The ME3 plot and ending was so bad that everything left were the characters, because of this we all liked and bought the DLC, because of this everyone don't even bother to tell that the plot of the DLC is utterly stupid and short("I Will take everything you are", 30 mintues later he was dead and forgotten)
Because we all expected that, honestly i bought it just to say goodbye to the character and to the Commander knowing that a part from them i couldn't expect any more
Citadel DLC Lacks Context
Débuté par
TJBartlemus
, mars 17 2013 06:18
Retour en haut
#77
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 06:01
Sajuro
-
- Members
- 6 871 messages
There is a difference between admitting things aren't perfect and saying "This is amazing, but it totally sucks!"TJBartlemus wrote...
Sajuro wrote...
I'm amazed that even when we love things we are still trying to find ways to say it sucks
Nothing is ever perfect. And if you believe the contrary for a second, in my opinion, that is quite foolish.
#78
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 06:57
Cutlass Jack
-
- Members
- 8 091 messages
Kabooooom wrote...
Rikketik wrote...
In my opinion, Citadel is so good precisely because it's lighthearted and has nothing do to with the general plot (or tone) of ME3. I like the story of the game, at least up until the last thirty minutes or so, but I always find myself mentally... tired... of all the death and destruction that piles up over the course of the game. Citadel remedied that somewhat by giving me some much needed comedy relief. Playing it all in one go is a bit overkill, but playing the central story arc just after the Cerberus coup prevents it from feeling too out of place and the squad member events are great to play in between missions. The party, lastly, is best reserved for either just before the final missions or immediately after the ending.
So in short: I agree that the story lacks context and all, but it just doesn't bother me. In fact, it might be one of the better qualities of the DLC, in my opinion at least.
This. Finally someone gets it. I do disagree about where to play it though. After trying it post coup, post Rannoch and end game: it is best post Rannoch. It just feels right there. It's the only place the Normandy has really 'seen action', it is following on the heels of a major victory rather than a relative defeat (Coup- Citadel attacked, Udina dead, general mood is somber), and it improves pacing dramatically. Omega should be played right after the Coup, Citadel right after Rannoch in my opinion. Try it, and you'll see.
Exactly how I play it. Right after Rannoch, the team is flush with a real victory, the ship is in need of repairs, and Shepard has to go to the citadel anyways to meet with the Asari. The team earned a few days off
And Rikk has it right too. Citadel is about recharging batteries. Both the player's and Shepard and Crew. Which is exactly the point of why the crew was forced into shore leave. As such it has complete context within ME3 and the series as a whole. Sometimes its important to remind yourself who you're fighting for.
And honestly Shepard spends the entire trilogy doing stupid quests for random people that have little to do with the main plot. If anything Citadel contextually fits better than many of those things. And humor has always been in the game from the very beginning. Anyone who says otherwise hasn't been playing the same series as me.
#79
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 07:00
Nightwriter
-
- Members
- 9 800 messages
Bah.
The article makes a great mistake: it acts as though "bleakness" and "theme shift" have nothing to do with each other. This is wrong. The bleakness itself was caused by theme shift.
Mass Effect was never My Little Pony, but the power of choice and the concept of self-empowerment were ongoing themes. In contrast, ME3's ending is, to me, about the feeling of choicelessness. No longer do you have the power to make a difference on your own steam or defy the will of Cthulhu. When do helplessness and bleakness not go hand in hand? How can you separate the fact that the ending was a downer from the fact that the ending betrayed core series elements? I must disagree with the article: complaining of the ending's bleakness is no faux pas.
The Citadel represents everything I wanted to win with the choices that were taken from me. I wanted this level of reward from the core game, but I wanted to experience a well written ending that made me feel like I earned it. BioWare cannot go back and make that happen, so they said, "The claw machine ate your quarter and isn't working? Well, here's your stuffed animal. Just take it." I really don't think that is as much of a threat to future storytelling as people are making out. ... Really. No need to go "But now their games will be full of nothing but animated stuffed animals with voice actors!"
