majority of opinions say that the game may have flaws, but is not a horrible game. That opinion of yours is only an opinion. Start a poll if you want to prove that others share your views. But don't be surprised if that's not the case, like you thought it was.

14. Again, DA2 is not a substancial addition. Just a build-up for the next game. It was built more like an interlude then a game. You should reserve judgement for after the next DA game is released. Besides, DA2 started development near the end phase of ME2, so that was being made close to each other.

And again, there are some who think just as badly of ME2 as you do of ME3.
@Blueprotoss said his least favorate game in the series was ME2 for feeling like nothing more then one giant sidequest to stop the Collectors, and was too devorced from the main story of stopping the Reapers.
Not to mention he was not a fan of the Metroid Prime-like boss fight with the Human-Reaper, or the exterme ammount of squad-mates, more then he felt were needed. He also wasn't a fan of the "Shepard dies and comes back to life" plot, thinking it was pushing the boundries of believable for ME. PM him if you don't believe me.
So, yes, ME2 was a sucess, but , just as you have for ME3, not everyone loved it.

15.  MMO's do not have to have a subscription to be sucessful, and being a F2P MMO is in no way an indication that it is not doing well. DC Universe and Guild Wars 2 are both free of subscription, and yet they are heralded as great, and still popular MMO's. Planetside 2 needs no subscription to play.
Just because an MMO has a F2P option doesn't mean it's doing bad.

16. Again, you said every aspect of ME3 was horrible even though your thoughts on that are in the minority. The major problem people had were with the endings. Yes, the game is considered underwhelming compaired to it's predisisors. But underwhelming is the key word, as that how it's decribed. Underwhelming, not horrible trash. It's trolling to call it such when having flaws does not instantly make it the most horrible game of all time. That's just your personal bias. Doing that is what trolling is.

17. That was in march. They are outdated, and ideals and opinions change. Unless you stay stagnant like you. No one can hold onto that kind of hate forever. You have to let go.
Compairing them should only highlight what I say. EC fixed most of the plotholes regarding the endings. People still agree that the ending is under par, but no one I have seen is still so furious at the game as you. They see that the game is not perfect, but not a horrible game.
And this was about imporving Priority: Earth, until you came in saying "it's impossible" and" BioWare will never do it" and "you are wasting your time" and "it need's a full remake" and "it's total garbage."
That's trolling the topic this thread was made to consider.
So, that ending comment you said, is best said to your reflection.

18. ME2's Lazarus Project was no less space magic.
And how the plotline of "billions-year old sentiant starships coming to wipe out all life every 50,000 years" is considered "soft sci-fi" is beyond me. The same goes fror the talking 50,000 year old plant, the telepathic insect race, Eezo and biotics, and the beacon that transferrs the last history of a 50,000 year old race directly into your head, or the cyber-zombie husks, or ME2's Human-Reaper fight, or the Protheans suddenly being alive, or a prothean surviving stasis for 50,000 years.
The entire series has fairytale space magic. That's part of being a sci-fi space-opera. It's no different from Star Wars, or Star Trek. they have plenty of space magic moments.

19. No. When I said to add a pair of cutscenes to each War Asset catagory, to make them matter, you refused to see it as a gameplay element. You yourself admitted that the concept of having each asset alter combat elements (like getting broming runs for every cruser you find, or more missle trucks if you find disruptor missles) is what you wanted. And that was impossible.
As @The Grey Nayr said, making such a system would have cost as much to develop as the game itself. Even is done from the very start of the game, that system you wanted would have been totally impractical.
Adding cutscenes give closure to War Assest, in you feel like it mattered getting them since a race could be destroyed by not doing so. But you refused to see that as a gameplay element, even though it would affect the story, which is a gameply element of RPG's, which ME is.

20. Again, I point you to ^10. Support means civing consturcuive critisism, telling them what did work, what didn't, what you would like to see more of, and not troll hate like yours. I never said you had to give them money to support them.
You may now facedesk yourself in shame. To think you messed that up so badly.




21. Again, you have no proof of the opposate either. And from what I've seen, the game was consiered underwhelming compaired to it's predesessior, but is not a horrible game. Especally since all reviewers, fan and corporate alike agreed that the gameplay was strong, the plot had many strong points (until the end).
MindJack - THATS a bad game.
This, underwhelming compaired to the last ones, but hardly a bad game.

