3595 réponses à ce sujet

[Beerfish]

The ending was horrible due to the overall execution of it more than anything.  The three choices thing sucked imo but I can see others not being upset at those.  What I can never be talked into is thinking the absolute shabby way they treated some key characters/enemies in the end was a good idea and bascially making my Herioc Shepard feel like a loser.

 

Making T.I.M. into a carbon copy at the end of Saren was idiotic.  Choosing to use a hologram of a small boy to lecture the shi* out of you and then pat you on the head and shrug his shoulders  and say, hey I guess you beat us you decide how to handle this problem we have been dealing with for a few million years. was stupid as can be.

 

Hell even if they had Harbinger or one of the big bad Reapers how up and give us our due saying, Shepard, we underestimated you and your species, we now bow down to your wishes, would have been okay.  I felt like I accomplished jack squat at the end of that game and it was mostly due to delivery of the ending. 

 

In a three part trilogy they mixed up their endings.  They had ME1, triumphant ending.  ME2 triumphant ending but more work to do.  ME3 downer ending with zero sense of accomplishment and you are going to probably die.  

 

I'm a big long time fan of BioWare and have played most of their games many times.  I detested the ending a to great series of games to he point it tainted the overall experience.

[rossler]

Hell even if they had Harbinger or one of the big bad Reapers how up and give us our due saying, Shepard, we underestimated you and your species, we now bow down to your wishes, would have been okay.  I felt like I accomplished jack squat at the end of that game and it was mostly due to delivery of the ending.

 

In a three part trilogy they mixed up their endings.  They had ME1, triumphant ending.  ME2 triumphant ending but more work to do.  ME3 downer ending with zero sense of accomplishment and you are going to probably die.

 

I wouldn't say you accomplished nothing. You did cure the genophage. That's a pretty big accomplishment. You had all these species come together, build the Crucible to help finish off the Reapers.

 

Mass Effect 3's ending was going to be different than the previous two games, because we were dealing with the Reapers, and not their little minions like Saren and the Collectors. It wasn't going to end with a medal ceremony or a fist pumping whoo-yah triumphant ending.

[themikefest]

I wouldn't say you accomplished nothing. You did cure the genophage. That's a pretty big accomplishment. You had all these species come together, build the Crucible to help finish off the Reapers.

I don't cure the genophage. No reason to. Salarians offer aid. So I take the deal.

One thing I will say about ME3. The player can do many different things in a playthrough that lead to destroying the reapers and getting the breath scene. excellent

 

Mass Effect 3's ending was going to be different than the previous two games, because we were dealing with the Reapers, and not their little minions like Saren and the Collectors. It wasn't going to end with a medal ceremony or a fist pumping whoo-yah triumphant ending.

Yes ME3's ending was different from the previous two game.

I wouldn't want a medal ceremony at the end. The only fist pumping was from Jacob in the hospital and from TIM before Shepard shoots Anderson.

[correctamundo]

The ending was horrible due to the overall execution of it more than anything.  The three choices thing sucked imo but I can see others not being upset at those.  What I can never be talked into is thinking the absolute shabby way they treated some key characters/enemies in the end was a good idea and bascially making my Herioc Shepard feel like a loser.

 

Making T.I.M. into a carbon copy at the end of Saren was idiotic.  Choosing to use a hologram of a small boy to lecture the shi* out of you and then pat you on the head and shrug his shoulders  and say, hey I guess you beat us you decide how to handle this problem we have been dealing with for a few million years. was stupid as can be.

 

Hell even if they had Harbinger or one of the big bad Reapers how up and give us our due saying, Shepard, we underestimated you and your species, we now bow down to your wishes, would have been okay.  I felt like I accomplished jack squat at the end of that game and it was mostly due to delivery of the ending. 

 

In a three part trilogy they mixed up their endings.  They had ME1, triumphant ending.  ME2 triumphant ending but more work to do.  ME3 downer ending with zero sense of accomplishment and you are going to probably die.  

 

I'm a big long time fan of BioWare and have played most of their games many times.  I detested the ending a to great series of games to he point it tainted the overall experience.

 

There are many possible major accomplishments for Shepard of which ending the cycles must be considered the biggest of them all. I don't really understand how having a tool of the intelligence bowing before Shepard instead of the intelligence itself acknowledging Shepards success is better, but horses for courses i guess.