The article makes a great mistake: it acts as though "bleakness" and "theme shift" have nothing to do with each other. This is wrong. The bleakness itself was caused by theme shift.
Mass Effect was never My Little Pony, but the power of choice and the concept of self-empowerment were ongoing themes. In contrast, ME3's ending is, to me, about the feeling of choicelessness. No longer do you have the power to make a difference on your own steam or defy the will of Cthulhu. When do helplessness and bleakness not go hand in hand? How can you separate the fact that the ending was a downer from the fact that the ending betrayed core series elements? I must disagree with the article: complaining of the ending's bleakness is no faux pas.
The Citadel represents everything I wanted to win with the choices that were taken from me. I wanted this level of reward from the core game, but I wanted to experience a well written ending that made me feel like I earned it. BioWare cannot go back and make that happen, so they said, "The claw machine ate your quarter and isn't working? Well, here's your stuffed animal. Just take it." I really don't think that is as much of a threat to future storytelling as people are making out. ... Really. No need to go "But now their games will be full of nothing but animated stuffed animals with voice actors!"
#80
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 07:06
Clayless
-
- Members
- 7 051 messages
The first mistake that article made was saying ""valid criticism" when talking about the end. You could probably find about 2 or 3 pre-EC, after that I still don't think I've seen a "valid" criticism.
#81
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 07:10
archangel1996
-
- Members
- 1 263 messages
Robosexual wrote...
The first mistake that article made was saying ""valid criticism" when talking about the end. You could probably find about 2 or 3 pre-EC, after that I still don't think I've seen a "valid" criticism.
Haters gonna hate lulz lulz ending is awesome, best pis....peace of the sucka..saga, i meant saga
This is awesome criticism lulz lulz
#82
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 07:13
DarkSpiral
-
- Members
- 1 944 messages
archangel1996 wrote...
Robosexual wrote...
The first mistake that article made was saying ""valid criticism" when talking about the end. You could probably find about 2 or 3 pre-EC, after that I still don't think I've seen a "valid" criticism.
Haters gonna hate lulz lulz ending is awesome, best pis....peace of the sucka..saga, i meant saga
This is awesome criticism lulz lulz
what...what exactly was just said? The english is so terrible I can't really figure it out. Unless the intent was to read it as if the author was drunk.
#83
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 07:38
Allan Schumacher
-
- BioWare Employees
-
- 7 640 messages
I wouldn't read too much into it as being "you just wanted a happy ending" (note, I have only read the OP)
In my opinion there wasn't really a "consensus" on what specifically made people upset with the ending (IIRC there were about 3 different themes that came up a lot, and I felt many people fit on it on a continuum in some way, like a place on a triangle with each point being the particular destination). One thing that I did feel was pretty consistent, however, is that in large part players had a strong emotional investment into the game, most specifically the characters (there were other aspects as well, but I don't remember them being as common).
Contextually within the story, Citadel's story doesn't really make much sense. But I found, while playing it myself, that there's a sort of meta aspect to it. Most (I dare say the vast majority) of the players that play it will have already experienced the ending. So as players when they play this, even though narratively it's "before" the ending, for the player it's still "after they've experienced all the other content in the game." It's literally the last piece of content they will experience within the ME trilogy.
I found Citadel wasn't so much design to go on an adventure with Shepard. It was more to go on an adventure with the person playing the game. I think that's why it goes with breaking the 4th wall as much as it does. It invites the player along on a trip where they poke fun at the various memes that exist in the franchise, and delves more into spending time with the characters within the game as much as a player, rather than exclusively Shepard.
So rather than "lets go on an adventure with Shepard" it more said to me "Lets go on an adventure together with Allan."
