1395 réponses à ce sujet

[Han Shot First]

DAI had the problem of casting itself as a war and in a war if you start winning that "decay" sets in. The problem is that either you start winning or else you have to have the magical McGuffin of the Warden or giant space weapon thing that allows you to win even though you are losing. I'm sort of comfortable with the idea that by the end the EO is a beating desperate man. His delusion starts to remind me of some of the scenes from Downfall and the final days of the Reich...lots of grandiose posturing in the face of total defeat.

 

I think it would have played out better if instead of having Corypheus on a consistent decline after his victory at Haven (which is a pyrrhic victory at best), the middle of the game would have been with the Inquisition ascendant and countering Corypheus' plans, with the end game being Corypheus striking back and doing some damage before his downfall. The final battle probably should have been set during an attack on Skyhold.

[Chealec]

The problem with the ME3 ending was that "winning" was as bad, if not worse, than "losing".

 

You win and you completely destroy the Mass Effect Relay Network - we know the devastation caused by the destruction of a single relay; Shepard alone is probably responsible for as many deaths as the Reapers in this cycle if you choose any of the "win" endings. Not to mention you destroy galactic civilisation and maroon everyone on whatever planet they're stuck on at the time.

 

There'll be a lot of Krogan on Palaven for instance... can't see that ending well.

 

Knowing the fallout from "winning" it's probably less destructive to just let the Reapers carry on... you never know, in the next cycle the civilisations that rise might have a Butlerian Jihad before the Reapers return; thinking machines may be outlawed and there'd be no reason for the Reapers to harvest everyone. They might just say "ok, our work here is done" and go back to having a nap.

 

By choosing any of the "win" options you're basically allowing the Reapers to say "you think you can do better? go ahead" - you never defeat them they just hand over the reins. Even destroying them is an option they give you.

 

It's utterly futile.

[Metalfros]

The problem with the ME3 ending was that "winning" was as bad, if not worse, than "losing".

 

You win and you completely destroy the Mass Effect Relay Network - we know the devastation caused by the destruction of a single relay; Shepard alone is probably responsible for as many deaths as the Reapers in this cycle if you choose any of the "win" endings. Not to mention you destroy galactic civilisation and maroon everyone on whatever planet they're stuck on at the time.

 

There'll be a lot of Krogan on Palaven for instance... can't see that ending well.

 

Knowing the fallout from "winning" it's probably less destructive to just let the Reapers carry on... you never know, in the next cycle the civilisations that rise might have a Butlerian Jihad before the Reapers return; thinking machines may be outlawed and there'd be no reason for the Reapers to harvest everyone. They might just say "ok, our work here is done" and go back to having a nap.

 

By choosing any of the "win" options you're basically allowing the Reapers to say "you think you can do better? go ahead" - you never defeat them they just hand over the reins. Even destroying them is an option they give you.

 

It's utterly futile.

 

I actually hoped the new Mass Effect would allow us too see the aftermath of it and let us deal with the new problems (f.i. Krogans on Palavan), but the endi... nvm.

[Bfler]

I don't know, for me it was very clear from the very beginning that they weren't going to be defeated in a conventional way. 

 

One possibility would the destruction of the mass relay in the earth system, like the one in ME 2's arrival DLC. It would eliminate the majority of the Reaper forces, but the price is the destruction of our planet.

[Dantriges]

The problem with the ME3 ending was that "winning" was as bad, if not worse, than "losing".

 

You win and you completely destroy the Mass Effect Relay Network - we know the devastation caused by the destruction of a single relay; Shepard alone is probably responsible for as many deaths as the Reapers in this cycle if you choose any of the "win" endings. Not to mention you destroy galactic civilisation and maroon everyone on whatever planet they're stuck on at the time.

 

There'll be a lot of Krogan on Palaven for instance... can't see that ending well.

 

Didn´t the extended cut clarify that the relays were repariable and the fleet left with conventional drives anyways.

 

Yeah won´t end well for the Krogans on Palaven. There´s nothing to eat for them but whatever remained of their forces probably left for Earth anyways. 

[DarthLaxian]

I'm going to be brutally honest here.

