122 réponses à ce sujet

[Sleekshinobi]

I was actually expecting them to use war assets like the Salarians, Krogan, or Asari in a similar way that they used the squadmates in Mass Effect 2. That's what I was hoping for anyway. Especially after Shepard made that comment during the chess game with Traynor about the Krogan being a strong infantry line.

I expected to be able to send the council races to certain locations during the last battle and depending on who I sent where there would be different outcomes

[AlanC9]

I can see a design like that, but I can also see the design failing an ROI evaluation. The ME2 SM didn't need very many different cutscenes or animations, since any squadmate you get killed dies the same way as any other would have. Some of the ME3 ground assets could have been handled this way, but others would have needed new models and animations, and in any event a 5 second death scene is a bit easier to script and animate than a 30 second battle scene. Space battles are even worse.

[Dean_the_Young]

Plus the assets that don't distinguish themselves visibly at all.

Personally, I favor the idea of breaking the assets into three or so categories: ground forces, space forces, and Crucible (science) assets. Then you'd have results tailored for each type: ground forces keep your squadmates from dying, space assets allow Shepard to escape the Citadel or not, Citadel assets enabling options and quality of results, etc. This way some of the big choices, by changing what sort of assets you'd get, could be more balanced in terms of different asset types. (Krogan are a cornerstone of your ground force pool, while Salarians offer space and science assets... which would make up the loss of the Geth if you chose Quarians. Etc.)

[sr2josh]

The War Asset system was a brilliant idea but poorly implemented.  So many of them are just numbers.

[Ieldra]

Interesting post, OP. IIRC, I actually said in my mission-by-misison review thread that I liked the war assets collection much better than the resource gathering it replaced, so this did not go under the radar for me.

I agree that it would be unreasonable to expect narratively significant consequences for all the small stuff, but the greater problem with it is that the even the consequences of drastic differences - which we were told would exist - were all but invisible, particularly in the original ending.

Enter the the EC, and we get different versions of endings based on EMS - which is very good - but the thresholds are so low that it's more work to get the lesser versions. This problem is also present in the original endings, to the point that many people didn't even know that you would be locked into Destroy or Control based on your decision about the Collector base if your EMS was low enough.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 02 janvier 2014 - 08:39 .

[Epic777]

The problem is that individual choices have no effect on their own. Said choices are liquidated into the big EMS score and lose any individual importance.

[Ledgend1221]

Fallout NV did it better.

[jstme]

In ME1 resource gathering was part of landing on planets and finding side quests of different quality - from enemies everywhere to Cerberus chains.
In ME2 while scanning for planets you found side missions.
And while both approaches had their problems (looking at you ,stuckonthemountainslope Mako) one thing is certain - they actually took much more effort then few lines of codex and pretty picture approach in ME3.

You also noted yourself the biggest flaw - mixing tactical resources and strategic choices in the same pool of assets.
Finding frigate or (sigh) playing "Shepard fetch me useless junk ,now who is a good boy have a treat" cannot be in the same pool as gaining support of Salarians OR Krogans, Geth or/and Quarians.
War assets system was not fantastic,simply because it was born out of the need to save development time due to budget issues. All its faults are due to that very reason and in my opinion if there was enough time and money war assets approach was not going to be used.

[wright1978]

Sleekshinobi wrote...

I was actually expecting them to use war assets like the Salarians, Krogan, or Asari in a similar way that they used the squadmates in Mass Effect 2. That's what I was hoping for anyway. Especially after Shepard made that comment during the chess game with Traynor about the Krogan being a strong infantry line.

I expected to be able to send the council races to certain locations during the last battle and depending on who I sent where there would be different outcomes

Without some form of mechanic ala ME2 suicide mechanic the war assets were potential without delivery. In other words a lame disappointment.

[McFlurry598]

Psychevore wrote...

I like this post.

Prepare for a crapstorm though.

[Fyurian2]

Ledgend1221 wrote...

Fallout NV did it better.

Similar concept, and better implimentation.

I did take a degree of pleasure in sending the Khans to certain death against Legion forces at the dam. Rather poetic I felt.
Saying that though, getting all possible "assets" to take part in the dam battle did leave it feeling a little like a cluster **** due to the small area and linear progression along the dam itself, and not really being able to give direction to the forces you'd gathered.

[Xamufam]

they never explained what a soldier& a ship was worth in ems
Mass Effect 3 gets complicated with 1,000+ variables
www.destructoid.com/mass-effect-3-gets-complicated-with-1-000-variables-180572.phtml
cut dialogue from priority earth
Jack - www.youtube.com/watch
Grunt - www.youtube.com/watch
Jacob - www.youtube.com/watch
Zaeed - www.youtube.com/watch
Geth Prime - www.youtube.com/watch (not all dialogues are cut, some are in the game - Geth Prime stands in Tali's place under certain conditions)

Modifié par Troxa, 02 janvier 2014 - 11:38 .

[SwobyJ]

I should start a Troxa drinking game.

[Slayer299]

MyChemicalBromance wrote...

Slayer299 wrote...
In the end War Assets for how they were implemented were a fail, not some epic success I couldn't understand.

