257 réponses à ce sujet

[Stalker]

For those who want to show support:

The original post had ideas especially for the ME2-squadmates...




Kaidan...



Ashley...




And the neutral Normandy...



Hope you like them.
If you have a request for another, you can message me and I can make it happen!  

[Wintermist]

Yes I support this. I was a bit disappointed I never got to see the forces *I* gathered, the forces *I* spent my whole game working to gather. I wanted to see Geth on the battlefield with me, Rachni with me, and so on.

[Alxea_Eve]

I support this. Plus harbinger needs to be the final boss... not star child diolog!

Modifié par Alxea_Eve, 28 novembre 2012 - 02:40 .

[SirLugash]

Alxea_Eve wrote...

I support this. Plus harbinger needs to be the final boss... not star child diolog!

^This

[Maxster_]

[quote]silverexile17s wrote...

[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.
[/quote]
From where you got that idea?
I said to make priority:earth better, by adding war assets as gameplay element, you need that addition to be meaningful. And to make it meaningful - it must make sense.
Currently, priority:earth makes no sense, it is completely unneeded.
No addition of cutscenes will change that - and you can't add war assets as gameplay element, because they are meaningless.

You still making no sense - races survival doesn't depend on priority:earth mission, only on it's success and previous choices(genophage cure).
If Crucible activated - all survive(except those who already dead(geth|quarian) or will die out(krogan). If Crucible not activated - everyone is dead.
There is no gradation, it never intended - and you want to add it in connection with priority:earth - but that's makes absolutely no sense. Races have their homeworld, so even complete annihilation of their fleets will not destroy them, if reapers are defeated.
And if you are saying that this should affect game epilogue - it will never happens.

[quote]
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.
[/quote]
You are making no sense.
Priority:earth have no effect on race survival. What you are proposing - is redesign of entire game.
You do not built races up. What the hell you even talking about? If you are talking about something like Neverwinter 2 fortress upgrades - ME3 have nothing of this by design, it never intended to.
As i said, - you are talking about meaningless cutscenes(meaningless because they affect nothing - result of this mission is the same).
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
You making no sense.
Closure given by cutscenes in ME3. Cutscenes you talking about in priority:earth will affect absolutely nothing without redesign of half a game. They are meaningless, they affect nothing, change nothing.
There is no difference between krogan ground forces and salarian fleets in your version - just meaningless cutscenes.
Also they are not a closure, closure you get after the end of the game - and there is already.
If you a talking about ending change - it will not going to happen.


[quote]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.
[/quote]
That's nonsense.
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
Current endings difference affected only by state of Crucible, and this state affected by overall EMS count.
Species EMS effect makes no sense, and requires rewriting of endings. Because of first, you are not making anything better, and because of second - it will never happens.
Same goes for Citadel EMS
[quote]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.
[/quote]
No, you just making no sense and contradicting yourself.
First you stated that priority:earth requires no redesign.
Then you proposed things based on non-existent gameplay elements(like helping races), and pure nonsense(fate of fleets determines fate of races). And first requires a complete redesign of ME3.
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
Yeah, and that requires rebalancing of EMS.
CDF EMS is consist mostly of 3 fetch quests. To make this category meaningful, you need to rebalance EMS, and redesign those assets.
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
Nonsense. How destruction of fleets will make races too weakened to rebuild? It doesn't.
And you just said, that this entire inclusion of reports is completely irrelevant to gameplay.
And that is what i already said before.
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
No, you do not undertand what EMS is.
EMS is designed to make your choices irrelevant. It can not affect epilogue, because it is meaningless, unstructured(and unbalanced).
All your choices through trilogy is shoerhorned into EMS, which is meaningless. You can't turn minced meat back into meat.
It cannot be made meaningful without redesigning half a game.

You just want some nonsensical cutscenes which affect nothing.
[quote]
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)
[/quote]
What are you answering to?
[quote]
10. What is it that makes you think it is so damningly impossible, when it is nowhere near the case?
[/quote]
Direct words of EAWare. Loss of former Bioware fanbase. Change of target audience.
It is too costly(your version, mine just impossible), small number of people will buy it with current garbage endings.
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
I'm just stating the obvious. ME universe died a horrible death, EAWare core fanbase destroyed.
Also, EAWare stated many times - they will not change endings, or make any post-ending dlcs. So Fallout example is irrelevant.

[quote]
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.
[/quote]
Next time use quotes. It is getting hard to decipher what part of post you answering too.
Also, Omega and Leviathan is new content, not restored.
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
Of course. It should be that way from the start of development cycle.
[quote]

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.
[/quote]
I never played MP in ME3, and never will(because i will not touch that crappy game again, obviously). It is completely out of place for Mass Effect.
Also, it is completely out of place in lore.
Including multiplayer and tying in into a sinpleplayer - is a design decision that led to nullification of choices.
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
Extended Crap is damage control. It solves nothing, just adds new plotholes, and even more characters assassination.
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
Please.
Living in a fairytale is probably a good thing, but i will not join you 
[quote]
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.

[/quote]
Lol.

[silverexile17s]

Leon481 wrote...

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

An expansion is defenately what it needs.

[silverexile17s]

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

[quote]silverexile17s wrote...

[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.
[/quote]
From where you got that idea?
I said to make priority:earth better, by adding war assets as gameplay element, you need that addition to be meaningful. And to make it meaningful - it must make sense.
Currently, priority:earth makes no sense, it is completely unneeded.
No addition of cutscenes will change that - and you can't add war assets as gameplay element, because they are meaningless.