I think that that's why it works so well. Had it been released with the game, it wouldn't have made a lick of sense. As the Forbes writer said, it only works as post-release content. As such, it came across as the game sort of saying "Thanks for all the memories." Which may sound sappy, but I really enjoyed the Citadel DLC and this I feel is why.
Cheers.
Allan
In my opinion there wasn't really a "consensus" on what specifically made people upset with the ending (IIRC there were about 3 different themes that came up a lot, and I felt many people fit on it on a continuum in some way, like a place on a triangle with each point being the particular destination). One thing that I did feel was pretty consistent, however, is that in large part players had a strong emotional investment into the game, most specifically the characters (there were other aspects as well, but I don't remember them being as common).
Contextually within the story, Citadel's story doesn't really make much sense. But I found, while playing it myself, that there's a sort of meta aspect to it. Most (I dare say the vast majority) of the players that play it will have already experienced the ending. So as players when they play this, even though narratively it's "before" the ending, for the player it's still "after they've experienced all the other content in the game." It's literally the last piece of content they will experience within the ME trilogy.
I found Citadel wasn't so much design to go on an adventure with Shepard. It was more to go on an adventure with the person playing the game. I think that's why it goes with breaking the 4th wall as much as it does. It invites the player along on a trip where they poke fun at the various memes that exist in the franchise, and delves more into spending time with the characters within the game as much as a player, rather than exclusively Shepard.
So rather than "lets go on an adventure with Shepard" it more said to me "Lets go on an adventure together with Allan."
I think that that's why it works so well. Had it been released with the game, it wouldn't have made a lick of sense. As the Forbes writer said, it only works as post-release content. As such, it came across as the game sort of saying "Thanks for all the memories." Which may sound sappy, but I really enjoyed the Citadel DLC and this I feel is why.
Cheers.
Allan
Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 19 mars 2013 - 07:40 .
#84
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 07:43
Degs29
-
- Members
- 1 089 messages
TJBartlemus wrote...
In an overall sense, the Citadel DLC feels way out of place from the rest of the story. You could say it lacks context. For all intents and purposes, the DLC shouldn't even exist pre-ending.
You're absolutely right. Citadel DLC shouldn't even exist pre-ending. Which is why many people are actually using it as their ending. I wonder if Bioware always had this type of DLC in mind or if it was somewhat a response to the outcry over the ending. They couldn't backtrack on their artistic integrity, but maybe they thought they could give us what we want another way. Either way, I appreciate it.
#85
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 07:58
MstrJedi Kyle
-
- Members
- 2 266 messages
The Citadel DLC wasn't about the Reaper war. That ended when you beat ME3. The DLC wasn't about Shepard, it was about the fans. It was about saying good bye.
#86
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 08:08
Kataphrut94
-
- Members
- 2 136 messages
Technically, the Citadel DLC cannot work as a post-ending DLC because post-ending has a potentially blown up Citadel, a potentially dead EDI and a probably dead Shepard. And the Reaper war is still referred to in several places as an ongoing thing that is still happening. Not to mention that the clone's goal to replace Shepard hardly makes sense if Shepard has already saved the galaxy.
I find the Citadel does fit in well enough with the context of the story, given that the initial macguffin of shore-leave and maintenance to the Normandy are not out of the question. As the posters above me mentioned, post-Rannoch works quite well, as does post-Sanctuary if you want to get the most out of the extra content. If doing the latter, it helps to leave an N7 or DLC mission in between it and Cronos since jumping from the Citadel party straight to the final battle is a bit jarring tone-wise.
I find the Citadel does fit in well enough with the context of the story, given that the initial macguffin of shore-leave and maintenance to the Normandy are not out of the question. As the posters above me mentioned, post-Rannoch works quite well, as does post-Sanctuary if you want to get the most out of the extra content. If doing the latter, it helps to leave an N7 or DLC mission in between it and Cronos since jumping from the Citadel party straight to the final battle is a bit jarring tone-wise.
