257 réponses à ce sujet

[silverexile17s]

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

[quote]silverexile17s wrote...

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

[quote]silverexile17s wrote...

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

[quote]silverexile17s wrote...
But it should have been. That's what should have been done. Make there be a difference between what happens if you have a salarian fleet, and what happens if you have heavy krogan support.
That would have been a key part in making Priority: Earth a much better experance.

[/quote]
You need to redesign entire game for that. And this will never happen.
Game was designed with meaningless EMS. It was decision of EAWare direction.

[/quote]
I
don't think re-deigning of the entire game is nessessary at all. Just
an expansion. A large one, like 3-4 GB. But it would be something that
fans would receve well.

[/quote]
There are reasons.
1. EMS are meaningless. What is 1 EMS? Nothing, undefined.
2. EMS are uncategorized(to be precise - categories are meaningless) and unbalanced. Crucible category - meaningless, Crucible always built. Citadel category - meaningless, Citadel always captured.
3. Choices are unbalanced and there is no difference for different categories. Like for choice between krogan(ground forces) and salarians(fleets).

So, to make EMS meaningful gameplay-wise - you need.
1. Completely separate multiplayer EMS. Throw them away.
They have no meaning in-universe.
2. Define meaningful and structured categories for EMS.
3. Define what 1 EMS is gameplay-wise.
4. Balance choices like krogan-salarian.

And only then you could start designing final mission(missions).

It is just impossible.

[/quote]
Not true at all. Absolutly not.

1. The number of EMS needs to matter. More EMS, easier time on Earth: Fix.
[/quote]
EMS is undefined. Tell me, why Sanders EMS value is half of the entire fleet? It makes no sense.
What is 1 EMS? What we are gaining with 1 EMS? How much EMS we need to down 1 destroyer?
1/30 of Kahlee Sanders? 1/5 of Diana Allers? 1/10 of Khalisah?
1/60 of fleet?
[quote]
2-A. I said nothing about there being individual consiquences for all the war assets. Just the major ones, like the squad members, (Grunt, Jacob, Kasumi, Zaeed, Mordin, Miranda, Jack, Wrex, Ashley/Kaiden, Samara) or the krogan/salarian, and the rachni, and the quarian/geth, and the Leviathans: Fix.
[/quote]
It is meaningless. Grunt is 40% of alliance fleet.
This is just nonsense. It can not be added as gameplay element without redesign.
[quote]
2-B. And there can be edits to show how much of the Citadel is evacuated during the attack, or if no one were attacked. Have Baily contact you at some point saying the Councilors got out safe if the Citadel was maxed out on prep: Fix.
[/quote]
it is not a gameplay element.
[quote]
2-C. Edit to that only spicific options can be used. Say, if you don't max the Crucible, you still get the bad endings where Earth is damaged or destroyed: Fix.
[/quote]
And this requires to redesign of the game. Look at Crucible assets - most of it from garbage minigame(scanning). And choices are - will you scan or not.
Also, you are narrowing endings to Crucible category - thus makes other categories even more meaningless than they are now. Crucible is only way of victory ME3 have - and you just nullified all other EMS.
[quote]
3. Make it that way. All you would need are a few cut scenes for the salarian space fleet, and a scene of krogan plowing through Reaper forces for the ground fight. Same for the others, like the rachni, and the quarian/geth: Fix.
[/quote]
It is not a gameplay element.
Also, in current circumstances it would make even less sense than current mission. Especially priority:earth ground assault being completely unneeded.
What difference between krogan ground forces fighting for unneeded ground - and salarian fleets beating some reapers, helping Crucible to be delivered?
So, you choose krogans - how it will affect fleets operations? It doesn't.
So, you choose salarians - how it will affect ground operations? It doesn't.
You are still end up with burned armor and beam - regardless of what you do. And all you get is pointless cutscenes with completely no effect on outcome.
[quote]
4. Not true. Multiplayer does not need to be thrown out at all. There can be a report on a terminal about how N7 Special Forces are holding the line. Not even a cut scene. Just a series of messages, depending on how many imports you made: Fix.
[/quote]
Lol. So, you narrowed EMS to only Crucible category - cutting out multiplayer EMS completely - and now you are telling that multiplayer EMS will affect something? And that something being what, exactly?
Also, not a gameplay element.
[quote]
5. It doesn't have to be that way. Just have the fleet get reinforecd by how many ships survived the Citadel for the citadel force asset, and the Crucible's best options be avalible for how many Crucible assets were collected. Those are the ones that need fixing the most: Fix.
[/quote]
And this completely unaffects gameplay.
[quote]
6. Defining every single War Asset like tha is both messy and unessessary. Just group them up, and have a few diolouge lines, or communication messages, or cut scenes at the best, showing how each group (turian, asari, krogan) fairs depending on how built up it was: Fix.
[/quote]
Those are not a gameplay elements.
[quote]
7. Like I said in 3, a few diolouge options, comm messages, or cut scenes at the best, would be all that is needed to do that, aside from lessening the enemies based on how many ground forces are recruted: Fix.
[/quote]
Also not a gameplay elements.
[quote]
It is nowhere near impossible. An expansion, in the style of Dragon Age: Awakening, could easily patch this all in, and still have room for more.
[/quote]
It will never be done, even in your shortened version.
First, everything you stated are not a gameplay elements.
Second, adding EMS as gameplay elements to current system is impossible.
Third, does it matter if you get more pointless and nonsensical cutscenes, if you still can't win?

And main point - it will cost too much even in your shortened version. Well, actually not, it should be done from start of ME3 development cycle - but if you adding war assets as gameplay elements - you need to throw out multiplayer, and to make EMS meaningful. And EAWare being too greedy - it will never happens. It is not a CD Project RED.

And if adding them just as cutscenes - you still get same garbage in the end.

[/quote]
1. EMS doesn't need to be defined. Just grouped properly. And the moral support and symbolisim of one person can be effective in boosting the fighting spirit of an entire force. What do you think Shepard's EMS rating would be in Shepard was a war asset? It would be something like 100, or 150 even.
So no, the EMS and war assets do not need to be all individually defined. Just the group catagories.

2. Untrue. It just needs a cutscene, that shows that each character you had saved matters in the final fight. Simple cutscene additions, or comm messages, do not need to have the entire level redesigned. The Extended Cut was proof of that.

3.  But it offers closure, and gives the feeling that building up the Citadel defence force actually mattered. It would not be that hard to get Baily's actor and record a few lines on how much (or little) of the Citadel and Council got out all right. And can improve the chances of succeding on Earth.

4. I beg to differ.  It can indeed become a gameplay element.
If you get krogan, then you face less enemies on the ground, but you need higher EMS for the Crucible to get past the Reapers.
If you get salarians, then you need less total EMS to get the Crucible past the Reapers, but will face more enemies on the ground.
Simple expansion changes can incorporate this.
And the burned armor and the beam are scripted changes. That can come later, but right now, these changes at least make the choices feel like they have some actual weight on the final battle.

5. :mellow:What the hell are you talking about?
I never cut multiplayer out. And how does that factor into the Crucible?
What I said was, the Crucible should limit how well it functions, based on how many assets were put into it.
And that multiplayer doesn't need to be cut out. I never said that. You did. 
Instead, I said, have a series of messages that say how well the N7 Special Forces Teams are holding the line, depending on how many imports you made from MP to SP.
Also, gameplay changes would be during the attack on that Destroyer? Have it so that the more imports, the less Reaper forces get through to Shepard and the missle trucks.
That my friend, is what we call, a gameplay element:lol:

6. Again, yes it does. Easer time getting the Crucible through the Reapers, thus giving a better chance of getting the best ending options. Gameplay element.