22. WHAT??
Star Wars isn't a sci-if?!?!

Are you kidding?!?!
Star Wars is as much sci-fi as it is fantasy! Sci-fi is half or more of all Star Wars! Many consider Star Wars to be the defining sci-fi series, for merging it's own fantasy lore with a space-opera background - No different then Mass Effect, with it's billion-year old living starships that wipe out life every 50,000 years amist the backdrop of a future amoug aliens! It has the name "The Sci-fi fantisy" for a reason!!" Look it up! It is offically classed as a "Space Opera" which is a legitamate sub-class of Science Fiction that is more leaniant on fantasy elements then "Hard Sci-fi." If you look up sci-fi movies, the Wikipedia list of 1970 lists Star Wars!
I cannot believe you said that! That just proves it right there that you don't have a flying flip what your talking about.
23. That doesn't really disprove the "troll" mentalaty, now does it?

24. The statement by @The Gray Nayr doesn't seem to match that. And what proof do you have that it ever was within the relm of possibilaty?
Again, a system like what you wanted is physically impossible for them to have made. It would have cost as much to develop as making the game itself. You really think it's ratonial to blame them for being unable to do the impossible? It would have cost as much as making a full MMO, and been even more complex to code everything like that. It's not that the game failed you. Your expectations were far too high.
No game could have done that. Not without insane ammounts of money and manpower. They aren't gods. There was no way a system like yours would have worked, either before or after the fact.

25. So what makes your assertations on MP true?
If MP wasn't in the game, the War Assets would still be accused of being worthless because none of them impacted what ending you got. I highly doubt that if you rip the Mp out, that all the War Assets will suddenly each have their own special and unique impact on the endings.
That you think otherwise is gibberish. How do you think lack of multiplayer would invaladate the War Assets any more then the endings were considered to? It wouldn't.
It's an optional feture. It has no impact on the endings, or War Assets.

26. It wasn't that way in ME1. The Normandy flew straight at the burning areas of Eden Prime, and a few seconds later, boom, it's at the colony. And the drop on Ilos.
I think you need to consider that orbital mechanics are altered when you have technology that reduces the overall mass of a ship, cause I'm pretty sure that failed to cross your mind. Or that the Normandy had a Tantalus Drive Core that didn't finction like most drive cores did. And the Unshackled A.I. working with the best pilot in the Alliance probably didn't factor into that either.
Don't worry. Lot's of people forget the human element:lol:
Or that this isn't the same physics that apply in real life.
And again, the thing about how frigates would have been the worst thing to use, and why a ground force was nessessary is in 4 & 5.

27. No. Shuttles are harder targets to hit. And they have stealth technology, according to Cortez's decription of the new Koidak used by the Alliance.
Frigates rushing straignt for the conduit like that would have drawn the attention of every Reaper in London - not just the Destroyers and Hades Cannons, but the Sovergien-classes. Something racing like that at them, they would have just shut off the beam before they even landed. If they got there. Frigates are tougher the shuttles, but they are larger, and less manuverable. Not to mention they lack the Shuttles stealth tech, meaning that the Reapers didn't know about the shuttles until they were past the atmosphere on the way to London. A fleet of frigates would have been detected much sooner, and would have been torn to shreads before even getting through the atmosphere.
Those shuttles carry less per person, so losing one would not mean losing a ton of soldiers. Losing a fragate packed with them loses alot of men and a battle-ready ship.

Again, I sure am glad you weren't in charge of the attack.

And like Anderson said, only a few people need to get through. The thought is "throw everyone we have at the beam, and someone has to get through."

28. Ships coming in that fast, the Reapers would have just locked down the beam. And the threat would have sent in every Reaper around London to stop them. There goes the invasion force, and a large portion of your fleet.
Again, glad you weren't in charge.

29. A Reaper weapon is less blast force, and more cutting power. Like a scalpel, or those beams the Borg use in Star Trek. When did you ever see a Reaper beam blow a target up? It cuts them like a knife. Anyone watching Sovergien dice the fleet in ME1 would know that.
You did play ME1, right?
Reaper Weapons are about dicecting the target and pinpoint strikes that impale and core a ships critical systems, not about explosions and blast force. You really don't read up on lore, do you?