#87
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 08:45
CaIIisto
-
- Members
- 2 050 messages
The Citadel DLC is something that would only ever work once, and would only ever work under the circumstances that it was released, ie. as the last piece of content, ever, for the trilogy. Outside of post-ending, the 'party' side of the DLC would not have worked as part of the main game, tonally it was too far apart from the main narrative.
Given this though, I thought that it worked superbly well. I have a few, minor gripes, like the apartment being empty after you've thrown the party and go back there. Having the LI hang around there with ambient dialogue would have been nice.
All in all though, I adore the DLC.
Given this though, I thought that it worked superbly well. I have a few, minor gripes, like the apartment being empty after you've thrown the party and go back there. Having the LI hang around there with ambient dialogue would have been nice.
All in all though, I adore the DLC.
#88
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 09:05
Fixers0
-
- Members
- 4 434 messages
I would have much preffered a "Crucible" DLC, that would keep some of the themes and the general tone of the Citadel DLC, but in a more relevant context. In fact, there are many more reasons as to why i think a crucible centerd DLC could have been perhaps the most ingenious idea for the final DLC:
Location wise it takes place at one of the few locations besides the Citadel that hasn't come under Reaper attack: the Crucible construction side, and most likely also one of the muster points for the allied fleets, thus having a legit narrative reason to have squad mates and other characters appear at this location. Narrative wise, It could provide mor exposition on the Crucible, which desigm and fuction has always remained rather iffy throughout the game. Gameplay wise, there could be rogue Alliance Captain (not Cerberus) who's crew and ship are attempting to throw over Hackett rule, the would act much like the Cat6 forces expect being more the just hirred guns.
Lastly, it could also act as way of having War assets pay off without having to re-do the final mission. Example: If you acquired the volus bombing fleet a volus commander (in military pressure suit) will be present at Hackett's command center, while seeing volus ships flying around in the background.
That's the general idea.
Location wise it takes place at one of the few locations besides the Citadel that hasn't come under Reaper attack: the Crucible construction side, and most likely also one of the muster points for the allied fleets, thus having a legit narrative reason to have squad mates and other characters appear at this location. Narrative wise, It could provide mor exposition on the Crucible, which desigm and fuction has always remained rather iffy throughout the game. Gameplay wise, there could be rogue Alliance Captain (not Cerberus) who's crew and ship are attempting to throw over Hackett rule, the would act much like the Cat6 forces expect being more the just hirred guns.
Lastly, it could also act as way of having War assets pay off without having to re-do the final mission. Example: If you acquired the volus bombing fleet a volus commander (in military pressure suit) will be present at Hackett's command center, while seeing volus ships flying around in the background.
That's the general idea.
Modifié par Fixers0, 19 mars 2013 - 09:06 .
#89
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 09:37
GoldenPersona
-
- Members
- 123 messages
It's a shame no one enjoys Omega. Yeah it isn't worth 15$ but it had the best incorporation of paragon / renegade choices that add up over the course of it. It actually has two unique enemies with their own challenges, in a game where you rarely fought any new enemies. It had the best level design in probably the entire series, and I don't think it was lacking in story either. It just needed to have been in the main game, with Nyreen being savable and becoming a party member. It's also pretty long. It takes me roughly 4 hours to beat it. I'm a person who only plays games with good stories and characters, so it's not just because I like to shoot things.
As for the Citadel DLC any whining because it's seperate from the main plot is useless and petty. If a product is advertized as something, and it does what it says it does in ways you didn't think possible, then giving it a low score says that you are the one with problem, not the DLC.
As for the Citadel DLC any whining because it's seperate from the main plot is useless and petty. If a product is advertized as something, and it does what it says it does in ways you didn't think possible, then giving it a low score says that you are the one with problem, not the DLC.
#90
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 10:15
TheRealJayDee
-
- Members
- 2 954 messages
Allan Schumacher wrote...