7. Inputing battle reports at the HQ before the beam, and comms saying that each race is holding, invaladates that, sir. It also offers closure in that you feel like each race has a better chance of surviving due to your actions.
It makes it feel worth it.

8. What exactally DO you consider a gameplay element, then?
Whatever I listed that doesn't fall into your narrow-minded view of the combat element of gameplay falls into the RPG aspect of the game, which are just as much gameplay elements as the combat, as they also vary on gamer input as much as combat does.
An expansion of cut-scenes, diolouge comm chatter, and messages, and some new character interactions, can fix most of the problems that you find so damningly impossible to bypass.

It is well within the realm of possibilaty, since,
First: These are all gameplay elements, either affecting combat difficulty, or gameplay narrative.
Second: Impossible is nowhere near the truth. Some coding and trigger cut-scenes and comm chatter, like what was done for the Extended Cut's slides, can make the major War Assets, like former party members, and the major species, gamplay elements of the RPG narrative.
Third: We haven't even gotten to the endings, and altering them. Right now, I'm trying to talk you through this first. And the endings can be affected through two things: Did you destroy or keep the collector base? And did you convince the Illusive Man to spare Anderson? THOSE will be what will determine the ending for me. All the other things are to bring closure to all loose ends of the story, which I think I have done well enough.

Also, cut scenes, and comm chatter, will not cost more then they are already willing to spend. It would be no less expensive then the development of Omega, From Ashes or Leviathan.

And like I said before, making every single Asset directly change the gameplay in a unique way for each individual Asset is messy, unnessary, and beyond phesibly cost-effective. Grouping them by catagory is the most efficent way. And much more cost effective. Your way, there is too much room for error if any try your idea of making all War Assets affect gameplay directly.

And multiplayer EMS has no reason to be thrown out, when altering how many Reaper forces break through the allied lines to reach Shepard and the missle trucks works just as well. Other elements can be added as well.

And NEVER say never. Fallout 3 got it's new ending. This can too. And look at the independent group that patched KotOR 2's restored content. Another studio, or division of BioWare could do it. BioWare's Montreal branch has taken over development of Mass Effect according to the posts, as they are confirmed to be working on everything having to do with the series now, including making Omega, and starting offical development on the series' next game.
New management. Possible new direction. Possible new responce to fan requests.

Anything is possible.

[silverexile17s]

Now, as for the ending itself. I personally have no problem with Destroy or Control being options. Synthesis, I consider the bane of my Shepard's existance, but I cannot speak for everyone. There are people who support, or prefer that option.

One thing I would do is a fight with Harbinger and the Normandy. During the space battle, a battle line charges the Reaper's flank, but is blocked by Harbinger. Harbinger tears them to shreads, but not before one of the dreadnoughts blows a hole in the Reaper's armor, right above it's "head", or "eyes." The Normandy then leads the second push against the Reaper line.
If EMS is low, Harbinger will hit the Normandy repatedly, and Joker, unwilling to let the Reaper escape, ramms the Normandy through the gap in Harbinger's armor, impailing it's core and killing them both, along with most of the crew (squad-mates will escape via escape pods, but crew like Traynor, Chakwas, Allers, Gabby, Ken and Adams will not escape in time) and EDI.

If EMS is medium, the Normandy will evade many of Harbinger's beams, but will sustain severe damage. Joker maneges to get close enough to pour weapons (either disruptors, or the Thanix) into the hole in Harbingers armor, coring the Reaper and killing it. Damages from the beams however char the crew deck, spicifically the med bay, which will kill Chakwas or Michel, depending on who you have aboard, and destroy the A.I. core, killing EDI. Also if you do not get the Thermal Pipe for Adams, then the drive core vents into the engeneering deck as the barriers overload, killing Adams, as well as Ken and Gabby, if recruted. Allers survives because the starboard hold can be sealed against the core vent, and Traynor would survive being on the CIC.

If EMS is high, there will be enough ships to cover the Normandy's attack vector, and Joker will be able to doge the majority of the beams, with only minor damage sustained, as the Normandy closes on Harbinger. After closing the distance, the Normandy fires straght into the gap on Harbinger's armor, destroying the drive core and killing the First Reaper. No crew deaths are sustained in this version.
(I would also add the option to purchase the Silars Armor, Cyclonic Barriers, and Thanix Cannon for the Normandy in ME3, if you did not do so in ME2, or are playing ME3 without an import)


The new option *I* would add would be to rerout the Crucible straght into the Citadel itself, frying the station's power grid, and killing the Catalyst, frying his A.I. core, since he is based in the station.  Since the Catalyst is a conglamoration of the collective intelligence of all the Reapers, killing him would be like giving all Reapers a mass lobotomy. (Think what happenes to Sovergien after his Saren-Husk avatar is killed)

As they flail in pain, unable to recover from the mental shock, Admiral Hackett will realize their current condition mirrors that of Sovergien right before the fleet brought it down, and siezes the oppertunity to attack. Basically traumatized from the death of the avatar of their higher thought processes, the Reapers are unable to recover, as the Allied fleet plows through them. Thsi is repeated throughouy the galaxy, as all Reapers are put in pain, smaller ones dying outright from the pratacal lobotomy they receved, and the larger ones either dying as well, collapsing from shock, unable to recover, or "head for the hills" as fast as they can while partially brain-dead.
Of course, routing the Crucible involves climbing down into the conduit that links the two together, and that whoever does so must stay there to make sure the power transfer ocurrs without incident.

This option, I would make avalible only to those that get high-EMS ratings. Say, 4,000 or so. Also, as a pre-requesate, in order to ensure the Crucible cannot be minipulated and shut down by the Catalyst, like as we see in the Refuse option, you must find all the prothean artifacts in ME3 (excluding DLC)

Prothean Obelisk: (The Shrike Abyssal, Urla Rast, Talis Fia)
Prothean Data Disks: (Valhallan Threshold, Paz, Garvug)
Obelisk of Karza: (Hades Nexus, Hoplos, Kopis)
Prothean Data Files: (Exodus Cluxter, Utopia, Zion)
Hesperia Period Statue: (Athena Nebula, Vernio, Polissa)

Recover these, get the EMS to 4,000+. That would have been the prerequsit for this new option.

Also, I would have had it so that if you stopped the Illusive Man from killing Anderson, he survives, and actually acompanies you to meet the Catalyst. From there, unless you chose Synthesis, you can have him be the one to activate either Destroy or (possibly) Control, or the new option (I call it "Sacrifice"). Granted, this means that he dies in your place. He will argue that Shepard has sacrificed enough, and deserves to live, after all Shepard has done. Shepard can either acknolodge Anderson's "Last Order," or briefly knock him out long enough to sacrifice yourself instead. Whoever you save will head back down the elevator lift, and back through the conduit to London
(I would write it as being still active)

Afterword, depending on your choice, either a badly wounded Shepard, or Anderson, will wake back up on Earth, looking as the gray skies of London, ash falling down as if it's snowing. Rays of sunlight peaking through the clouds here and there.

If you save Anderson, he will be rescued by either an Alliance shuttle (possibly flown by Cortez) or a slightly (or heavaly) chared Normandy. If it is the Normandy, the crew will come out looking for Shepard and Anderson. Either the LI, or whoever crewmate Shepard had the most affinaty with, will be with the crew members that find Anderson, after whcih the crew will be devestated and heartbroken to hear Anderson's report on Shepards' fate.
Afterward, Anderson will limp back, with one of the crew (most likely Vega) helping him back. Anderson will monolouge on how horrible war always is, and that no fight is won without a price. And that no matter how much you win, or how many survive, the cost  never seems worth it.
We then see he is holding a charred set of N7 dog tags, taken from Shepard, because after the Commander knocks him out, and he makes one final grab to stop Shepard from dying, and instead grabs the Commanders tags.