By contrast, the Normandy was right above the ground. The Thanix is literally right above Shepard's head, so firing the superheated beam of liquid tungsten would have most likely lit Shepard like a candle, and the Javlian disruptor torpedos would cause a blastwave that would be more likely to flatten Shepard then damage Harbinger. Especally since that beam disrupts the tagreting of missles, and though a miss at that range is unlikely, if a miss did happpen, it would be more harmfull to friend then foe.
Also, speed doesn't affect firepower. The Normandy's weapons are inneffective on Harbinger, and he knows this, hence why he doesn't bother with shooting down what can't hurt him.

I mean, to criticize me without even knowing the function of Reaper weapons, or study of the lore is really pitiful.

30. That conduit is no different the one the protheans created on Ilos. That got you into the Citadel straight through the solid walls of the Station. THAT was an asspull, and in your precious ME1. How do you explain THAT? It was a mini relay, not a magic portal. Yet there it is, my friend. There it is.
Space magic has been part of this, in one way or another, weather you ilke it or not.
Also, he never thought Shepard, or anyone for that matter, could survive his attack. So, he didn't bother turning it off. Arrogant as ever.

31. Reaper guns don't have a blast force. They are basically like lightsabers. Or the Borg cutting laser in Star Trek They cut, core and impale a target. They are pin-point precice, as Harbinger demonstrates as he picks Hammer apart. That's how they work. There is no "maximum power" setting. Harbinger's beams are no different the beams that the Reapers in the space battle used. And on Earth, A reaper struck that house Shepard was next to, and cut a large piece of it out. It didn't level the building.
Anyone that played ME1 would know this already, having watched Sovergien cut the fleet apart.
You really need to read up on the lore. Seeing you blunder through this is painfull

32. Again, when did any of the Reapers beams cause a 400kt explosion? None of the Reaper beams acted any different then a lightsaber, or laser cutter.
And Harbinger like to play with his prey. Let them dispare before he kills them.
I mean, honestly, I expect you to know the lore, here! You should have played through the games by now, right? When did you see any Reaper beam cause an explosion like that? They cut, they core, they impale, they slice. They don't explode.


33. I said it's open to speculation. It is nowhere near enough to consider a plothole. The crew suddenly dissapearing onto the Normandy, which was in FTL for unknown reasons. That is a plothole.
The Normandy rescuing the crew, then having to leave because there is no way of knowing weather on not the Crucible blastwave will kill them or not. That's not a plothole. How the Normandy got there is open to speculation, yes, but hardly a plothole. No worse then "How did the Conduit in ME1 work like a a portal through steel?" or "How was Shepard revived from clinical brain-death in ME2?" or "How did a prothean survive for 50,000 years in stasis?" or "How do the Leviathans talk to you underwater?" or "How did destroying the Saren-Husk stun Sovergien?" Answer those.


34. Again, the Allies had no clue what the Crucible would do. Again I say, would you sit in front of the possible doomsday bomb (I highlight possible since you seem to have missed reading it in yout topic skimming) and just wait like an idiot for it to go off and possibly kill your entire fleet? Or, ane you going to use that thing called "common sense" and get out, so that you don't risk the lives of everyone in orbit?
That much raw power being released? Who knows what it would do? It could incenerate everything at ground zero for all they knew. (The loss of Earth would be bad, but wiping out the core of the Reaper fleet would be detrimental to the Reapers) And I doubt that they knew what would happen to the mass relays once it went off, otherwise, they would have hesitated to delpoy it. Only Shepard knew for sure after talking with the Catalyst. No one else knew for sure what would happen, but they couldn't risk the lives of everyone entire remaining fleet sitting in front of the thing while it was going off to find out.
Hackett himself said it was a risk, like the atom bomb, and like the bomb, they set it off.

35. And it's an asspull how? What do you have that disproves it. It's called "dumb luck."
Besides, we saw that actually, Anderson and Shepard's comms were working. (I admit I'm not sure how Shep's comm was working when the suit was charred, but there it is) If both comms were working, they could track them. And contact them. So, since we see both their comms working as they arrive on the Citadel, no, it isn't an asspull.