You still making no sense - races survival doesn't depend on priority:earth mission, only on it's success and previous choices(genophage cure).
If Crucible activated - all survive(except those who already dead(geth|quarian) or will die out(krogan). If Crucible not activated - everyone is dead.
There is no gradation, it never intended - and you want to add it in connection with priority:earth - but that's makes absolutely no sense. Races have their homeworld, so even complete annihilation of their fleets will not destroy them, if reapers are defeated.
And if you are saying that this should affect game epilogue - it will never happens.

[quote]
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.
[/quote]
You are making no sense.
Priority:earth have no effect on race survival. What you are proposing - is redesign of entire game.
You do not built races up. What the hell you even talking about? If you are talking about something like Neverwinter 2 fortress upgrades - ME3 have nothing of this by design, it never intended to.
As i said, - you are talking about meaningless cutscenes(meaningless because they affect nothing - result of this mission is the same).
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
You making no sense.
Closure given by cutscenes in ME3. Cutscenes you talking about in priority:earth will affect absolutely nothing without redesign of half a game. They are meaningless, they affect nothing, change nothing.
There is no difference between krogan ground forces and salarian fleets in your version - just meaningless cutscenes.
Also they are not a closure, closure you get after the end of the game - and there is already.
If you a talking about ending change - it will not going to happen.


[quote]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.
[/quote]
That's nonsense.
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
Current endings difference affected only by state of Crucible, and this state affected by overall EMS count.
Species EMS effect makes no sense, and requires rewriting of endings. Because of first, you are not making anything better, and because of second - it will never happens.
Same goes for Citadel EMS
[quote]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.
[/quote]
No, you just making no sense and contradicting yourself.
First you stated that priority:earth requires no redesign.
Then you proposed things based on non-existent gameplay elements(like helping races), and pure nonsense(fate of fleets determines fate of races). And first requires a complete redesign of ME3.
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
Yeah, and that requires rebalancing of EMS.
CDF EMS is consist mostly of 3 fetch quests. To make this category meaningful, you need to rebalance EMS, and redesign those assets.
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
Nonsense. How destruction of fleets will make races too weakened to rebuild? It doesn't.
And you just said, that this entire inclusion of reports is completely irrelevant to gameplay.
And that is what i already said before.
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
No, you do not undertand what EMS is.
EMS is designed to make your choices irrelevant. It can not affect epilogue, because it is meaningless, unstructured(and unbalanced).
All your choices through trilogy is shoerhorned into EMS, which is meaningless. You can't turn minced meat back into meat.
It cannot be made meaningful without redesigning half a game.

You just want some nonsensical cutscenes which affect nothing.
[quote]
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)
[/quote]
What are you answering to?
[quote]
10. What is it that makes you think it is so damningly impossible, when it is nowhere near the case?
[/quote]
Direct words of EAWare. Loss of former Bioware fanbase. Change of target audience.
It is too costly(your version, mine just impossible), small number of people will buy it with current garbage endings.
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
I'm just stating the obvious. ME universe died a horrible death, EAWare core fanbase destroyed.
Also, EAWare stated many times - they will not change endings, or make any post-ending dlcs. So Fallout example is irrelevant.

[quote]
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.
[/quote]
Next time use quotes. It is getting hard to decipher what part of post you answering too.
Also, Omega and Leviathan is new content, not restored.
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
Of course. It should be that way from the start of development cycle.
[quote]

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.
[/quote]
I never played MP in ME3, and never will(because i will not touch that crappy game again, obviously). It is completely out of place for Mass Effect.
Also, it is completely out of place in lore.
Including multiplayer and tying in into a sinpleplayer - is a design decision that led to nullification of choices.
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
Extended Crap is damage control. It solves nothing, just adds new plotholes, and even more characters assassination.
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
Please.
Living in a fairytale is probably a good thing, but i will not join you 
[quote]
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.

[/quote]
Lol.

[/quote]

1. You are looking at it the wrong way. The war asset catagories represent the strength of each race, and how well they will fair in the final battle. If one catagory is too low, that race will end up being destroyed by the Reapers.

And you are the one that is wrong. Even if Earth is won, if the fleets are devastated, then the economy of the civilizations will not recover, and each race will colapse on itself, having had no leftover resources in the wake of the final battle. Not to mention that war asstes go to BOTH the attack on Earth, and the defence of their own homeworlds.
Say you fail to get enough Asari assets. They will be unable to muster enough forces to signi****antly help you over Earth, or have enough in reserve to defend their homeworld, meaning that the asari fleets are wiped out, and their homeworld conquered.
But if it is maxed, the asari will be able to commit a good-sized fleet to you, and still have enough to hold Thessia until the Crucible fires.
That kind of thing makes it feel like it was worth finding war assets for the asari.
So NO, the sucess of Priority: Earth does NOT garuntee the survival of the other races, and assuming so is a mistake for this game.

2. No. It is not a redesign of the entire game. Just adding and building onto the framework of the final hours.
And the cutscenes are in no way meaningless, as they affect the story narrative, giving closure and making you feel like running round the galaxy was worth all the trouble. Making you feel like geting these turian assets will really help them rebuild after the war, or that they can hold their own back in thir home-system, while they keep the Reapers in their space too busy to reinforce the ones at Earth.

3. Competely untrue. All you need it to build cutscenes for each catagory of War Asset, which shows that building up was worth it. It doesn't need total redesign. Just a system that reads them by their catagories.
Cutscenes are not meaningless at all ,when they alter the story, and on which species lives, and dies. The storyline is the core of the story, and is told through cutscenes and doilouge.
So no, cutscenes are not meaningless.