If Shepard is saved, the Commander wakes up in the same position, before the rescue crew findes him. If it the Normandy, then the first group to find him is the one with Shepard's LI (possably even ones that were not on the Normandy, as they would be on Earth too). If Shepard has no LI, then the squad mate with the most affinaty is the one that finds the Commander first. The crew is saddened by the loss of Anderson, especally Joker, or the Virmire survivor. The crew help the wounded Shepard up (if Shpard is female, and the LI is either Garrus or Kaiden, then the aftermentioned will pick Shepard up and carry her back to the Normandy.  Call me a hopeless romantic.).

Shepard then walks back to the waiting ship, with a short monoloug on the price of war. If paragon, Shepard will mirror Anderson's views on it, wheras a Renagade will say that no cost is beyond consideration, as long as it wins the day, in the end.

Either way, the scene fades out, the "camera" raising up to face the sky, showing the sunlight break through the clouds as ash continues to fall.

Afterwards, the end credits play. Albit, the credits play to the far left of the screen. The right shows the slides we see in the Extended Cut, with the Respective monologues of Hackett, Synthesis EDI, or the Shepard-Reaper A.I. for each (Along with possibly a new one: the Anderson-Reaper A.I. if you convince him that it's the right choice).

After the EC slides play, the scene shows the Normandy's memorial wall, with either Anderson mounting Shepard's name, or Shepard mounting Anderson's name. (Or Liara, the LI, or Traynor doing it if you didn't save Anderson from the Illusive Man, and had to die yourself). After this scene, the Normandy lifts off from the ruins of London, flying of into the distance.

PHEW.
And THAT'S how I would have wrote the ending. Any critizisim is welcome, bacause both Positive and Negitive, I can look at, and possibly draw from to improve aspects of it.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 27 novembre 2012 - 06:10 .

[Blueprotoss]

brummyuk19 wrote...

Come on guys, no arguements please, otherwise it'll get locked!

Its odd that some people will always go for personal attacks like ad hominems to derail a simple discusion, which this isn't directed at you.

Stella-Arc wrote...

I support a revamp Priority: Earth.

Not going to happen because of "Artistic Integrity". lol

This is also odd based on how Bioware hasn't changed their philosophy when they created Baldur's Gate.

Xellith wrote...

I still find it disgusting that Bioware turned what could have been the most epic ending ever into a "whatever bro" battle.

How do you know this especially with the overreaction that appeared  when some people didn't get most of what they wanted.  To be fair something epic doesn't need to be something that you personally wanted and Bioware has the power to do what they want to their own IP.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 27 novembre 2012 - 03:22 .

[Blueprotoss]

silverexile17s wrote...

Now, as for the ending itself. I personally have no problem with Destroy or Control being options. Synthesis, I consider the bane of my Shepard's existance, but I cannot speak for everyone. There are people who support, or prefer that option.

If you don't speak for everyone then why are you trying to turn opinion into fact even everyone will have differing opinions when you look into the minuet details.

silverexile17s wrote...

One thing I would do is a fight with Harbinger and the Normandy. During the space battle, a battle line charges the Reaper's flank, but is blocked by Harbinger. Harbinger tears them to shreads, but not before one of the dreadnoughts blows a hole in the Reaper's armor, right above it's "head", or "eyes." The Normandy then leads the second push against the Reaper line.
If EMS is low, Harbinger will hit the Normandy repatedly, and Joker, unwilling to let the Reaper escape, ramms the Normandy through the gap in Harbinger's armor, impailing it's core and killing them both, along with most of the crew (squad-mates will escape via escape pods, but crew like Traynor, Chakwas, Allers, Gabby, Ken and Adams will not escape in time) and EDI.

If EMS is medium, the Normandy will evade many of Harbinger's beams, but will sustain severe damage. Joker maneges to get close enough to pour weapons (either disruptors, or the Thanix) into the hole in Harbingers armor, coring the Reaper and killing it. Damages from the beams however char the crew deck, spicifically the med bay, which will kill Chakwas or Michel, depending on who you have aboard, and destroy the A.I. core, killing EDI. Also if you do not get the Thermal Pipe for Adams, then the drive core vents into the engeneering deck as the barriers overload, killing Adams, as well as Ken and Gabby, if recruted. Allers survives because the starboard hold can be sealed against the core vent, and Traynor would survive being on the CIC.

If EMS is high, there will be enough ships to cover the Normandy's attack vector, and Joker will be able to doge the majority of the beams, with only minor damage sustained, as the Normandy closes on Harbinger. After closing the distance, the Normandy fires straght into the gap on Harbinger's armor, destroying the drive core and killing the First Reaper. No crew deaths are sustained in this version.
(I would also add the option to purchase the Silars Armor, Cyclonic Barriers, and Thanix Cannon for the Normandy in ME3, if you did not do so in ME2, or are playing ME3 without an import)


The new option *I* would add would be to rerout the Crucible straght into the Citadel itself, frying the station's power grid, and killing the Catalyst, frying his A.I. core, since he is based in the station.  Since the Catalyst is a conglamoration of the collective intelligence of all the Reapers, killing him would be like giving all Reapers a mass lobotomy. (Think what happenes to Sovergien after his Saren-Husk avatar is killed)

As they flail in pain, unable to recover from the mental shock, Admiral Hackett will realize their current condition mirrors that of Sovergien right before the fleet brought it down, and siezes the oppertunity to attack. Basically traumatized from the death of the avatar of their higher thought processes, the Reapers are unable to recover, as the Allied fleet plows through them. Thsi is repeated throughouy the galaxy, as all Reapers are put in pain, smaller ones dying outright from the pratacal lobotomy they receved, and the larger ones either dying as well, collapsing from shock, unable to recover, or "head for the hills" as fast as they can while partially brain-dead.
Of course, routing the Crucible involves climbing down into the conduit that links the two together, and that whoever does so must stay there to make sure the power transfer ocurrs without incident.

This option, I would make avalible only to those that get high-EMS ratings. Say, 4,000 or so. Also, as a pre-requesate, in order to ensure the Crucible cannot be minipulated and shut down by the Catalyst, like as we see in the Refuse option, you must find all the prothean artifacts in ME3 (excluding DLC)

Prothean Obelisk: (The Shrike Abyssal, Urla Rast, Talis Fia)
Prothean Data Disks: (Valhallan Threshold, Paz, Garvug)
Obelisk of Karza: (Hades Nexus, Hoplos, Kopis)
Prothean Data Files: (Exodus Cluxter, Utopia, Zion)
Hesperia Period Statue: (Athena Nebula, Vernio, Polissa)

Recover these, get the EMS to 4,000+. That would have been the prerequsit for this new option.

Also, I would have had it so that if you stopped the Illusive Man from killing Anderson, he survives, and actually acompanies you to meet the Catalyst. From there, unless you chose Synthesis, you can have him be the one to activate either Destroy or (possibly) Control, or the new option (I call it "Sacrifice"). Granted, this means that he dies in your place. He will argue that Shepard has sacrificed enough, and deserves to live, after all Shepard has done. Shepard can either acknolodge Anderson's "Last Order," or briefly knock him out long enough to sacrifice yourself instead. Whoever you save will head back down the elevator lift, and back through the conduit to London
(I would write it as being still active)

Afterword, depending on your choice, either a badly wounded Shepard, or Anderson, will wake back up on Earth, looking as the gray skies of London, ash falling down as if it's snowing. Rays of sunlight peaking through the clouds here and there.