I think BW wwants to go with a new setting because the VA for male Shep is not very good and was holding the franchise back.

When BW first made ME1 AAA games weren't the massive Hollywood level productions that they are today. In today's market the general audience demands more from the VA then it was in the old days when a game company could get away with having one of the programmers or an intern doing the VA work.

These days in 2015 having Hollywood talent do much of the voice work in AAA games is totally normal.

Long time fans might say "Shepard's male voice is perfectly fine" and I would say that those fans have bonded with that voice like a new born baby chick bonds with the first thing that it sees.

Now understand that BW/EA would NEVER..EVER admit to any of this publicly but I am sure it has been discussed internally because it effects the franchises bottom line and ME's ability to move beyond its core audience.

 

If you care for voice-protagonist you might be right - but I think that many fans of Mass Effect would even go for a silent protagonist and more options for roleplay in the series

 

Though I don't think it's the voice work (I'd love it if you actually explained WHY you thought that the male VA for the protagonist was bad/lacking as I totally think you are damned wrong!)

 

greetings LAX

[DarthLaxian]

It doesn't matter if you think he did a better job than Hale.(He didn't btw) The MALE character is the lead character in the franchise. The male is the lead in marketing and promotions and is the one most chosen by gamers. And with that being sad the MaleShep voice is not up to 2015/2016 top level AAA standards.

 

Now THAT is total BS (they even offered a cover you could SWITCH around to the default female Sheppard!), there was no defined lead character -.- (where are you getting this from anyway? - I'd really like to know because as far as I remember no one on the team (devs, marketing etc.) ever said something along those lines - and playing as a female never felt tacked on or anything!)

 

greetings LAX

[Master Warder Z_]

Meer was certainly a far sight better then the over hyped Hale, not mention just a generally awesome guy to be around.

His preformance only really suffer due to game limitations to and what it entailed like auto dialogue and forced plot script.

But at least unlike Hale he didn't sound bored and overpaid like Hale entirety of 3.

[canarius]

Even though it had horrible endings, Mass Effect 3 is still the best video game of all time. That said, Bioware did many stupid things with Inquisition so I'm kinda skeptical for this game because of their failure with Inqusition. I will still give them a chance though. I need to see more of the game to make a decision.

[Iakus]

Even though it had horrible endings, Mass Effect 3 is still the best video game of all time. That said, Bioware did many stupid things with Inquisition so I'm kinda skeptical for this game because of their failure with Inqusition. I will still give them a chance though. I need to see more of the game to make a decision.

We have very different definitions of "best game of all time" then.

[Glockwheeler]

Personally, I hope Bioware finds a way to carry this franchise forward in a meaningful way. To be honest, seeing how much disagreement there is, in general, on these forums I would prefer they not try to keep everybody happy. Shepard and crew, as well as the Milky Way are obviously gone at this point and hopefully they will be able to recapture a lot of the original mystery and overall feel of the original ME game. If they listen too much to fans, I fear they are going to end up with something that really doesn't even feel like ME. Regardless of differing opinions on the end of ME3, I have not found another original Sci-Fi series that comes close to the overall feel that Bioware created with Mass Effect. I find it odd that there are so many different topics already in this forum stating that someone doesn't want this aspect from ME, or another person doesn't want another certain aspect that was in the original series and so on and so forth. It seems that people want to strip many of the elements that made the franchise what it was, flawed in some ways, yet awesome in most. At what point will Mass Effect stop being Mass Effect? 

[Hanako Ikezawa]

One possibility would the destruction of the mass relay in the earth system, like the one in ME 2's arrival DLC. It would eliminate the majority of the Reaper forces, but the price is the destruction of our planet.

They could just jump out of the system at FTL speeds, avoiding the blast. 

[BaconClubhouse]

it's going to have unique squadmates whom are integral to the story

 

for a low price of 9.99

[Cyonan]

I feel like I'm in the minority of people who think both Meer and Hale did a pretty good job for what they were working with.

 

Shep is a pretty generic military leader, and not terribly interesting. Especially compared to anybody else you can have a conversation with on the ship.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I was perfectly content with both VAs. 