4. Thats' fact.
If a fleet is destroyed, so is it's chance to recover. They wil be starting from scratch if their fleet gets wiped out, and there is not enough raw resources left in the ravaged galaxy to start from. There would be no way for them to recover before their economy and civilization collapse.

5. So change that. It would not be hard.
Make it so that ONLY the Crucible EMS affects the endings avalible.
And not true. It in no way requires rewrite of the endings. Just cutscenes, or diolouge, that shows/tells us these races will pull through. Same with the Citadel.
And as I said, never say never.

6. It in no way requires a complete redesign of the game. Just adding on to what we already have. No "total restructure."
Helping the races survive this war was the point of fighting the Reapers! What did you think it was for? Sport?
It's a key element of the story, which in turn is a gameplay element of the RPG elements of the game!
And the fleet needs to be big enough to have (A) enough ships to signifigantly help you during the attack on Earth while ( having enough in reserve to beep the Reapers in their own space at bay while the Crucible is delivered.
So yes, fleet strength for each species is all the difference.

7. No, a tweak, and nothing very difficult. It would not be that hard. They already have that system IN the game, as it lowers how much EMS you need for a spicific ending based on what you did with the Collector Base. It would be easier to make the needed level for all the endings be lowered based on the Citadel force rating, compaiered to lowering one spicific option for the state of the Collector Base.
And no, redesign of the Citadel Defence Force asset is unessessary, as many sidequests and doilouge options rase or lower it's value.

8. As I said in ^. the fleet needs to be big and well supported enough to help re-take Earth, while still having enough in reserve to keep the Reapers in their own systems at bay.  If there is not enough to do both, then that races fleet at Earth will be destroyed, and the reserves at their home-system will crumble to the Reapers, resulting in the destruction of their worlds. And afterwards, there is not enough for them to rebuild, so that race is bascially dead.
So like I said, Fleet strength make all the difference.

9. That can be fixed rather easily. Just grouping them into catagories, and telling us how well each race fairs depending on how strong the catagory is, through cutscenes or diolouge, or comm chatter, offers closure to each race, and assures us that gathering war assets helped them survive.

Also, the inclusion of the reports adds to the story, which is just as much part of the gameplay, in what I remind you is primaraly an RPG. NOT an FPS.

Your ideas would only work in action mode of the game, where no one cares about the story. Just the combat gameplay.

Making them ALL individually affect gamplay (Crusier Agencourt = banshees tied down by bombing. Disruptor missles = more missle trucks) is messy, complicated, and unessessary. Your option is what would need restructuring of the entire thing.

This option does not.

10. I fear that you are the one that does not understand what EMS should be.
It was never designed to be irrelevent. That's just how it seems to have come out. I highly doubt the devs went into this saying "let's make it a system that has no meaning what-so-ever!" If you do, you are just blaming them for the ending out of bitterness. It may have ended up that way, but they had no intention of making it feel worthless.
EMS should be how well these races fair, based on how well you prepped them. Cutscenes add to the story and give meaningfull closure to these assets, and to the races of each catagory. It does not need redesign of the entire game to make them have meaning. They were ment to be part of the story elements, not combat elements.

11. Your post that said "And?"

12. That was when Gamble had control. A new BioWare branch is now in control of ME. Besides, many of the BioWare fan base- old,new, and former- is willing to support this idea. Ant they were targeting the same audence, but went about it the wrong way.
Besides, this is a thread about re-vamping Priority: Earth, which I did without needing to re-design the entire game. And that if someone DID make it, it would be totaly possible.
If you don't support it, or  believe in it's possibliaty, then why are you on this thread?

13. ME is only dead if people like you sit back and let it die.
Threads like this show that people DO care about the series. The entire blow-up with the endings was because peopel cared about the game, and wanted it done justice. Anyone - ending haters, ending lovers - stating their opinions on the ending is showing that they care about the franchise in one way or another. So BioWare's core fanbase hasn't abandoned them yet. As long as they post on these forms, they are still fans of the company, regardeless of which game they like.
And Fallout is relevent because there were people that thought Bethesda would do nothing of the sort regarding changing the game's ending. Yet it happened.
The point is to expect the unexpected. You may be surprised. People sure were by the ORIGINAL endings. If surprises like that can happen, anything can.

14. It's still relavent, since many consider adding on to the story with the current endings is pointless and a waste of money. This would be no more a waste of money then those are, since those are just add-ons to what many consider a dissapointing story.

15. But you are talking about things that could have been, and are no longer possible. This expansion I outlined is.

16. I am the opposate. MP was the main reason I actually bought the game in the first place. And a galactic war against every species made MP feel well placed as an option in thsi game, since every race is being attacked.
And that isn't true. Messages that say the N7 teams are examples of cooperation in the Allied Forces, and a message that says they are improvong the unity of the Allies, makes you feel like if you import, it has an effect. Making them a war assest was the best way to accent that, as they show the Allies how to band together. It makes you feel like it can have a purpose.

17. The point was, at least they TRIED to fix it. Besides, not everything was horrible. The ending slides helped, and the choices make more sense then they did before.  And there are more holes fixed the added.

18. I point you to the Halo series. They moved away from Bungie to 343 Industries, and the content being made is still quite good, despite the change in management/development. Proof that another company or branch can make materal of good or better calibur as the original creator. Thinking otherwise is the fairytale:lol:.
So good luck in yours, where no one but the original owner can make good material for his/her story. Cause George Lucas is wonderfull proof of that.