[KrrKs]

What is it with the horrible analogies in this thread?

They just have to fix the Citadel. As it is the hub of the relay network. The Citadel makes all the relays work. If you had one relay operational, in addition to the Citadel, you would have a complete network.

 

A router is the hub of a computer network, and all the other computers and devices connect to it. Without the router, all the computers can't communicate with each other.

 

The Citadel is similar in function.

 

How do you figure that the Citadel 'makes the relays work'? How do you get the idea that one relay in addition to the Citadel suddenly means 'a complete network'?

You'd need at least two relays in order to have a 'network'. That would be a network of two nodes or one connection, btw.

 

When the council or someone else talks about the Citadel as the 'hub of the network', they refer to this:

 

Strategically located at the junction of a number of mass relays leading to various parts of the galaxy, the Citadel quickly became a hub of activity.

(Quote from ME wiki)

 

And, yes it had the function to (selectively?) enable or disable relays. But it can't just magically make destroyed relays work again.

A damaged/destroyed relay has to be repaired/replaced on site, the Citadel can't do anything.

 

Oh, and because here are obviously people 'using technology that's too advanced for their own good.'

Spoiler

A Router connects networks and handles routing between networks.

What you compared the Citadel to is a L2 switch, that is directly connected to all network participants (the Citadel isn't!) and forwards packets based on L2/Mac addresses.

 

While usually home routers also play the role of a switch at the customer-side, these two are not the same.

In fact you'd don't even need a switch to build a network. Directly connecting all the devices together also forms a network. One could also build a sort of CHORD-like connection scheme, but that would actually require similar forwarding protocols.

[rossler]

You should try and use information you have yourself instead of using Wikipedia or other pages as a source for your arguments. You know, first hand knowledge.

[rossler]

There's no need for that video.

[Gorwath-F]

The ending is incredible in its own way. Not only did it ruin Mass Effect 3 for me, I cannot bear to replay the first two games. Such a colossal failure can only happen by design (in which case congratulations are in order) or talent (in which case I will have sense enough to never touch another game by Mac Waters and Casy Hudson).

 

4 years later and it still hurts. If at some point they decide to reboot the game in 20 years or so, here's to hoping someone is paid to reiterate every day that Starchild was the worst thing to happen to a scifi franchise since midiclorians.

[rossler]

in which case I will have sense enough to never touch another game by Mac Waters and Casy Hudson

 

Mac Walters and Casey Hudson didn't make Mass Effect 3, or the ending. Look the credits.

[Monica21]

Mac Walters and Casey Hudson didn't make Mass Effect 3, or the ending. Look the credits.

Casey Hudson was the Director. Mac Walters was one of the Lead Writers. IMDB can tell you that.

[rossler]

You can't really put your dislike on a game down to two specific people or a group that made a decision on how the game was designed. Sounds like finger pointing.

 

It's okay to not like the Starchild bit though.

[Monica21]

You can't really put your dislike on a game down to two specific people or a group that made a decision on how the game was designed. Sounds like finger pointing.
 
It's okay to not like the Starchild bit though.

And I think if you dislike the story and can detail the ways in which the storytelling didn't make sense, that you can actually blame the people who were largely responsible for writing the story.

[ImaginaryMatter]

And I think if you dislike the story and can detail the ways in which the storytelling didn't make sense, that you can actually blame the people who were largely responsible for writing the story.

 

It's just so videogame-y.

 

 

Edit: Woops. Posted the wrong video.

[Monica21]

It's just so videogame-y.

You know, it would have been really interesting if they had explored the idea of whether synthetic intelligence will ever rival organic intelligence and whether organics should incorporate synthetic technology into themselves. Sadly, they did not.

[Natureguy85]

You should try and use information you have yourself instead of using Wikipedia or other pages as a source for your arguments. You know, first hand knowledge.

 

Since you reported my post laughing at you, I'll do it in text. HA!

You'd just say he made it up. Sources not only verify what he's saying but allow you to go do some reading or viewing on your own. You're really grasping at straws to find any kind of argument to use against those who disagree with you. You're just wrong.

 

 

There's no need for that video.

 

There was no need to report the post. Grow a spine and some thicker skin.