[lastpatriot]

I think that BioWare needs to go back and see what made ME:2 the game of the year and why it became phenomenon almost overnight.  If they can recapture what was so loved in that game an bring it forward to ME:A, they should do well.  For me, it was how amazing the story was, the quick pace of combat, and that amazing ending!  I absolutely love the "suicide mission" theme song.  That was probably the most exciting part of any game I have ever played.

[Cyonan]

I think that BioWare needs to go back and see what made ME:2 the game of the year and why it became phenomenon almost overnight.  If they can recapture what was so loved in that game an bring it forward to ME:A, they should do well.  For me, it was how amazing the story was, the quick pace of combat, and that amazing ending!  I absolutely love the "suicide mission" theme song.  That was probably the most exciting part of any game I have ever played.

 

Take combat mechanics of ME3

 

Take RPG elements of ME1

 

Take quality of squadmates from ME2

 

Merge them into some kind of super Mass Effect.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

ME2 was by far my least favorite of the Mass Effect games. So the less it copies that, the better. 

[Mcfly616]

Take quality of squadmates from ME2

No.

[O'Voutie O'Rooney]

Bioware should not listen to their fans and just make Andromeda according to my specifications.

[AlanC9]

You win and you completely destroy the Mass Effect Relay Network - we know the devastation caused by the destruction of a single relay; Shepard alone is probably responsible for as many deaths as the Reapers in this cycle if you choose any of the "win" endings.

Are you sure we know that? When the Citadel relay blows, it doesn't even destroy the Citadel, let alone Earth.

Knowing the fallout from "winning" it's probably less destructive to just let the Reapers carry on... you never know, in the next cycle the civilisations that rise might have a Butlerian Jihad before the Reapers return; thinking machines may be outlawed and there'd be no reason for the Reapers to harvest everyone. They might just say "ok, our work here is done" and go back to having a nap.

By choosing any of the "win" options you're basically allowing the Reapers to say "you think you can do better? go ahead" - you never defeat them they just hand over the reins. Even destroying them is an option they give you.

It's utterly futile.

Is this one of those arguments that's expressing a feeling rather than a rational position? As written, it's awfully silly.

[Sidney]

The problem with the ME3 ending was that "winning" was as bad, if not worse, than "losing".
 
You win and you completely destroy the Mass Effect Relay Network - we know the devastation caused by the destruction of a single relay; Shepard alone is probably responsible for as many deaths as the Reapers in this cycle if you choose any of the "win" endings. Not to mention you destroy galactic civilisation and maroon everyone on whatever planet they're stuck on at the time.
 
.

No losing = everyone dead. Winning has a body count no doubt although I continue to be amazed people equate the loss of the relay in Arrival with the loss of the relays at the end of ME3 since they go out of their way to say they are different. You stopped an eternal set of invincible killer robots. No one in eons had done it. Survival is more than enough reward and that people need it to go beyond that says not a lot good for the player base n

[Former_Fiend]

My best friend, who's arguably a bigger Mass Effect fan than I am, is completely against Andromeda. Feels it's a cash grab game and that Bioware's going the way of Ubisoft, just milking the franchise. 

 

I'm being considerably more generous than that, myself. I'm not sold on this game by a long shot, but I'm keeping an open mind.

[slimgrin]

Even though it had horrible endings, Mass Effect 3 is still the best video game of all time. 

 

[lastpatriot]

To be honest folks, I'm was pretty hard on BioWare back when the Retake moving was going on.  I LOVED Mass Effect and it just irked me how they ended the series.  Of course, the MEHEM fixed all that.  My point is, that after ME:3, I was very hesitant to buy any BioWare product again.  I think I waited about a month after DA:I came out before I finally bought it.  Of any game developer out there, I think the BioWare has the closest relationship with their fans and they honestly want to make something we all enjoy.  Sure, they screw up from time to time on some things but I can honestly say that outside of KOTOR, I've not played a game where I was actually emotionally affected by the story.  Mass Effect, and in many areas, Dragon Age, have done just that.

 

I for one believe that BioWare won't fail us with ME:A.