19. Impossible things happen.
Did you ever POSSIBLY think the endings would suck as bad as they did? I doubt it.
Never say anything is Impossible.

[thehomeworld]

New CG that shows your war assets in work like Samara killing husks, the Rachni swarming and eating a reaper, ect would be good

However they don't need to "revamp" the priority Earth missions they where great the only thing that needs to change is if you have Lev then Lev should kill all reapers including Harbi who get in your way and lev on the battlefield frying reapers left and right should also cut back on casualties both on ground and in space by 70 - 90%.

[saintjimmy43]

Seriously, Joker running the Normandy into Harbinger would be good enough to excuse him not appearing in the game any further.

[ThaDPG]

Seriously, cut scenes of Krogans and Batarians taking it to the Reaper ground troops, with Geth Collossi standing over them and covering them from air attack, Asari and Alliance ships in the sky taking the fight to the Reapers up there, The Leviathans flying around turning Reapers on themselves, that would be awesome

[Sparda Stonerule]

Now this is a cause I can get behind fully. Hell I'd pay for this. My issue isn't with the ending at all. But I do admit a better buildup, a better ground war, a more detailed space battle, more war assets fighting, a better mission structure for Earth would all be seriously kick ass.

So I fully support this. Good luck ladies and gentlemen, I really hope to see this happen! But I do want to be clear I don't want this to be about the ending, but the lead up to it.

[Dr_Extrem]

the whole mission is a mess - from a tactical point of view, major fish'n'chips and anderson should be smacked for putting their battle plan on the table. i mean .. anderson - n7 graduate - tactical mastermind - war hero - and HE comes up with THIS plan? hard to believe.

running into an enemy with superior position, firepower, without having a good cover on our side - this sounds like france 1914. this is like running into machine gun fire while holding formation.

they should have made their homework (writers) - basic military tactics and stategies. the tactic anderson and the brit came up with, is not working anymore, since ww1.

its london ... what about the tunnels fron the underground? what about asari and stg infiltration specialists? turians, humans, krogan and mercs making fake attacks to draw attention.
what about the remaining citadel defense forces (we have an ems score for them!) on the other side of the portal? nobody knows where portal leads to. that could have been clarified with baily and his guys doing some recon up on the citadel. they also could build up a bridgehead on the citadel-side of the beam, to enshure, that the infiltrators are landing savely on the citadel.. shepard was lucky in the ending - he/she could have landed in a big blender or right on top of some reaper forces.


london is just a tactical nightmare - no wonder hammer got hammered.

Modifié par Dr_Extrem, 28 novembre 2012 - 11:54 .

[saintjimmy43]

^I think the point is that it was a desperate gut charge. less france 1914 than normandy beach.

[MKfighter89]

Of Course, But instead of London, do Zimbabwe cause nothing interesting happens their

[Spectre Impersonator]

This is literally the only thing that could restore my faith in Bioware following the Omega DLC.

[Dr_Extrem]

saintjimmy43 wrote...

^I think the point is that it was a desperate gut charge. less france 1914 than normandy beach.

desperation and stupidity should not go hand in hand. even if you are desperate, you can bring up a smart plan. blindly rushing into the enemy is always stupid and gets people killed - even if you are not in desperation.

desperate times need smart plans to be overcome.

[Leon481]

Sparda Stonerule wrote...

Now this is a cause I can get behind fully. Hell I'd pay for this. My issue isn't with the ending at all. But I do admit a better buildup, a better ground war, a more detailed space battle, more war assets fighting, a better mission structure for Earth would all be seriously kick ass.

So I fully support this. Good luck ladies and gentlemen, I really hope to see this happen! But I do want to be clear I don't want this to be about the ending, but the lead up to it.

Yeah, I mean you spend the whole game collecting assets for the war and making quite a few choices that seem like they should have a significant effect on the situation, but once you get to the end you wonder why it even mattered. Even the present squad mates (EDI being the one exception) were relegated to the background and had no noticible effect on the war. It was a sorry state of affairs.

I'm not saying all these assets and choices had to have an effect on the main plot, not necessarily even on the ending (though that is an option), but it would have been nice if it had some effect on the many side plots and character stories we have followed and been invested in since the beginning.

I think that's all many of us wanted. Not a better ending to the main plot, but a more complete wrap up to those many interwoven side plots and side characters we have all come to love, and for our choices to make a difference in their fates.

Mass Effect was never just about saving the galaxy. It was about how our choices effected people and places along the way. To have that dropped at the last minute is contrary to a prominent theme throughout the series and highly disappointing to us fans who became invested in the world Bioware created.

As far as I see it, a revamped Priority Earth is the best way to finally put to rest most of the anger and disappointment from fans. The other option is a post-ending expansion that would give consequences to these choices but I just think it would be less satisfying in general than revamping Priority Earth. That's just my opinion though.

[silverexile17s]

Sparda Stonerule wrote...

Now this is a cause I can get behind fully. Hell I'd pay for this. My issue isn't with the ending at all. But I do admit a better buildup, a better ground war, a more detailed space battle, more war assets fighting, a better mission structure for Earth would all be seriously kick ass.

So I fully support this. Good luck ladies and gentlemen, I really hope to see this happen! But I do want to be clear I don't want this to be about the ending, but the lead up to it.

Exactally. I actually liked Control and Destroy as options. I wish there had been others, or that these two were better executed, but the premise of these two are not horrible to me. The only ending I do not like is Synthesis.

As you can see, Maxster_ thinks it's impossible without re-designing the entire game.
Cut-scenes can give closure to the races you built up, and the squadmates you saved.