 

 

 

You can't really put your dislike on a game down to two specific people or a group that made a decision on how the game was designed. Sounds like finger pointing.

 

It's okay to not like the Starchild bit though.

 

Yes, if you dislike something you can put it on the people who had a large role in making it.

[Natureguy85]

Wow that Pluto example just went right over your head didn't it? I'm honestly not going to respond to this because you are clearly in not paying attention mode. So I'm not going to waste the effort to go into any sort of explanation. Just sufficient to say you are wrong and your statement makes no sense as you are clearly grasping for straws

 

Well I'm not fluent in "stupid" so I might have missed something. What was your point then? Was it about the distance between you and anyone else? Because the example was a civilization that was just fine on its homeworld and didn't want outside, alien interference. So if pluto was your homeworld where you live, then that's fine and is the objective. That civilization wants to be "stranded."

 

You won't "waste the effort" because you're incapable of communicating an intelligent explanation.

 

 

 

Yep really in the not paying attention must be right and I must be wrong mode. There is a reason bullets penetrate our squishy skin mean while a BB gun or air soft gun doesn't. The kinetic energy of the bullet pierces our skin and any other body part save maybe bone depending on the kind of round. The kinetic energy of the bullet creates that pressure wave you mention. That momentum impacts the body the bullet penetrates flesh and bone and the pressure wave created by the high speed bullet is also transferred to the squishy human body.  Which again is just like what happened with Alpha Relay. The giant Relay sized asteroid was fired at high speed at the Relay. It impacted and the momentum of it overloaded the shielding and caused the energy containment to crack and release the energy in a massive explosion.

 

Except the Relay isn't squishy. The energy is distributed differently.

 

 

 

 

 

No the wording a choice of words rather show the bias. If you are talking politics to someone and the first words out of their mouth is "Well the liberal media always says X or Fox News says Y" it is fairly obvious of the bias of the speaker or the source material or both. Your videos you post are no different. They like you have already made up their mind on specific subjects thus completely closing their mind to any other set up.  Much like in another thread were you state:

 

Right, they made up their mind after analysis. It's a conclusion.  My position on the endings is a conclusion based on playing the games and thinking about them. I then make the arguments here. That's not the same thing as "bias." But it's funny you use that network example for bias since you like to complain about FOX in examples.

 

 

Which directly ignores 3 rather important points.

1st DLC is always thought of well in advance. So even if they don't start production on them till after the game ships it has already been planned out before the game is even finished.

 

2nd DLC is SUPPOSE TO add to the over all story. Maybe you are happy with paying $5.99 to unlock horse armor that only you can see online or $99.99 to unlock all MP related abilities on Assassin's Creed. Me I really don't like of DLC stuff I prefer the DLC that actually adds to the game. Which the DLC Bioware releases does just that in spades. 

 

3rd Games like this take all DLC into account to tell the whole story. Claiming Leviathan was pure retcon thrown in later to bolster their weak ending is idiotic and childish statement. Existing only because you have closed your mind to any other possibility besides Bioware are bumbling idiots who don't know what they are doing with this game.

 

1) No, it isn't. There might be some ideas floating around, but Leviathan as it is presented was not all planned out before ME3's release. Even if it was, something that important should have been in the main game.

 

2) Yes, it's supposed to add background or extra information or maybe a new adventure. It should not be necessary to understand the main plot. And this is what Bioware's DLC does. Lets take a look just at Mass Effect.

 

ME1

 

Pinnacle Station: Combat challenges. No plot connection

Bring Down the Sky: Single mission; introduces Batarians. No plot connection.

 

ME2

 

Firewalker: New vehicle missions. No plot connection.

Overlord: Stand alone series of missions. Interesting technology. Cool VR section. No plot connection.

Lair of the Shadow Broker: Awesome mission with Liara. Helps us understand her weird character transformation and gives us time with a character from the last game. Explains backstory behind Shepard's recovery. Not needed to understand ongoing events. This is the proper way for DLC to add to the story.

Kasumi and Zaeed: Extra squadmates with cool missions. Events have no plot connection, but as squadmates the characters help in the suicide mission.

Arrival: Bridging DLC for ME3. Definitely better after beating the Collectors. Connects to overall Reaper plot thankfully, but not to the plot of ME2.