If you save Anderson, he will be rescued by either an Alliance shuttle (possibly flown by Cortez) or a slightly (or heavaly) chared Normandy. If it is the Normandy, the crew will come out looking for Shepard and Anderson. Either the LI, or whoever crewmate Shepard had the most affinaty with, will be with the crew members that find Anderson, after whcih the crew will be devestated and heartbroken to hear Anderson's report on Shepards' fate.
Afterward, Anderson will limp back, with one of the crew (most likely Vega) helping him back. Anderson will monolouge on how horrible war always is, and that no fight is won without a price. And that no matter how much you win, or how many survive, the cost  never seems worth it.
We then see he is holding a charred set of N7 dog tags, taken from Shepard, because after the Commander knocks him out, and he makes one final grab to stop Shepard from dying, and instead grabs the Commanders tags.

If Shepard is saved, the Commander wakes up in the same position, before the rescue crew findes him. If it the Normandy, then the first group to find him is the one with Shepard's LI (possably even ones that were not on the Normandy, as they would be on Earth too). If Shepard has no LI, then the squad mate with the most affinaty is the one that finds the Commander first. The crew is saddened by the loss of Anderson, especally Joker, or the Virmire survivor. The crew help the wounded Shepard up (if Shpard is female, and the LI is either Garrus or Kaiden, then the aftermentioned will pick Shepard up and carry her back to the Normandy.  Call me a hopeless romantic.).

Shepard then walks back to the waiting ship, with a short monoloug on the price of war. If paragon, Shepard will mirror Anderson's views on it, wheras a Renagade will say that no cost is beyond consideration, as long as it wins the day, in the end.

Either way, the scene fades out, the "camera" raising up to face the sky, showing the sunlight break through the clouds as ash continues to fall.

Afterwards, the end credits play. Albit, the credits play to the far left of the screen. The right shows the slides we see in the Extended Cut, with the Respective monologues of Hackett, Synthesis EDI, or the Shepard-Reaper A.I. for each (Along with possibly a new one: the Anderson-Reaper A.I. if you convince him that it's the right choice).

After the EC slides play, the scene shows the Normandy's memorial wall, with either Anderson mounting Shepard's name, or Shepard mounting Anderson's name. (Or Liara, the LI, or Traynor doing it if you didn't save Anderson from the Illusive Man, and had to die yourself). After this scene, the Normandy lifts off from the ruins of London, flying of into the distance.

You do know that you're still asking for a redesign, right?

silverexile17s wrote...

PHEW.
And THAT'S how I would have wrote the ending. Any critizisim is welcome, bacause both Positive and Negitive, I can look at, and possibly draw from to improve aspects of it.

If you welcomed criticism then you wouldn't defend opinion like your own child.  You can talk the talk but you still can't walk the walk.

[Maxster_]

[quote]silverexile17s wrote...

1. EMS doesn't need to be defined. Just grouped properly. And the moral support and symbolisim of one person can be effective in boosting the fighting spirit of an entire force. What do you think Shepard's EMS rating would be in Shepard was a war asset? It would be something like 100, or 150 even.
So no, the EMS and war assets do not need to be all individually defined. Just the group catagories.
[/quote]
Of course it will be complete nonsense. As it is now.
You seems to completely ignoring my points. I said why EMS must be defined, - to add it as gameplay element in meaningful way.
[quote]
2. Untrue. It just needs a cutscene, that shows that each character you had saved matters in the final fight. Simple cutscene additions, or comm messages, do not need to have the entire level redesigned. The Extended Cut was proof of that.
[/quote]
So, more pointless nonsensical cutscenes.
As i said, it is not a gameplay element - and you are confirming it again, and then stated that i'm wrong.
[quote]
3.  But it offers closure, and gives the feeling that building up the Citadel defence force actually mattered. It would not be that hard to get Baily's actor and record a few lines on how much (or little) of the Citadel and Council got out all right. And can improve the chances of succeding on Earth.
[/quote]
Citadel defence force didn't mattered. And what are you proposing is not a gameplay element, it is just more cutscenes.

[quote]
4. I beg to differ.  It can indeed become a gameplay element.
If you get krogan, then you face less enemies on the ground, but you need higher EMS for the Crucible to get past the Reapers.
If you get salarians, then you need less total EMS to get the Crucible past the Reapers, but will face more enemies on the ground.
Simple expansion changes can incorporate this.
And the burned armor and the beam are scripted changes. That can come later, but right now, these changes at least make the choices feel like they have some actual weight on the final battle.
[/quote]
That requires rebalancing of EMS.
Also, Crucible is never destroyed, so you made fleet EMS pointless.

[quote]
5. :mellow:What the hell are you talking about?
I never cut multiplayer out. And how does that factor into the Crucible?
What I said was, the Crucible should limit how well it functions, based on how many assets were put into it.
And that multiplayer doesn't need to be cut out. I never said that. You did. 
Instead, I said, have a series of messages that say how well the N7 Special Forces Teams are holding the line, depending on how many imports you made from MP to SP.
Also, gameplay changes would be during the attack on that Destroyer? Have it so that the more imports, the less Reaper forces get through to Shepard and the missle trucks.
That my friend, is what we call, a gameplay element:lol:
[/quote]
You are making no sense.
The only difference between endings now - is how well Crucible works. And you are narrowing entire EMS which affects that, to Crucible category only.
Thus you making any other EMS pointless.

And new endings - this will never happens. Redesigned endings - will never happens.

Instead of making priority:earth better(which is not possible, it is pure garbage which cannot be corrected) - you made every decision even more pointless. An achievement, i think.


[quote]
6. Again, yes it does. Easer time getting the Crucible through the Reapers, thus giving a better chance of getting the best ending options. Gameplay element.
[/quote]
You contradicting yourself.
Also, you just said that current mission is ok. Because every EMS category is affecting how Crucible works, and ending options. Thus - EMS already is a gameplay element.
What was the point of this thread?
[quote]
7. Inputing battle reports at the HQ before the beam, and comms saying that each race is holding, invaladates that, sir. It also offers closure in that you feel like each race has a better chance of surviving due to your actions.
It makes it feel worth it.
[/quote]
It makes no sense.
Reapers can't be defeated conventionally in ME3 - so it is irrelevant "how good each race is holding"(and makes completely no sense for many reasons). Crucible activated - everyone lives, not activated - everyone dies.
You starting to make less and less sense with each iteration.
[quote]
8. What exactally DO you consider a gameplay element, then?
Whatever I listed that doesn't fall into your narrow-minded view of the combat element of gameplay falls into the RPG aspect of the game, which are just as much gameplay elements as the combat, as they also vary on gamer input as much as combat does.
An expansion of cut-scenes, diolouge comm chatter, and messages, and some new character interactions, can fix most of the problems that you find so damningly impossible to bypass.
[/quote]
You listed things either meaningless, nonsensical, or not possible without a redesign.
Of course, EAWare could add more cutscenes, but with current priority:earth they will never make any sense.
This mission(and game) was designed that way. EMS never meant to matter in gameplay.
Result of this mission is - Shepard is alone, wounded, goes into the beam, no matter what. EMS only affects ending choices(which is meaningless) and if your squad dies or not.

You just proposed redesign of the entire mission, and it will still not make any sense, because the reasons i stated.
It will not make priority:earth any better.