However, He thinks that cut-scenes will always be nonsensacal, and that cut-scenes are not gameplay elements, when what happens in these cut-scenes affetct the story narrative. And the story and narrative are key gameplay elements of an RPG, which is Mass Effects' priamry genre.

I intend to show that this re-vamp can be done without needing to gut the entire level, and the EMS system to do it.

[Maxster_]

[quote]silverexile17s wrote...
1. You are looking at it the wrong way. The war asset catagories represent the strength of each race, and how well they will fair in the final battle. If one catagory is too low, that race will end up being destroyed by the Reapers.
[/quote]
So, you are inventing things to "prove" your point?
You are wrong, war assets represent military.
[quote]
And you are the one that is wrong. Even if Earth is won, if the fleets are devastated, then the economy of the civilizations will not recover, and each race will colapse on itself, having had no leftover resources in the wake of the final battle. Not to mention that war asstes go to BOTH the attack on Earth, and the defence of their own homeworlds.
Say you fail to get enough Asari assets. They will be unable to muster enough forces to signi****antly help you over Earth, or have enough in reserve to defend their homeworld, meaning that the asari fleets are wiped out, and their homeworld conquered.
But if it is maxed, the asari will be able to commit a good-sized fleet to you, and still have enough to hold Thessia until the Crucible fires.
That kind of thing makes it feel like it was worth finding war assets for the asari.
So NO, the sucess of Priority: Earth does NOT garuntee the survival of the other races, and assuming so is a mistake for this game.
[/quote]
What are you talking about?
This makes completely no sense.
First, "helping" never happened in game, it was not part of design. You are just making up things that never happened, which requires remake of an entire game, and stating that is not redesign. Stop contradicting yourself already.
Second, if you are talking about fetch quests as means of "helping" - this makes absolutely no sense. Ships are not magically build themselves, troops are not appearing out of thin air.
Third, fleets destruction are not tied to economics. This is nonsense. Asari have a lot of developed colonies, System Alliance have only Earth. Devastation of Earth means that SA is not a power anymore, even with it fleets. Krogan have no fleets and colonies, salarians and turians have a lot of fleets and developed colonies. Destruction of asari, salarian and turian fleets will not destroy their economy.
Stop making up never existed nonsense.
[quote]
2. No. It is not a redesign of the entire game. Just adding and building onto the framework of the final hours.
And the cutscenes are in no way meaningless, as they affect the story narrative, giving closure and making you feel like running round the galaxy was worth all the trouble. Making you feel like geting these turian assets will really help them rebuild after the war, or that they can hold their own back in thir home-system, while they keep the Reapers in their space too busy to reinforce the ones at Earth.
[/quote]
That nonsense again.
You talking about things which was never a part of design. There is no "helping" races gameplay elements. They were never in game.
And tying fleets destruction to economics - is nonsense.
Magically strengthening races is nonsense also.

What you talking about is a complete remake of the game. And in current ME3, and priority:earth - those cutscenes are meaningless and nonsense.

[quote]
3. Competely untrue. All you need it to build cutscenes for each catagory of War Asset, which shows that building up was worth it. It doesn't need total redesign. Just a system that reads them by their catagories.
Cutscenes are not meaningless at all ,when they alter the story, and on which species lives, and dies. The storyline is the core of the story, and is told through cutscenes and doilouge.
So no, cutscenes are not meaningless.
[/quote]
So, you didn't read what i wrote. What is the point of this discussion? You just ignoring anything i said and spew your nonsense.

Stop pretending that i said that all cutscenes are meaningless.
I repeat.

Closure given by cutscenes in ME3. Cutscenes you talking about in
priority:earth will affect absolutely nothing without redesign of half a
game. They are meaningless, they affect nothing, change nothing.
There is no difference between krogan ground forces and salarian fleets in your version - just meaningless cutscenes.
Also they are not a closure, closure you get after the end of the game - and there is already.
If you a talking about ending change - it will not going to happen.
[quote]
4. Thats' fact.
If a fleet is destroyed, so is it's chance to recover. They wil be starting from scratch if their fleet gets wiped out, and there is not enough raw resources left in the ravaged galaxy to start from. There would be no way for them to recover before their economy and civilization collapse.
[/quote]
*facedesk*

I think it is useless to continue.
If you do not undestand that you are saying complete nonsense - it just pointless.
If a fleet is destroyed, so is it's chance to recover.
False statement. Nonsense.
They wil be
starting from scratch if their fleet gets wiped out
Plain nonsense. If colonies still exists(with infrastructure), economy will be recovered, if not - then starvation, and extinction(or survival of much smaller population).
And fleets have nothing to do with it.
, and there is not
enough raw resources left in the ravaged galaxy to start from.
Plain lie.

There
would be no way for them to recover before their economy and
civilization collapse.
Fleets are completely unrelated to state of economy.
[quote]
5. So change that. It would not be hard.
Make it so that ONLY the Crucible EMS affects the endings avalible.
[/quote]
So, you already forgot what you were answering, and haven't even bothered to check. Arguing for the sake of arguing?
I said, that you narrowed all EMS categories affecting the endings, to one category - Crucible. You started objecting, and after few posts, now, you are telling me, they should narrow all EMS categories affecting the endings - Crucible.
Dafuq?
[quote]
And not true. It in no way requires rewrite of the endings. Just cutscenes, or diolouge, that shows/tells us these races will pull through. Same with the Citadel.
And as I said, never say never.
[/quote]
Of course it is. To make any cutscenes to be meaningful, you need redesign and rewrite of the endings and priority:earth.
If you just add cutscenes to priority:earth - they will be pointless.
If you also want to change endings, - it will never happen.