Contextually within the story, Citadel's story doesn't really make much sense. But I found, while playing it myself, that there's a sort of meta aspect to it. Most (I dare say the vast majority) of the players that play it will have already experienced the ending. So as players when they play this, even though narratively it's "before" the ending, for the player it's still "after they've experienced all the other content in the game." It's literally the last piece of content they will experience within the ME trilogy.
I found Citadel wasn't so much design to go on an adventure with Shepard. It was more to go on an adventure with the person playing the game. I think that's why it goes with breaking the 4th wall as much as it does. It invites the player along on a trip where they poke fun at the various memes that exist in the franchise, and delves more into spending time with the characters within the game as much as a player, rather than exclusively Shepard.
So rather than "lets go on an adventure with Shepard" it more said to me "Lets go on an adventure together with Allan."
I think that that's why it works so well. Had it been released with the game, it wouldn't have made a lick of sense. As the Forbes writer said, it only works as post-release content. As such, it came across as the game sort of saying "Thanks for all the memories." Which may sound sappy, but I really enjoyed the Citadel DLC and this I feel is why.
Cheers.
Allan
That's more or less how I understand the DLC as well. Still we now have the Citadel DLC's content sitting between the Citadel Coup and Chronos Station for all time. And as much as I did enjoy it, as you said yourself, it really doesn't make too much sense. If they wanted to make a DLC that was as meta as Citadel they proably should have done it as some sort of stand-alone thing. Making something part of the game's narrative that is basically one big in-joke (highly enjoyable as it may be) really doesn't do the game any good imo.
But hey, it made it possible for me to finally move on from Mass Effect, so yay...!
#91
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 10:18
HolyAvenger
-
- Members
- 13 848 messages
Exactly. I don't understand how people misread this.DarthKilby wrote...
The Citadel DLC wasn't about the Reaper war. That ended when you beat ME3. The DLC wasn't about Shepard, it was about the fans. It was about saying good bye.
#92
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 10:26
Yestare7
-
- Members
- 1 340 messages
HolyAvenger wrote...
Exactly. I don't understand how people misread this.DarthKilby wrote...
The Citadel DLC wasn't about the Reaper war. That ended when you beat ME3. The DLC wasn't about Shepard, it was about the fans. It was about saying good bye.
Fun and good times. What's not too like?
#93
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 12:44
Getorex
-
- Members
- 4 882 messages
Robosexual wrote...
The first mistake that article made was saying ""valid criticism" when talking about the end. You could probably find about 2 or 3 pre-EC, after that I still don't think I've seen a "valid" criticism.
Virtually all the criticism of the ending was valid. It was out of place given the ending of both previous games. It defied objective logic. It defied logic even in the game itself. It defied good story-telling by using a McGuffin. It defied content in the previous games (but in particular ME1). All valid criticisms by definition.
Now, this thread is about the Citadel DLC. THAT was a good bit of fun.
#94
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 12:56
spirosz
-
- Members
- 16 356 messages
It got me wanting to play the series again because one of my main reasons for not wanting to play through it again, was the lack of closure for my Shepard's relationship with Jack. Sure, you can argue that's petty compared to wanting an excellent written story, but for me personally, the characters were the reason I loved the series so much, since the story was never that well written as people like to state, so I could look past it flaws, even if others couldn't and I understand that.
The Citadel DLC gave me exactly what I was asking for, in terms of content with Jack and I'm okay with it, not jumping on my feet with joy feels, but I can find peace within the content that they were able to provide, with their budget and limits. I would of been more happier if this content was in the vanilla game itself, but hey, **** happens.
Also, I was never really too upset with the endings, but in it's current state, they are still not executed well, but I can deal with it.
The Citadel DLC gave me exactly what I was asking for, in terms of content with Jack and I'm okay with it, not jumping on my feet with joy feels, but I can find peace within the content that they were able to provide, with their budget and limits. I would of been more happier if this content was in the vanilla game itself, but hey, **** happens.