As for gameplay - DAO.
[quote]
It is well within the realm of possibilaty, since,
First: These are all gameplay elements, either affecting combat difficulty, or gameplay narrative.
[/quote]
And?
[quote]
Second: Impossible is nowhere near the truth. Some coding and trigger cut-scenes and comm chatter, like what was done for the Extended Cut's slides, can make the major War Assets, like former party members, and the major species, gamplay elements of the RPG narrative.
[/quote]
It is impossible, but not for the reasons you stated.
[quote]
Third: We haven't even gotten to the endings, and altering them. Right now, I'm trying to talk you through this first. And the endings can be affected through two things: Did you destroy or keep the collector base? And did you convince the Illusive Man to spare Anderson? THOSE will be what will determine the ending for me. All the other things are to bring closure to all loose ends of the story, which I think I have done well enough.
[/quote]
I'm not a part of EAWare, convincing me(which you failed to do btw) will not change anything.
EAWare said they will not change the endings, so discussion about endings change is already pointless.
[quote]
Also, cut scenes, and comm chatter, will not cost more then they are already willing to spend. It would be no less expensive then the development of Omega, From Ashes or Leviathan.
[/quote]
From Ashes have no relevance to that, it was part of the game, which was cut to sell separately.
And they are not willing to spent money for the lost cause.
[quote]
And like I said before, making every single Asset directly change the gameplay in a unique way for each individual Asset is messy, unnessary, and beyond phesibly cost-effective. Grouping them by catagory is the most efficent way. And much more cost effective. Your way, there is too much room for error if any try your idea of making all War Assets affect gameplay directly.
[/quote]
My way - to make priority:earth good mission, not nonsensical retarded clowns show, as it is now.
And i stated that was impossible, because of endings, EMS tied into multiplayer, EMS being meaningless.
[quote]
And multiplayer EMS has no reason to be thrown out, when altering how many Reaper forces break through the allied lines to reach Shepard and the missle trucks works just as well. Other elements can be added as well.[/quote]
Sure.
Multiplayer EMS makes absolutely no sense in-universe, but as you demonstrated you don't care for plausibility.

[quote]And NEVER say never. Fallout 3 got it's new ending. This can too.[/quote]
That will never happens.
[quote]
And look at the independent group that patched KotOR 2's restored content. Another studio, or division of BioWare could do it.[/quote]
To restore content, you must have that content first. And there is none by design.
You are making no sense.
[quote]
  BioWare's Montreal branch has taken over development of Mass Effect according to the posts, as they are confirmed to be working on everything having to do with the series now, including making Omega, and starting offical development on the series' next game.
New management. Possible new direction. Possible new responce to fan requests.

Anything is possible.
[/quote]
Sure, if you are living in fairytale.

Modifié par Maxster_, 27 novembre 2012 - 07:04 .

[silverexile17s]

Blueprotoss wrote...

brummyuk19 wrote...

Come on guys, no arguements please, otherwise it'll get locked!

Its odd that some people will always go for personal attacks like ad hominems to derail a simple discusion, which this isn't directed at you.

Stella-Arc wrote...

I support a revamp Priority: Earth.

Not going to happen because of "Artistic Integrity". lol

This is also odd based on how Bioware hasn't changed their philosophy when they created Baldur's Gate.

Xellith wrote...

I still find it disgusting that Bioware turned what could have been the most epic ending ever into a "whatever bro" battle.

How do you know this especially with the overreaction that appeared  when some people didn't get most of what they wanted.  To be fair something epic doesn't need to be something that you personally wanted and Bioware has the power to do what they want to their own IP.

1.Didn't you just now direct something at him?
Besides, he has every reason to be worried, since this brawling between you and me locked another thread.

2. They were an independant company back then. Now, they are a division of EA.
And I beg to differ. The games have been gradually moving to combat insted of being story driven like the BioWare games of old. BioWare seems to be getting progressively weaker in storytelling.

3. Many people in general found the ending to be both underwhelming and unsatisfying. The protests and "Retake ME3" movement are proof of that. The entire Earth mission felt like an overglorified escort mission with a long set of goodbyes, then a run to the beam.

[silverexile17s]

Blueprotoss wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

Now, as for the ending itself. I personally have no problem with Destroy or Control being options. Synthesis, I consider the bane of my Shepard's existance, but I cannot speak for everyone. There are people who support, or prefer that option.

If you don't speak for everyone then why are you trying to turn opinion into fact even everyone will have differing opinions when you look into the minuet details.

silverexile17s wrote...

One thing I would do is a fight with Harbinger and the Normandy. During the space battle, a battle line charges the Reaper's flank, but is blocked by Harbinger. Harbinger tears them to shreads, but not before one of the dreadnoughts blows a hole in the Reaper's armor, right above it's "head", or "eyes." The Normandy then leads the second push against the Reaper line.
If EMS is low, Harbinger will hit the Normandy repatedly, and Joker, unwilling to let the Reaper escape, ramms the Normandy through the gap in Harbinger's armor, impailing it's core and killing them both, along with most of the crew (squad-mates will escape via escape pods, but crew like Traynor, Chakwas, Allers, Gabby, Ken and Adams will not escape in time) and EDI.

If EMS is medium, the Normandy will evade many of Harbinger's beams, but will sustain severe damage. Joker maneges to get close enough to pour weapons (either disruptors, or the Thanix) into the hole in Harbingers armor, coring the Reaper and killing it. Damages from the beams however char the crew deck, spicifically the med bay, which will kill Chakwas or Michel, depending on who you have aboard, and destroy the A.I. core, killing EDI. Also if you do not get the Thermal Pipe for Adams, then the drive core vents into the engeneering deck as the barriers overload, killing Adams, as well as Ken and Gabby, if recruted. Allers survives because the starboard hold can be sealed against the core vent, and Traynor would survive being on the CIC.

If EMS is high, there will be enough ships to cover the Normandy's attack vector, and Joker will be able to doge the majority of the beams, with only minor damage sustained, as the Normandy closes on Harbinger. After closing the distance, the Normandy fires straght into the gap on Harbinger's armor, destroying the drive core and killing the First Reaper. No crew deaths are sustained in this version.
(I would also add the option to purchase the Silars Armor, Cyclonic Barriers, and Thanix Cannon for the Normandy in ME3, if you did not do so in ME2, or are playing ME3 without an import)


The new option *I* would add would be to rerout the Crucible straght into the Citadel itself, frying the station's power grid, and killing the Catalyst, frying his A.I. core, since he is based in the station.  Since the Catalyst is a conglamoration of the collective intelligence of all the Reapers, killing him would be like giving all Reapers a mass lobotomy. (Think what happenes to Sovergien after his Saren-Husk avatar is killed)

As they flail in pain, unable to recover from the mental shock, Admiral Hackett will realize their current condition mirrors that of Sovergien right before the fleet brought it down, and siezes the oppertunity to attack. Basically traumatized from the death of the avatar of their higher thought processes, the Reapers are unable to recover, as the Allied fleet plows through them. Thsi is repeated throughouy the galaxy, as all Reapers are put in pain, smaller ones dying outright from the pratacal lobotomy they receved, and the larger ones either dying as well, collapsing from shock, unable to recover, or "head for the hills" as fast as they can while partially brain-dead.
Of course, routing the Crucible involves climbing down into the conduit that links the two together, and that whoever does so must stay there to make sure the power transfer ocurrs without incident.