It is simple.
[quote]6. It in no way requires a complete redesign of the game. Just adding on to what we already have. No "total restructure."
[/quote]
You are making no sense.
I gave you example - Citadel Defence Force from war assets of the game.
Those war assets mostly comes from fetch quests.
To make something meanigful in this category you must rebalance and remake that category.
[quote]
Helping the races survive this war was the point of fighting the Reapers! What did you think it was for? Sport?
It's a key element of the story, which in turn is a gameplay element of the RPG elements of the game!
[/quote]
You are making no sense. Again.
You are uniting everyone, so actually they helping themselves to survive. You are not getting them fleets and ground forces - they give them to allied command, in hope that their plan with Crucible will work. There is no possibility for conventional victory in narrative.
[quote]
And the fleet needs to be big enough to have (A) enough ships to signifigantly help you during the attack on Earth while ( having enough in reserve to beep the Reapers in their own space at bay while the Crucible is delivered.
So yes, fleet strength for each species is all the difference.
[/quote]
You talking about things that never happened in game. All homeworld defences were easily crushed.
[quote]
7. No, a tweak, and nothing very difficult. It would not be that hard. They already have that system IN the game, as it lowers how much EMS you need for a spicific ending based on what you did with the Collector Base. It would be easier to make the needed level for all the endings be lowered based on the Citadel force rating, compaiered to lowering one spicific option for the state of the Collector Base.
[/quote]
What are you answering to? I have no idea. 7th point was about fleet destruction tied to rebuild(which is nonsense). 6th point was about CDF and narrowing all EMS affecting ending to Crucible category only.
[quote]
And no, redesign of the Citadel Defence Force asset is unessessary, as many sidequests and doilouge options rase or lower it's value.
[/quote]
No, you are wrong, 120 points comes from fetch quests. This is a overwhelming majority of CDF EMS.
[quote]
8. As I said in ^. the fleet needs to be big and well supported enough to help re-take Earth, while still having enough in reserve to keep the Reapers in their own systems at bay.  If there is not enough to do both, then that races fleet at Earth will be destroyed, and the reserves at their home-system will crumble to the Reapers, resulting in the destruction of their worlds. And afterwards, there is not enough for them to rebuild, so that race is bascially dead.
So like I said, Fleet strength make all the difference.
[/quote]
This is nonsense.
First, there is nothing about reserves in game.
Second, that operation was fast, and ended in destruction of the reapers.
Third, if reapers wanted to bombard every colony into dust - they'd already done that. There is not enough fleets to even hold them for a moderate amount of time, not even stop them. Stop making up things to "prove" your point.
What you proposing - is rewrite of entire story.


[quote]9. That can be fixed rather easily. Just grouping them into catagories, and telling us how well each race fairs depending on how strong the catagory is, through cutscenes or diolouge, or comm chatter, offers closure to each race, and assures us that gathering war assets helped them survive.
[/quote]
If this included before catalyst's nonsense and endings with epilogues - it makes no sense.
If this included in epilogues - it will never happen.
[quote]
Also, the inclusion of the reports adds to the story, which is just as much part of the gameplay, in what I remind you is primaraly an RPG. NOT an FPS.
[/quote]
Stop that already.
First you telling me that game do not need redesign, and all could be solved by slight changes - and then you are proposing things that were never a part of design, and requires a complete remake.
Second, you either do not undestand what i said, or just lying.
I never said what you are saying i said in this quote. It is plaing false.

I repeat - your inclusion of reports, which affect nothing in narrative, are completely meaningless, and makes no sense. To make them sensical, you must remade endings.
It is simple.
[quote]
Your ideas would only work in action mode of the game, where no one cares about the story. Just the combat gameplay.
[/quote]
You are arguing about images in your head.
[quote]
Making them ALL individually affect gamplay (Crusier Agencourt = banshees tied down by bombing. Disruptor missles = more missle trucks) is messy, complicated, and unessessary. Your option is what would need restructuring of the entire thing.
[/quote]
At least you got small part of what i said.
Finally.
I said - current priority:earth mission makes no sense, ground assault is completely unnecessary. It was made by someone who never was an officer, and have no idea about military tactics at all. Or was suddenly retarded to fit completely broken narrative.
You now, that tactics also written in the lore of ME universe from ME1.
This garbage mission was specifically designed so Shepard would be alone and deadly wounded before the catalyst.
In current mission, it is completely irrelevant what you do - it all ends with wounded Shepard.
Adding cutscenes, dialogues to this mission will change nothing. Also, with current structure of EMS(meaningless) this will make even less sense than now.

And you are proposing a redesign of this entire mission, - and saying it is not a redesign.

[quote]

10. I fear that you are the one that does not understand what EMS should be.
It was never designed to be irrelevent. That's just how it seems to have come out. I highly doubt the devs went into this saying "let's make it a system that has no meaning what-so-ever!" If you do, you are just blaming them for the ending out of bitterness. It may have ended up that way, but they had no intention of making it feel worthless.
EMS should be how well these races fair, based on how well you prepped them. Cutscenes add to the story and give meaningfull closure to these assets, and to the races of each catagory. It does not need redesign of the entire game to make them have meaning. They were ment to be part of the story elements, not combat elements.
[/quote]
You now, there is big difference between "You do not understand what EMS is", and "You do not understand what EMS should be".