36. The Force in Star Wars disproves that. (Look it up. "Space Opera" is a sub-catagory of sci-fi.) As do the many telepathic races in Star Trek. And Stargate's teleportation tech, and body possessing aliens.
You didn't refute the point, even though the Leviathans make it valid. Just as they probed Shepard's mind and used the Commanders' memories to give them an avatar the Commander could better relate to, the Catalyst can to, as being created by them, it would likely have the same meathods of communication. Also, according to the codex in ME2:
Reaper "indoctrination" is an insidious means of corrupting organic
minds, "reprogramming" the brain through physical and psychological
conditioning using electromagnetic fields, infrasonic and ultrasonic
noise, and other subliminal methods. The Reaper's resulting control over
the limbic system leaves the victim highly susceptible to its
suggestions.

Note the highlighted "infrasonic and ultrasonic noise" part.
It's part of indoctrination.
37. Again, no proof from you:wizard:

38. Like I said in 26. I think you forgot the Mass Effect physics that reduce the mass of a ship, Unique Tantalus Drive Core that allows propulsion without thrusters, the combination of the fastest ship in the Alliance with the Unshackled A.I. and Alliance's best pilot. Or the many scenes of the SR1 doing that kind of decent, like with Eden Prime, and Ilos in ME1.

39. Eden Prime and Ilos disprove your claim.

40. You really have no heart, do you? The squad-mates -your friends, and possibly LI - are bleeding out, possibly dying in front of you. And you'd drag them through that hell? If Harbinger was going to blow the Normandy apart, he would have done so before it ever got in close enough to borad. It's not a threat to him while he towers over Shepard. Even then, it couldn't harm him. And the Normandy is no more safe in the skies filled with Reapers then it is sitting in the shadow of Harbinger itself.
And no one on the Normandy is considered expendinble by the others. As shown in ME2 when Shepard risks everything to get Joker from the Normandy' SR1s cockpit during the Collector's attack.  And you yourself would be more likely to grab a fimilar face to save then a total stranger. It's "human nature". Look it up sometime.
Also, to explain EDI, half of EDI's programs are in that body. She says that "not all of" her is in the body. And her body didn't slump and fall inactive when she was partly disconnected from the Normandy if brought with on the mission to save Admiral Koris near the Gteh Jamming Tower. The body and A.I. core each contain half of EDI. One dies if the other does.

41. No more then the Conduit transporting you through solid steel into the Citadel, or the Asari mind-meld thing, or the 50,000 year old talking plant, or Shepard being revived from clinical brain death.
The Citadel is like a giant master control hub where the Reapers can link up and be directed from. Once they bring it under control in order to wake their sleeping master.

42. That's not an answer. And it's the only ending that escapes all the logic. Then again, so does Shepard's return from the dead.

43. Untrue. I said already, the teleporting squadmate plothole is replaced with a Normandy rescue, which can be speculated, but isn't a plothole. We know why the Normandy had to run (the Crucible may kill everyone at ground ero, and it's too risky to stay and find out the hard way), what happens to the major races, and weather or not the Normandy is stranded.
The only ones it leavs is Synthesis being possible, and an in-depth fight on the Catalyst's logic.
No one knew what it did, or what happens. Not even the Catalyst knew what is was or what it would do until it connected. Only then were the possibilaties exposed. You must compine them to have them be avalible. If it was just in the Citadel already, the Reapers would have built a giant battery themselves and used Synthesis already.

44. Can you disprove it? Simple as that.
What is your proof that ME3 is as downright awful as you claim, and that it's not your own opinion?
It's a flawed game. That much is true. But by no accounts is it a bad game. Just because it's not on par with ME2 doesn't make it a bad game. And ME2 is not the game from which all others are mesured, I remind you.

45. You have no defense presented. You had no refute that denied it.
ME3 is not a bad game. It has flaws, but is not a bad game by any account. When asked if ME3 is not a bad game, people will tell you "it's not perfect, but it's not bad." Start a poll. You can see for yourself that just because no one thought is was perfet, very few think it is a bad game, and certenly not the downright trash you rage it is.

46. Source: http://www.amazon.co...#R180BLHHUQWO14
"The series was great, dynamic, and epic, but Bioware ended it on a
horrible note, making all the dynamic decisions of your play-throughs
boil down to an inevitable suicide with your choice of 3 flavors. If you
had a love interest, you will never see him/her again, nor find any
closure to the relationship. It's basically a 'Kobayashi Maru' for
Shepard.

ME fans have been trolled by one of the best game
publishers in existence, and it saddens me to an extent. To me, it is a
deal-breaker, as the conclusion was the main selling point of this
title.