This option, I would make avalible only to those that get high-EMS ratings. Say, 4,000 or so. Also, as a pre-requesate, in order to ensure the Crucible cannot be minipulated and shut down by the Catalyst, like as we see in the Refuse option, you must find all the prothean artifacts in ME3 (excluding DLC)

Prothean Obelisk: (The Shrike Abyssal, Urla Rast, Talis Fia)
Prothean Data Disks: (Valhallan Threshold, Paz, Garvug)
Obelisk of Karza: (Hades Nexus, Hoplos, Kopis)
Prothean Data Files: (Exodus Cluxter, Utopia, Zion)
Hesperia Period Statue: (Athena Nebula, Vernio, Polissa)

Recover these, get the EMS to 4,000+. That would have been the prerequsit for this new option.

Also, I would have had it so that if you stopped the Illusive Man from killing Anderson, he survives, and actually acompanies you to meet the Catalyst. From there, unless you chose Synthesis, you can have him be the one to activate either Destroy or (possibly) Control, or the new option (I call it "Sacrifice"). Granted, this means that he dies in your place. He will argue that Shepard has sacrificed enough, and deserves to live, after all Shepard has done. Shepard can either acknolodge Anderson's "Last Order," or briefly knock him out long enough to sacrifice yourself instead. Whoever you save will head back down the elevator lift, and back through the conduit to London
(I would write it as being still active)

Afterword, depending on your choice, either a badly wounded Shepard, or Anderson, will wake back up on Earth, looking as the gray skies of London, ash falling down as if it's snowing. Rays of sunlight peaking through the clouds here and there.

If you save Anderson, he will be rescued by either an Alliance shuttle (possibly flown by Cortez) or a slightly (or heavaly) chared Normandy. If it is the Normandy, the crew will come out looking for Shepard and Anderson. Either the LI, or whoever crewmate Shepard had the most affinaty with, will be with the crew members that find Anderson, after whcih the crew will be devestated and heartbroken to hear Anderson's report on Shepards' fate.
Afterward, Anderson will limp back, with one of the crew (most likely Vega) helping him back. Anderson will monolouge on how horrible war always is, and that no fight is won without a price. And that no matter how much you win, or how many survive, the cost  never seems worth it.
We then see he is holding a charred set of N7 dog tags, taken from Shepard, because after the Commander knocks him out, and he makes one final grab to stop Shepard from dying, and instead grabs the Commanders tags.

If Shepard is saved, the Commander wakes up in the same position, before the rescue crew findes him. If it the Normandy, then the first group to find him is the one with Shepard's LI (possably even ones that were not on the Normandy, as they would be on Earth too). If Shepard has no LI, then the squad mate with the most affinaty is the one that finds the Commander first. The crew is saddened by the loss of Anderson, especally Joker, or the Virmire survivor. The crew help the wounded Shepard up (if Shpard is female, and the LI is either Garrus or Kaiden, then the aftermentioned will pick Shepard up and carry her back to the Normandy.  Call me a hopeless romantic.).

Shepard then walks back to the waiting ship, with a short monoloug on the price of war. If paragon, Shepard will mirror Anderson's views on it, wheras a Renagade will say that no cost is beyond consideration, as long as it wins the day, in the end.

Either way, the scene fades out, the "camera" raising up to face the sky, showing the sunlight break through the clouds as ash continues to fall.

Afterwards, the end credits play. Albit, the credits play to the far left of the screen. The right shows the slides we see in the Extended Cut, with the Respective monologues of Hackett, Synthesis EDI, or the Shepard-Reaper A.I. for each (Along with possibly a new one: the Anderson-Reaper A.I. if you convince him that it's the right choice).

After the EC slides play, the scene shows the Normandy's memorial wall, with either Anderson mounting Shepard's name, or Shepard mounting Anderson's name. (Or Liara, the LI, or Traynor doing it if you didn't save Anderson from the Illusive Man, and had to die yourself). After this scene, the Normandy lifts off from the ruins of London, flying of into the distance.

You do know that you're still asking for a redesign, right?

silverexile17s wrote...

PHEW.
And THAT'S how I would have wrote the ending. Any critizisim is welcome, bacause both Positive and Negitive, I can look at, and possibly draw from to improve aspects of it.

If you welcomed criticism then you wouldn't defend opinion like your own child.  You can talk the talk but you still can't walk the walk.

1. I just said that I, as in my personal opinion, did not have a problem with Control or Destroy. I do not like the way they were executed. Something that most seem to agree with me on. I personally hate Synthesis, but I know that some like the concept.

2. It's not a total redesign. It can be done by adding to the framework of what already exists. You don't need go gut what is already there. Just add more to it.

3. I defend the general opinion that many have, in that Mass Effect 3's endings were underwhelming, and poorly executed. And I do not see anything that makes your statements any more factual then my own, so please do not talk about being unable to walk the walk, when you have not been able to do so, if the opinion everyone else has of you is any indacation.

[silverexile17s]

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

[quote]silverexile17s wrote...

1. EMS doesn't need to be defined. Just grouped properly. And the moral support and symbolisim of one person can be effective in boosting the fighting spirit of an entire force. What do you think Shepard's EMS rating would be in Shepard was a war asset? It would be something like 100, or 150 even.
So no, the EMS and war assets do not need to be all individually defined. Just the group catagories.
[/quote]
Of course it will be complete nonsense. As it is now.
You seems to completely ignoring my points. I said why EMS must be defined, - to add it as gameplay element in meaningful way.
[quote]
2. Untrue. It just needs a cutscene, that shows that each character you had saved matters in the final fight. Simple cutscene additions, or comm messages, do not need to have the entire level redesigned. The Extended Cut was proof of that.
[/quote]
So, more pointless nonsensical cutscenes.
As i said, it is not a gameplay element - and you are confirming it again, and then stated that i'm wrong.
[quote]
3.  But it offers closure, and gives the feeling that building up the Citadel defence force actually mattered. It would not be that hard to get Baily's actor and record a few lines on how much (or little) of the Citadel and Council got out all right. And can improve the chances of succeding on Earth.
[/quote]
Citadel defence force didn't mattered. And what are you proposing is not a gameplay element, it is just more cutscenes.

[quote]
4. I beg to differ.  It can indeed become a gameplay element.
If you get krogan, then you face less enemies on the ground, but you need higher EMS for the Crucible to get past the Reapers.
If you get salarians, then you need less total EMS to get the Crucible past the Reapers, but will face more enemies on the ground.
Simple expansion changes can incorporate this.
And the burned armor and the beam are scripted changes. That can come later, but right now, these changes at least make the choices feel like they have some actual weight on the final battle.
[/quote]
That requires rebalancing of EMS.
Also, Crucible is never destroyed, so you made fleet EMS pointless.

[quote]
5. :mellow:What the hell are you talking about?
I never cut multiplayer out. And how does that factor into the Crucible?
What I said was, the Crucible should limit how well it functions, based on how many assets were put into it.
And that multiplayer doesn't need to be cut out. I never said that. You did. 
Instead, I said, have a series of messages that say how well the N7 Special Forces Teams are holding the line, depending on how many imports you made from MP to SP.
Also, gameplay changes would be during the attack on that Destroyer? Have it so that the more imports, the less Reaper forces get through to Shepard and the missle trucks.
That my friend, is what we call, a gameplay element:lol:
[/quote]
You are making no sense.
The only difference between endings now - is how well Crucible works. And you are narrowing entire EMS which affects that, to Crucible category only.
Thus you making any other EMS pointless.

And new endings - this will never happens. Redesigned endings - will never happens.

Instead of making priority:earth better(which is not possible, it is pure garbage which cannot be corrected) - you made every decision even more pointless. An achievement, i think.