It was designed to streamline all choices of a trilogy into meaningless numbers, to simplify game development.
Intention was to simplify game development not to make choices irrelevant. Result of this simplification is, however, lead to nullification of choices.


[quote]
12. That was when Gamble had control. A new BioWare branch is now in control of ME.
[/quote]
So, more Omega-like meaningless shoot them all?
[quote]
Besides, many of the BioWare fan base- old,new, and former- is willing to support this idea.[/quote]
Really?
[quote]
Ant they were targeting the same audence, but went about it the wrong way.[/quote]
You are plainly wrong.
There is big difference in even ME1 and ME2. Many serious themes were dropped in ME2, scifi feeling also gone, exploration.
And ME3 target audience is very far away from ME1 target audience.
ME1 was scifi(soft) rpg, ME3 - mindless nonsensical fantasy shooter.
[quote]
Besides, this is a thread about re-vamping Priority: Earth, which I did without needing to re-design the entire game. And that if someone DID make it, it would be [i]totaly possible.
If you don't support it, or  believe in it's possibliaty, then why are you on this thread?
[/quote]
I stated how you can make priority:earth good mission, and stated reasons why it will never happens.
You made another variant, a lot more nonsensical and less plausible, and i stated it also never happens.
And i'm in this thread for fun. I never thought this revamp was a possibility, but that's unrelated to my support.
You really think that small thread will make EAWare change something, when even entire fan outrage hadn't changed EAWare position?
[quote]
13. ME is only dead if people like you sit back and let it die.
Threads like this show that people DO care about the series. The entire blow-up with the endings was because peopel cared about the game, and wanted it done justice. Anyone - ending haters, ending lovers - stating their opinions on the ending is showing that they care about the franchise in one way or another. So BioWare's core fanbase hasn't abandoned them yet. As long as they post on these forms, they are still fans of the company, regardeless of which game they like.
And Fallout is relevent because there were people that thought Bethesda would do nothing of the sort regarding changing the game's ending. Yet it happened.
The point is to expect the unexpected. You may be surprised. People sure were by the ORIGINAL endings. If surprises like [i]that can happen, anything can.
[/quote]
If i didn't care for ME universe, i'd never be on this forum. BUT, my position is - EAWare gone too far, ME3 is utter garbage and is beyond saving.
[quote]
14. It's still relavent, since many consider adding on to the story with the current endings is pointless and a waste of money. This would be no more a waste of money then those are, since those are just add-ons to what many consider a dissapointing story.
[/quote]
Learn to use quotes. Your constant number remapping and refusal to use quotes is tiresome. I'm not interested in guessing what part of my post you are answering to.
[quote]
15. But you are talking about things that could have been, and are no longer possible. This expansion I outlined is.
[/quote]
what?
[quote]
16. I am the opposate. MP was the main reason I actually bought the game in the first place. And a galactic war against every species made MP feel well placed as an option in thsi game, since every race is being attacked.
And that isn't true. Messages that say the N7 teams are examples of cooperation in the Allied Forces, and a message that says they are improvong the unity of the Allies, makes you feel like if you import, it has an effect. Making them a war assest was the best way to accent that, as they show the Allies how to band together. It makes you feel like it can have a purpose.
[/quote]
You are telling me, that you started the trilogy with ME3? Then this discussion is almost pointless.
[quote]
17. The point was, at least they TRIED to fix it. Besides, not everything was horrible. The ending slides helped, and the choices make more sense then they did before.  And there are more holes fixed the added.
[/quote]
No, garbage like teleporting Normandy demonstrates that they don't care, and haven't even tried.
Extended Crap solved completely nothing, just added some major plotholes.

[quote]18. I point you to the Halo series. They moved away from Bungie to 343 Industries, and the content being made is still quite good, despite the change in management/development. Proof that another company or branch can make materal of good or better calibur as the original creator. Thinking otherwise is the fairytale:lol:.
So good luck in yours, where no one but the original owner can make good material for his/her story. Cause George Lucas is wonderfull proof of that.
[/quote]
Shooters do not interest me. And RPG(not garbage like ME3) is requires far more effort to make.
Second, you are just jumping around. First you said that another studio will repair ME3, now you are saying that it will make new, better ME game.

Also, there is more fitting example - Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas.
[quote]
19. Impossible things happen.
Did you ever POSSIBLY think the endings would suck as bad as they did? I doubt it.
Never say anything is Impossible.
[/quote]

After ME2 terminator, i should have expected that

[Maxster_]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

the whole mission is a mess - from a tactical point of view, major fish'n'chips and anderson should be smacked for putting their battle plan on the table. i mean .. anderson - n7 graduate - tactical mastermind - war hero - and HE comes up with THIS plan? hard to believe.

running into an enemy with superior position, firepower, without having a good cover on our side - this sounds like france 1914. this is like running into machine gun fire while holding formation.

they should have made their homework (writers) - basic military tactics and stategies. the tactic anderson and the brit came up with, is not working anymore, since ww1.

its london ... what about the tunnels fron the underground? what about asari and stg infiltration specialists? turians, humans, krogan and mercs making fake attacks to draw attention.
what about the remaining citadel defense forces (we have an ems score for them!) on the other side of the portal? nobody knows where portal leads to. that could have been clarified with baily and his guys doing some recon up on the citadel. they also could build up a bridgehead on the citadel-side of the beam, to enshure, that the infiltrators are landing savely on the citadel.. shepard was lucky in the ending - he/she could have landed in a big blender or right on top of some reaper forces.


london is just a tactical nightmare - no wonder hammer got hammered.