Edit 7/2/12:
Upgrade to 4-stars. New ending DLC
addressed the endings much to my satisfaction. While still short of
perfect, the game is now a much better package.
'

Other sources:http://www.rpgamer.com/games/masseffect/masseffect3/reviews/masseffect3strev1.html
Youtube: Angry Joe, JeremyJhans.

47. Do you have any of that data? If not, don't presume to know either. I doubt you have the power to track everyone on when they visit this form. Even so, The game is still considered a good game, despite ending bad.

48. ME3 isn't perfect because it lacks your precious "every war asset changes gamplay drastically" plan. That system is unphesible. Even if done from the begining, it would never have worked. It would have been as costly do develop that as the game itself. That's the only reason for all this butthurt of yours. Yes, ME3 isn't really on par with it's predessors, but that doesn't instantly make it a bad game. Especally not as bad as you rant and rage it is.

49. Saying that BioWare deserves to close down for making ME3 is considered trolling the company. Complaints would be listing the things that could be improved, not raging that the game is garbage, worthless, and downright horrible. THAT is trolling.

50. It's not that my standards are low. It's that yours are downright unrealistic. That War Assets system you wanted is downright impossible, even had it been part of the game's development from the very beginning. Also, you are the one that hasn't been able to prove your statements. I have shown that anyone that actually paid attention to the lore would be able to understand that making Priority: Earth re-vamped is not impossible, and can be done without needing to touch the endings, or re-design the game.

51. Now, [i]this finallizes the discussion.
I am not the one that ever lied. And I do not believe you are lying either. Just that you let your hate cloud your judgement, to be cliche'. And that your basing of off false assumptions. You cannot let your dissapointment at ME3 ruin any chance of recovering the series in the next game, or the chance the BioWare: Montreal may actually consider this thread's topic. Being a hater and a troll like this won't make magically fix ME3 and make it better.
The proof of the EC's assumed plotholes regarding Harbingers weapons and the sue of shuttles are disproven by the above. You diffinitively could not say anything that disproved me.
If you want to respond to any of this, please do so in PM. I am tired of clogging the page with these comment walls.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 06 décembre 2012 - 07:48 .

[silverexile17s]

Now, back to Priority: Earth.
Creating cutscenes, and gameplay changes for every single war asset is beyond possibility. It would be as expensive as making the game itself was.
A pair of cutscenes for each faction, and one for each major character would give adaquate closure tho War Assets.
Any other ideas to add?
And maybe a scene to show the Normandy trailing Harbinger, to take care of the persestant little notpick on how the Normandy arrived so fast.
And the top thing I'd do:GIVE HARBINGER LINES. We  know that Reapers can talk in person. That Reaper on Rannoch did it.

Hearing him say out loud that he considers the Normandy not worth detsroying would diffinitively finilize that Nipick of Maxster_s on why Harbinger doesn't shoot the Normandy. I already listed reasons in that brawl, but I don't blame anyone for avoiding that wall of comments.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 06 décembre 2012 - 08:37 .

[brummyuk19]

BUMP

[MSandt]

I don't support this idea. ME was Shepard's story. The focus of the story should not shift on other things while it's undergoing its most important phase.

[Dubozz]

Priority Earth was my biggest disappointment in ME3. I thought it will be a suicide mission on a larger scale. Why did i collect all of the war assets? Why did i scan all location on the galaxy map? Numbers? ***k Numbers. I would like to see ingame scenes at least for my squadmates (me1-3) or maybe new game mechanics. I would gladly trade every n7 mission + rachni(lol rachni matters) for awsome final mission. Oh well..

[ME859]

my Aim is True wrote...


For inspiration, look to the Marauder Shields comic.

I had no idea those existed.  If that had been the ending no one would have complained and the Mass Effect trilogy would have gone down as the greatest trilogy in video game history.  Instead we're now stuck between the retakers, neutrals and the appologist and in the end good endings don't need appologist.  

[shodiswe]

I would love to see soem improvement to the last mission and the way warassets are handled. Doubt it will happen though.

[ME859]

If filesize is tight then they shuold just focus on expanding the High EMS destroy ending. as It is easily the most requested feature among fans.

[JC1987]

i support this, me3 PE lacked the feel you got when coming to the end of me1 and me2.