[quote]
6. Again, yes it does. Easer time getting the Crucible through the Reapers, thus giving a better chance of getting the best ending options. Gameplay element.
[/quote]
You contradicting yourself.
Also, you just said that current mission is ok. Because every EMS category is affecting how Crucible works, and ending options. Thus - EMS already is a gameplay element.
What was the point of this thread?
[quote]
7. Inputing battle reports at the HQ before the beam, and comms saying that each race is holding, invaladates that, sir. It also offers closure in that you feel like each race has a better chance of surviving due to your actions.
It makes it feel worth it.
[/quote]
It makes no sense.
Reapers can't be defeated conventionally in ME3 - so it is irrelevant "how good each race is holding"(and makes completely no sense for many reasons). Crucible activated - everyone lives, not activated - everyone dies.
You starting to make less and less sense with each iteration.
[quote]
8. What exactally DO you consider a gameplay element, then?
Whatever I listed that doesn't fall into your narrow-minded view of the combat element of gameplay falls into the RPG aspect of the game, which are just as much gameplay elements as the combat, as they also vary on gamer input as much as combat does.
An expansion of cut-scenes, diolouge comm chatter, and messages, and some new character interactions, can fix most of the problems that you find so damningly impossible to bypass.
[/quote]
You listed things either meaningless, nonsensical, or not possible without a redesign.
Of course, EAWare could add more cutscenes, but with current priority:earth they will never make any sense.
This mission(and game) was designed that way. EMS never meant to matter in gameplay.
Result of this mission is - Shepard is alone, wounded, goes into the beam, no matter what. EMS only affects ending choices(which is meaningless) and if your squad dies or not.

You just proposed redesign of the entire mission, and it will still not make any sense, because the reasons i stated.
It will not make priority:earth any better.

As for gameplay - DAO.
[quote]
It is well within the realm of possibilaty, since,
First: These are all gameplay elements, either affecting combat difficulty, or gameplay narrative.
[/quote]
And?
[quote]
Second: Impossible is nowhere near the truth. Some coding and trigger cut-scenes and comm chatter, like what was done for the Extended Cut's slides, can make the major War Assets, like former party members, and the major species, gamplay elements of the RPG narrative.
[/quote]
It is impossible, but not for the reasons you stated.
[quote]
Third: We haven't even gotten to the endings, and altering them. Right now, I'm trying to talk you through this first. And the endings can be affected through two things: Did you destroy or keep the collector base? And did you convince the Illusive Man to spare Anderson? THOSE will be what will determine the ending for me. All the other things are to bring closure to all loose ends of the story, which I think I have done well enough.
[/quote]
I'm not a part of EAWare, convincing me(which you failed to do btw) will not change anything.
EAWare said they will not change the endings, so discussion about endings change is already pointless.
[quote]
Also, cut scenes, and comm chatter, will not cost more then they are already willing to spend. It would be no less expensive then the development of Omega, From Ashes or Leviathan.
[/quote]
From Ashes have no relevance to that, it was part of the game, which was cut to sell separately.
And they are not willing to spent money for the lost cause.
[quote]
And like I said before, making every single Asset directly change the gameplay in a unique way for each individual Asset is messy, unnessary, and beyond phesibly cost-effective. Grouping them by catagory is the most efficent way. And much more cost effective. Your way, there is too much room for error if any try your idea of making all War Assets affect gameplay directly.
[/quote]
My way - to make priority:earth good mission, not nonsensical retarded clowns show, as it is now.
And i stated that was impossible, because of endings, EMS tied into multiplayer, EMS being meaningless.
[quote]
And multiplayer EMS has no reason to be thrown out, when altering how many Reaper forces break through the allied lines to reach Shepard and the missle trucks works just as well. Other elements can be added as well.[/quote]
Sure.
Multiplayer EMS makes absolutely no sense in-universe, but as you demonstrated you don't care for plausibility.

[quote]And NEVER say never. Fallout 3 got it's new ending. This can too.[/quote]
That will never happens.
[quote]
And look at the independent group that patched KotOR 2's restored content. Another studio, or division of BioWare could do it.[/quote]
To restore content, you must have that content first. And there is none by design.
You are making no sense.
[quote]
  BioWare's Montreal branch has taken over development of Mass Effect according to the posts, as they are confirmed to be working on everything having to do with the series now, including making Omega, and starting offical development on the series' next game.
New management. Possible new direction. Possible new responce to fan requests.

Anything is possible.
[/quote]
Sure, if you are living in fairytale.

[/quote]
1. But you seem to think that unless it affects the combat element of the game, it isn't a gameplay element.
These changes would affect the RPG story element, which is just as much an element as the game. Having a satisfying story is just as important a gamplay element as the combat is.
As I said, grouping the assets together, and making each species catagory fair better or worse, through comm reports, is fulfilling to the story, and makes you feel like these races will survive because of your actions.
THAT is an RPG gameplay element - something the series has began to stray from.

2. So, according to you, a games' story isn't a gameplay element, and therefore doesn't matter?
The story is half the game, and the cutscenes would not be nonsensical. They would show how each species (turian, krogan, asari) fairs depending on how well you built them up.
Story narrative is just as much a gameplay element as the combat. That was the entire point of RPG-FPS hybrids like Mass Effect.

3.Cutscenes help give closure and satisfaction to the story. And the story and it's conclusion and variables are gameplay elements for the RPG half of the game. You are forgetting the entire core of the series is that of an RPG. And an RPG thrives on story. Meaning that story is one of the key gameplay elements of an RPG hybrid like Mass Effect.

4. No. Just grouping of them. 2 cutscenes max for each catagory of War Assets. Enough to provide closure to each major element of the storyline. And the fleets status represents weather or not that spicific races economy and civilization will recover well, or at all. So the state of the fleets in the end would matter.

5. No, I am not.
Crucible EMS: Determins weather or not the Crucible works properly.
Species EMS: Determins how well the races will pull through the fight and recover, or if they are destroyed.
Citadel EMS: Determins how much of the Citadel's forces, and the Council, survive the Reaper's taking of the station.
No, I am not making anything pointless. I am giving it a point. I am giving reasons to do this. To build up the Citadel defence force. To help as many races as you can. To get as much materal for the Curcible as possible.
It gives the story a purpose. It makes you feel like you can give the story an ending that was directly affected by your actions.
As I said before, I don't think you get that the story and narrative is as much a gameplay element as the combat is. If you want a game that relies soly on killing, and combat gameplay elements, buy Dishonored from Bethesda Software.

6. The survival of the Citadel fleets means that the ammount of overall EMS needed to get the best endings is lowered. That does not take away from the EMS being a gameplay element at all.

7. It won't matter if the Crucible stops the Reapers, if the other races are too weakened to rebuild. They will fall apart, and colapse and die, possibly attacking others ofr scarse resources. This system gives a chance to feel like you can prevent that. By building up the individual species catagories, you increese the chance that they will get through with the least amount of loss, and recover quickly from the war, as many resources from the Allied fleet would need to be recycled in roder to rebuild the economies and civilizations of the many races, like Palaven and Thessia.
So yes, there would be a point.

8. No, I did not.
These things close the story and tie any lose ends. And, make you feel like the story was truly infulenced by what you have done.
And I beg to differ. Priority: Earth seems bare-bones. Therefore, a blank canvas that can handle these additions without changeing the core framework of the level.
A few cutscenes, comm chatter diolouge, and messages, would make it feel like EMS matters.
EMS is ment to determine the fate of the galaxy's races. This decides their fates. Just because it is seperate from what happens to the squad does not make it any less an element to the story. There IS supposed to be a bigger picture, you know.
You are being to fatalistic. It can be great, without needing to restructure the entire level. Just build on the framework of what you have without needing to replace anything. THAT is the point of this.