Also, I was never really too upset with the endings, but in it's current state, they are still not executed well, but I can deal with it.
Modifié par spirosz, 19 mars 2013 - 12:57 .
#95
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 01:07
shodiswe
-
- Members
- 5 002 messages
The story is somewhat disconected from the game even if the war is in the background.
But i'm fine with shepard and CO taking a break while the ship is getting maintained and refitted and they get a chance to breathout and... well.. kill an anoying clone that just happens to show up and requiers to be taken care of before you can take that well earned breake.
While I find the clone chase and stiff ok I think the other parts of the DLC were the parts I really like, I liked the casino sneaking around aswell, so, yeah. So lets jsut say it was an intersting and slightly different adventure with lots of down time with your old and new Mass effect "friends".
Maybe therer is some kind of truth to it being better when released after the game, when people arn't in a hurry to get to the ending
But i'm fine with shepard and CO taking a break while the ship is getting maintained and refitted and they get a chance to breathout and... well.. kill an anoying clone that just happens to show up and requiers to be taken care of before you can take that well earned breake.
While I find the clone chase and stiff ok I think the other parts of the DLC were the parts I really like, I liked the casino sneaking around aswell, so, yeah. So lets jsut say it was an intersting and slightly different adventure with lots of down time with your old and new Mass effect "friends".
Maybe therer is some kind of truth to it being better when released after the game, when people arn't in a hurry to get to the ending
#96
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 01:08
GreyLycanTrope
-
- Members
- 12 711 messages
Pretty much this.Nightwriter wrote...
Bah.
The article makes a great mistake: it acts as though "bleakness" and "theme shift" have nothing to do with each other. This is wrong. The bleakness itself was caused by theme shift.
Mass Effect was never My Little Pony, but the power of choice and the concept of self-empowerment were ongoing themes. In contrast, ME3's ending is, to me, about the feeling of choicelessness. No longer do you have the power to make a difference on your own steam or defy the will of Cthulhu. When do helplessness and bleakness not go hand in hand? How can you separate the fact that the ending was a downer from the fact that the ending betrayed core series elements? I must disagree with the article: complaining of the ending's bleakness is no faux pas.
The Citadel represents everything I wanted to win with the choices that were taken from me. I wanted this level of reward from the core game, but I wanted to experience a well written ending that made me feel like I earned it. BioWare cannot go back and make that happen, so they said, "The claw machine ate your quarter and isn't working? Well, here's your stuffed animal. Just take it." I really don't think that is as much of a threat to future storytelling as people are making out. ... Really. No need to go "But now their games will be full of nothing but animated stuffed animals with voice actors!"
#97
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 01:24
Sundance31us
-
- Members
- 2 647 messages
So long and..."thanks for all the memories".Allan Schumacher wrote...
I think that that's why it works so well. Had it been released with the game, it wouldn't have made a lick of sense. As the Forbes writer said, it only works as post-release content. As such, it came across as the game sort of saying "Thanks for all the memories." Which may sound sappy, but I really enjoyed the Citadel DLC and this I feel is why.
Cheers.
Allan
This explains all the fish.
![=]](https://lvlt.forum.bioware.com/public/style_emoticons/default/sideways.png)
#98
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 01:37
JosieFrances
-
- Members
- 418 messages
Allan Schumacher wrote...
I wouldn't read too much into it as being "you just wanted a happy ending" (note, I have only read the OP)
In my opinion there wasn't really a "consensus" on what specifically made people upset with the ending (IIRC there were about 3 different themes that came up a lot, and I felt many people fit on it on a continuum in some way, like a place on a triangle with each point being the particular destination). One thing that I did feel was pretty consistent, however, is that in large part players had a strong emotional investment into the game, most specifically the characters (there were other aspects as well, but I don't remember them being as common).