This.
Also, some basic tactics are even written in ME lore.

Problem is, that this mission is  designed to lead to endings, - Shepard alone and deadly wounded. Also it is tied to overall nonsense which destroyed ME3 plot - the Crucible.

[silverexile17s]

(Comment edit failure)
Maxster_, I tried to edit it so for YOUR convenience, and it got so tangled up, I had to take the damn thing down and repost it.

Modifié par silverexile17s, 02 décembre 2012 - 09:04 .

[silverexile17s]

Maxster_ wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

the whole mission is a mess - from a tactical point of view, major fish'n'chips and anderson should be smacked for putting their battle plan on the table. i mean .. anderson - n7 graduate - tactical mastermind - war hero - and HE comes up with THIS plan? hard to believe.

running into an enemy with superior position, firepower, without having a good cover on our side - this sounds like france 1914. this is like running into machine gun fire while holding formation.

they should have made their homework (writers) - basic military tactics and stategies. the tactic anderson and the brit came up with, is not working anymore, since ww1.

its london ... what about the tunnels fron the underground? what about asari and stg infiltration specialists? turians, humans, krogan and mercs making fake attacks to draw attention.
what about the remaining citadel defense forces (we have an ems score for them!) on the other side of the portal? nobody knows where portal leads to. that could have been clarified with baily and his guys doing some recon up on the citadel. they also could build up a bridgehead on the citadel-side of the beam, to enshure, that the infiltrators are landing savely on the citadel.. shepard was lucky in the ending - he/she could have landed in a big blender or right on top of some reaper forces.


london is just a tactical nightmare - no wonder hammer got hammered.

This.
Also, some basic tactics are even written in ME lore.

Problem is, that this mission is  designed to lead to endings, - Shepard alone and deadly wounded. Also it is tied to overall nonsense which destroyed ME3 plot - the Crucible.

You do know that Drew was the one that invented the Crucible, right? It was part of his Dark Energy plot, which would have panted the Reapers as actual good guys trying to save life from Dark Energy buildup. And you still would have gotten phyric victories. The Crucible was part of the main plot from the get-go.

[Blueprotoss]

silverexile17s wrote...

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.

You seem to forget that I'm not brawling unlike you and him.  Maybe you should debate instead of hate.
 
Bioware is still mostly an Indepent especially when they still hold the majority rights to their IPs.  Until Bioware sell their IP rights then EA truelly doesn't "own" them.

Thats a strawmen because some people will always be unsatisfied and underwelmed just like how some will be satisfied and overwelmed.  Btw ME3 had more love then hate just like ME1 and ME2 previously had.

silverexile17s wrote...

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.

Thats okay to hate Synthesis and are okay with Control/Destroy while everyone doesn't share that.  Personally I prefer Destroy but I'm fine with Control and Synthesis.

ME2 was an overhaul of ME1 and its not that hard to miss to notice that.

Yet there are more that disagree with you then agree with you.  Either way you should defend opinion as a whole rather then focusing on the ones that agree with you.

silverexile17s wrote...

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.

Yet you assume its only related to ME3 or ME3's endings.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:12 .

[Dr_Extrem]

Maxster_ wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

the whole mission is a mess - from a tactical point of view, major fish'n'chips and anderson should be smacked for putting their battle plan on the table. i mean .. anderson - n7 graduate - tactical mastermind - war hero - and HE comes up with THIS plan? hard to believe.

running into an enemy with superior position, firepower, without having a good cover on our side - this sounds like france 1914. this is like running into machine gun fire while holding formation.

they should have made their homework (writers) - basic military tactics and stategies. the tactic anderson and the brit came up with, is not working anymore, since ww1.

its london ... what about the tunnels fron the underground? what about asari and stg infiltration specialists? turians, humans, krogan and mercs making fake attacks to draw attention.
what about the remaining citadel defense forces (we have an ems score for them!) on the other side of the portal? nobody knows where portal leads to. that could have been clarified with baily and his guys doing some recon up on the citadel. they also could build up a bridgehead on the citadel-side of the beam, to enshure, that the infiltrators are landing savely on the citadel.. shepard was lucky in the ending - he/she could have landed in a big blender or right on top of some reaper forces.


london is just a tactical nightmare - no wonder hammer got hammered.

This.
Also, some basic tactics are even written in ME lore.

Problem is, that this mission is  designed to lead to endings, - Shepard alone and deadly wounded. Also it is tied to overall nonsense which destroyed ME3 plot - the Crucible.

i have a recommendation:

lets fix london and the endings altogether.

[Blueprotoss]

chunghanjie92 wrote...

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.

To be fair most of ME2's choices were based on your sqaudmates with their missions and upgrades to the Normandy.

I knew that the ME3's endings would be done in a similar fashion since the end of ME1.

In all fairness most of the "complaints" seem to stem from every Bioware game before ME3.

Hudathan wrote...

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.

This is true for the most part but half of the EC was from content buried under code.

To be fair fan feedback is a double-edged sword like Mako and Inventory systems throughout the ME series.  Also companies can't survive on individuality while you'll always get some people that will get upset oer anything.

ThaDPG wrote...

Seriously, cut scenes of Krogans and Batarians taking it to the Reaper ground troops, with Geth Collossi standing over them and covering them from air attack, Asari and Alliance ships in the sky taking the fight to the Reapers up there, The Leviathans flying around turning Reapers on themselves, that would be awesome

To me this sounds like a los-lose instead of a win-win because people can always change their minds since it can sound good on paper then look horrible on the screen.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:28 .