9. And what?
The RPG-story gameplay elements are affected by what you have done.
The FPS-combat gameplay elements are affected by the N7 imports, and by the races you recrut (krogan, geth)

10. What is it that makes you think it is so damningly impossible, when it is nowhere near the case?

11. You do not know that for sure, and this is something that BioWare looks over anyway. And since a new BioWare branch has taken the reins of ME, you cannot say "impossible" for sure. Look at Fallout 3. I'm sure people said changing the ending for that was a waste of time, but it was done.
Don't be so pessimistic about the future.

12. But that is basically what they are doing anyway. DLC like Omega and Leviathan are never going to be as popular as they thought it would be after the ending, so doing something like this would be no more a waste then those.

13. Your way was to make a system that would be far too complex, and would take far too long to code. This is a simpler system, and more phesable then what you had in mind.

14. You are making it sound like you are an MP hater.
Multyplayer can have an impact. A console with messages that the races are cooperating better the more imports there are makes you feel like the MP has a meaning without feeling like a nessary option.
That was the intent of the devs, after all it seems. Make MP something that affects the story, yet not so much that you feel like it forces you to do multiplayer, if you don't want to.

15. There are peopel who said the same for Fallout 3. And people who didn't think anything like the Extended Cut would be made.

16. The point is, game content doesn't have to be restored/developeded by the original developer. Another branch can do it. And that oppertunity has already come, as a seperate BioWare Branch has taken over development of the ME series.

17. Nothing is ever impossible. Anyone who played ME should know that.
Saying something is impossible, is basically a shoutout for someone to prove it wrong.

My point is: Never say that something is impossible. Because someday, that could change.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 28 novembre 2012 - 06:30 .

[abyss-reaver]

"My point is: Never say that something is impossible. Because someday, that could change."

Exactly! after ME1 i thought that the only possible way of the franchise is to improve. It was impossible to make sth which is not as good... and... TADAAAAAAM!

[silverexile17s]

abyss-reaver wrote...


"My point is: Never say that something is impossible. Because someday, that could change."

Exactly! after ME1 i thought that the only possible way of the franchise is to improve. It was impossible to make sth which is not as good... and... TADAAAAAAM!

No kidding.
NO one thought the ending would be that unsatisfying.

[saintjimmy43]

please make a new ending? please? pleeeeeeeeeease? PLEASEEEEEEEEEEEE?

[M2S SOLID JOSH]

me1- omg this is epic. it had awesome set pieces, a battle at a grand scale, and a great villian

me2- omg this is badass. you get to see everything u worked for (or didnt ) in action and just made you like a boss. the final boss couldve been better but i didnt mind too much.

me3- ....is that it? other than that final speech nothing really happened. you land, u fight, u get to the missiles and fight a wave of enemies. thats it. i expected alot more than this, like meeting up with past squadmates during firefights, taking key points, and little sidequest stuff like helping out a downed shuttle or something. how did bw become so backward?

[RuthlessGravity]

I am going have to agree. The final battle was underwhelming. I don't mind the ending choices, but the final battle needed to punch me in the face and show how gone to hell the situation on Earth is and make us feel we need to fight for it back. The entire game is great up until that point which feels like the weakest gut punch ever.

[hanjie1712]

Well yeah, if you compare the final acts of ME2 and ME3, the former is so much better solely because it takes into account all your actions. In ME3 all you do is fight and run and fight again. War assets do nothing here, nor do your actions across the whole trilogy

Never mind the completely silly endings (c'mon, you knew this was coming).

All Bioware needs to do is revamp the final act (and also the ending) and their credibility will return again.

Modifié par chunghanjie92, 28 novembre 2012 - 07:41 .

[Yumi50]

I don't really think BW give a damn, honestly

[Hudathan]

Yumi50 wrote...

I don't really think BW give a damn, honestly

How you figure. Enough people spoke up about needing more closure for the ending and Bioware made the Extended Cut. What part of that is them not giving a damn?

[silverexile17s]

Hudathan wrote...

Yumi50 wrote...

I don't really think BW give a damn, honestly

How you figure. Enough people spoke up about needing more closure for the ending and Bioware made the Extended Cut. What part of that is them not giving a damn?

Many feel that the request to make new endings, and make the end of the game feel worthwhile, was ignored in favor of just explaining the endings they already made, since they thought just explaining the endings would fix everything.
However, I do admit that they get points for re-prioritizing their DLC release lineup for this, since that was probably a pain for them. So at least we know they tried SOMETHING.

[Leon481]

I'll support a revised Priority Earth.

Better yet, a full expansion that adds onto Priority Earth and allows us to explore the galaxy after the endings, fully explores the effect of our choices on the state of the galaxy, shows what happened to our squad mates, and ultimately sets up for the sequel. That would be the best thing possible in my mind

Modifié par Leon481, 28 novembre 2012 - 09:38 .

[Ridwan]

I support this, but it won't ever happen.

[Hudathan]

silverexile17s wrote...

Many feel that the request to make new endings, and make the end of the game feel worthwhile, was ignored in favor of just explaining the endings they already made, since they thought just explaining the endings would fix everything.
However, I do admit that they get points for re-prioritizing their DLC release lineup for this, since that was probably a pain for them. So at least we know they tried SOMETHING.

Whether or not what Bioware comes up with will be satisfying is up to the individual player to decide, the important thing is that they made a DLC to address an issue that many fans brought up in a way that they felt was a good extension of the original ending.

If they're willing to do that then it means Bioware is still a company that tries its best to incorporate fan feedback in some way when it comes to their games. I said 'still' because they've always made sure that the Mass Effect series had its fair share of fan service.

[hawat333]

I don't support a revamped Priority: Earth mission. Since the Extended cut, I found it to be absolutely fine.
But I do support War Assets being added to the scenes.

[Majin Paul]

I'd certainly like to see Priority Earth improved. On my first playthrough I had set a few hours aside for that mission expecting a few hours of pure epic and it turned out to be a few fight in corridors/streets followed by fighting waves and waves of enemies for a set time, which is okay in short bursts in MP but for the final mission of the trilogy it was infuriating to say the very least.
Plus the lack of showing war assets was abyssmal.

Modifié par Majin Paul, 28 novembre 2012 - 10:54 .

[MassEffecter132]

I want this!

[Yumi50]

Hudathan wrote...

Yumi50 wrote...

I don't really think BW give a damn, honestly

How you figure. Enough people spoke up about needing more closure for the ending and Bioware made the Extended Cut. What part of that is them not giving a damn?

it's their borderline. They had to do it because there were so much media and pressure not just from fans.
Priority:EARTH is kinda part of the ending even though it's not. But BW will see it that way and changing ending is what they've been against since Day 1

And it's been...what.. how long since the game release.
Instead of going back, wasting time/resource/manpower to redo the already done mission, I think they'd rather spend those stuff on new DLC, if there's any, and release it for another $15.

Modifié par Yumi50, 28 novembre 2012 - 12:56 .

[idunhavaname]

YES 100% YES.

I can't convince myself to play Earth again not because of the ending (which I rather liked. Could have been better but im content with it) but because Priority: Earth SUCKED.

It was single handedly the most anti-climactic and dull mission I have ever experienced in any game.
The music (if there was any) was mediocre and it was not anyway creative like Tuchanka. All you did was literally point and shoot for 30 minutes.

Priority: Earth didn't give me the "please don't let this end" feeling like ME1 Citadel and ME2 collectors base and instead gave me a nauseating "WHEN WILL THIS END?!".