Contextually within the story, Citadel's story doesn't really make much sense. But I found, while playing it myself, that there's a sort of meta aspect to it. Most (I dare say the vast majority) of the players that play it will have already experienced the ending. So as players when they play this, even though narratively it's "before" the ending, for the player it's still "after they've experienced all the other content in the game." It's literally the last piece of content they will experience within the ME trilogy.
I found Citadel wasn't so much design to go on an adventure with Shepard. It was more to go on an adventure with the person playing the game. I think that's why it goes with breaking the 4th wall as much as it does. It invites the player along on a trip where they poke fun at the various memes that exist in the franchise, and delves more into spending time with the characters within the game as much as a player, rather than exclusively Shepard.
So rather than "lets go on an adventure with Shepard" it more said to me "Lets go on an adventure together with Allan."
I think that that's why it works so well. Had it been released with the game, it wouldn't have made a lick of sense. As the Forbes writer said, it only works as post-release content. As such, it came across as the game sort of saying "Thanks for all the memories." Which may sound sappy, but I really enjoyed the Citadel DLC and this I feel is why.
Cheers.
Allan
Totally agree with this!
And for me the Citadel DLC did take place after the game
#99
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 01:44
Knightly_BW
-
- Members
- 828 messages
For me Citadel filled a nice hole in the ME series, a fun story with characters, writers, community and the team created this awesome game.
I can see many nods to BSN topics in DLC. I never laughed that hard during a game. It is complete contrast to main ME 3 which is the only computer game made me cry... constantly.
It was a parade and salute to bits made that game great. Even Shepard was in the good mood and less serious than his usual self.
So I care less if there was a story or how it relates with overall ME3 story, it was about me, us the players who loved this francise so much. Citadel DLC is like a desert over a good main course... a finger licking good one.
I can see many nods to BSN topics in DLC. I never laughed that hard during a game. It is complete contrast to main ME 3 which is the only computer game made me cry... constantly.
It was a parade and salute to bits made that game great. Even Shepard was in the good mood and less serious than his usual self.
So I care less if there was a story or how it relates with overall ME3 story, it was about me, us the players who loved this francise so much. Citadel DLC is like a desert over a good main course... a finger licking good one.
#100
Posté 19 mars 2013 - 02:27
FlyinElk212
-
- Members
- 2 598 messages
Thanks Allan, for summarizing in a much better way than I'd ever be able to why I disagree with this article.Allan Schumacher wrote...
Contextually within the story, Citadel's story doesn't really make much sense. But I found, while playing it myself, that there's a sort of meta aspect to it. Most (I dare say the vast majority) of the players that play it will have already experienced the ending. So as players when they play this, even though narratively it's "before" the ending, for the player it's still "after they've experienced all the other content in the game." It's literally the last piece of content they will experience within the ME trilogy.
This article is a travesty not to game development in general, or to the validity of video gamer's arguments--it's a travesty to the video gamer and the video game developer themselves.This article does not nearly give the fanbase or developers enough credit, oft postulating the intelligence of the fan by questioning whether or not the happy ending satisfied them, or whether or not developers will recognize the discconect in tonality of the main game and this DLC.
In the end, this article insults the fanbase and developers of Bioware by stating that neither party could in no way have recognized the true purpose of this DLC--to be a swansong; an intricalely thought out love note from Bioware to the fans saying their goodbyes.
The fact of the matter is this. Check out the title of the final song of this DLC: Farewell and into the Inevitable. Let's not even touch upon how this song, in terms of music thematics, is a reference to the Mass Effect Team saying goodbye to fans (the chord progression is a Major Intonation of the main theme of ME3, Leaving Earth)-- instead, lets look at the title: FAREWELL. A clear indicator of the MASS EFFECT TEAM saying FAREWELL to their fans.
Add to the fact that multiple fans are creating threads stating, "Thank you Bioware for this FINAL JOURNEY", and I think it's pretty clear that both developer and fan knew what this DLC was really all about.
Modifié par FlyinElk212, 19 mars 2013 - 02:36 .