*sigh*

Never change BSN.

You might consider reading OPs now and then; trust me, it won't hurt. Nothing I said is in direct contradiction to what you just said.

Here's a surpise mr arrogance. I *DID* read it...and it just didn't stick in since I'd been up for 17hrs straight. Stop with the frickin attitude that you've never made such an mistake, bloody twit. 

Modifié par Slayer299, 02 janvier 2014 - 03:36 .

[cap and gown]

Obadiah wrote...


I love ME1's ending way more than ME2's, because it was so much more dramatic and cinematic. Maybe that's why I like ME3's ending.

You didn't think the ME2 ending was dramatic and cinematic?! I just love the final cut scenes as Shepard runs for the Normandy, the music (which is terrific) plays, Harbinger taunts, and then the Normandy flies away from the base as it explodes. Of course, a lot of my love for that ending is a) the triumph, and the music. The feeling of triumph in ME1 is nowhere near as great, for me, anyway, and the music is ok, but not spectacular, again, for me. And, of course, there is no feeling of triumph in ME3, but, of course, that was always going to be a melancholy ending no matter what.

[Chashan]

Fyurian2 wrote...

Ledgend1221 wrote...

Fallout NV did it better.

Similar concept, and better implimentation.

I did take a degree of pleasure in sending the Khans to certain death against Legion forces at the dam. Rather poetic I felt.
Saying that though, getting all possible "assets" to take part in the dam battle did leave it feeling a little like a cluster **** due to the small area and linear progression along the dam itself, and not really being able to give direction to the forces you'd gathered.

FNV works like that because Couriers are not put in charge of the entire force assembled there. The dam is the key objective of the battle, thus as many and as varied forces as possible being relegated there makes a certain bit of sense (not all, though; the Brotherhood is more concerned with that distant power plant, after all).

ME3 belatedly tried to do that with the fleets approaching Earth, where Shepards, ground-side spec ops, are suddenly put in charge of giving the firing order for the entire fleet...what? Not to mention that there is no input by the player whatsoever there either.

StreetMagic wrote...

I think the funniest one is the Citadel Defense Force, and all of the little components that amount to nothing. Probably the majority of these people get slaughtered. And even if they don't, what use are they as war assets by the time Priority Earth kicks in? They're in the Citadel. They can't actually contribute to the war. I don't see why any of it is tallied into an overall Readiness rating. There's no Citadel mission or noticable combat or medical rescue efforts inside it. That would've been great to see something like that, but this is the biggest example (imo) of how half-assed the war assets are done. It's easy to see all of the potential in what it could have been, but instead, they took the most simplistic implementation possible. And we're supposed to praise them for it? Sorry. No.

Even just a superficial representation of some of those things would've been nice, but they didn't even try that. Like after Grissom, you have the opportunity at the Spectre terminal to enable access for younger biotic students to train on the Citadel while Jack and the older students are deployed. These kids could've showed up, and maybe helped you past somewhere. Or maybe one of the doctors you helped earlier in the game might be giving people aid. Or the C-Sec guys could've been gunning reapers down, if you helped that Turian general with the weapons. There's nothing going on though.

Which is pretty much saying how it is, really. It's nice to have a paragraph of text for the small decisions and imagine how they unfold in the greater picture oneself. That does not excuse the more major arcs being all but disregarded, of which there were not that many, after all: Tuchanka, Rannoch and invariably assembling the Turian and Asari fleets to the cause.

The aforementioned three-fold types of assets would have further been a more sensible approach rather than throwing all these various entries into one pot. But then, that would have required a more careful tying in of the Crucible-plot, and thus shake-down time in the finale, with the game at large, wouldn't it.

cap and gown wrote...

And, of course, there is no feeling of triumph in ME3, but, of course, that was always going to be a melancholy ending no matter what.

Can't say I agree. I like seeing a triumphant finale playing out, rather than what is got with pre-/post-EC as shipped...

Modifié par Chashan, 02 janvier 2014 - 04:21 .

[AlanC9]

StreetMagic wrote...

I'm curious on one facet there actually. I know Garrus can die if you don't use his Thanix upgrades - and if you don't recruit Thane. I've never tried it, but I kind of want to know what it looks like. Thane gets impaled in his quarters (I guess he's destined to be impaled in ME3 as well), but I imagine Garrus would have a different death.

I just looked up a couple of videos, and both Thane and Garrus die in the same place. An elevator door is visible, so I don't think it's actually Thane's quarters.

[KaiserShep]

As another person mentioned, the fact that the war assets includes lots of trivial crap kind of doomed it from the start. Then, of course, there's multiplayer which only served to make it worse.

I wish it felt half as involving as DA:O's method.

[KaiserShep]

I agree. I think the clincher for me, however, was the fact that the first section of the final raid involved the *entire* party. That alone made Priority: Earth seem all the duller.

[AlanC9]

We already do see asari, turian, krogan, and human ground troops fighting. I suppose it would have been relatively easy to add drell, quarian, geth, and salarian forces to that, since the models and animations already existed. Enough? Or would that just have left people wanting even more?