 

ME3

 

From Ashes: Prothean squadmate. Interesting dialogue but no plot impact, which is a waste. Tells stories that some use to support the Catalyst's argument. This is the one that supports your earlier point about planning since it was released on day 1.

Omega: I didn't play it but I'm not aware of any plot connection. Cerberus takes over Omega with Reaper monsters. Tell me if I'm wrong.

Citadel: I didn't play it but I'm not aware of any plot connection. It's made to spend time with the characters. Tell me if I'm wrong.

 

Leviathan: Introduces another character to make us aware of the Catalyst earlier in the story so that it's not as jarring a surprise. Explains the change in central conflict from "stop the Reapers" to "solve conflict between organic and synthetic genreally." This is not extra info to explain a backstory or add to the world, though it does some of that too. This is to try and carve a hole in the story for the ending to fit.

 

The line you quote was referring to the citadel AIs, not Leviathan. I am not sure if I've ever called Leviathan a retcon, but thinking about it right now, I'm not sure that's the right term for it. The Catalyst itself is a retcon, but I don't think Leviathan is since the Catalyst had to be made by something and it mentions its creators.

 

 

 

Added to this specific topic of conversation you still ignore the the fact that people like you see only what they want to see. This is also true of the videos you post. It is how people can read Lord of the Rings and think it supports segregation or read Fahrenheit 451 a college student out right tell Bradbury the author of the book his statement of what the book is about is wrong.

 

You're the one reading things into the narrative. And yes, authors make mistakes too. They may have intended to convey one message but their words or stories send a different one. Some of that will be up to the reader. Two actual intelligent analyses could come up with some different conclusions. Then there's whatever it is you do to make your posts.

 

 

 

You really just back up my statement with this line about pre EC was author's intent. How do you know that? Isn't EC simply expanding and providing a greater explanation of events that happened? Seems both were author's intent one was just explained better then the other. Please show your proof they intended it to be that way and only changed it because of fan out rage. Because 3 months after release makes it seem a lot less fan out rage and more they were rushed at the end to meet shipping date by EA. After it shipped it gave them a chance to actually expand the ending out to make it better explain things.

 

The original ending is what they wanted to say. The EC is a reaction to the fans. Those explanations were patches onto the holes fans found. The original ending shows what Bioware thought was sufficient. You're the first person I've heard suggest that the EC is actually the "Director's Cut" and what they wanted to do all along. It also doesn't save the terrible endings.

If they were rushed by EA, why would EA authorize the resources for them to keep working to make a free DLC?

 

 

 

Yes I continually try to go to outrageous extremes to highlight the idiocy of the logic being used. EC exists and has existed longer then any other DLC in the game besides Ashes one. Trying to use pre EC in any argument is as stupid as trying to use the Ancient Greek explanation of wondering vagina to explain why women suffer cramps and bleed during their time of the month. When medical science has already explained exactly why they go though those issues.

 

No need to go to extremes. I highlighted the idiocy for you.

[rossler]

Since you reported my post laughing at you, I'll do it in text. HA!

You'd just say he made it up. Sources not only verify what he's saying but allow you to go do some reading or viewing on your own. You're really grasping at straws to find any kind of argument to use against those who disagree with you. You're just wrong.

 

Yeah...I'm wrong and you're right. We've been through this before.

 

There was no need to report the post. Grow a spine and some thicker skin.

 

No, read and heed the forum rules. You'll learn that there are consequences for your actions. You're a guest here and you have rules to abide by. Can't do or say whatever you want and expect to get away with it.

 

Yes, if you dislike something you can put it on the people who had a large role in making it.

 

That's called blaming, and or calling people out/naming specific people/accusing.

 

You're basically saying it's their fault for the way the game turned out.

 

It's verbal abuse, which isn't tolerated. Read the forum rules.

 

Since you didn't work on the game at the studio, you really can't put it on any one person, because you weren't at the studio during its development. It's making accusations, without having all the information.

 

I know why people here do it though. They feel they got shafted by the ending, so they are looking for someone to blame for the way it turned out. 

[Gorwath-F]

*snip*

 

Poor, defenseless Bioware needs big boys like yourself defending them, right? Keep on fighting the good fight. Make the unhappy, immature kids realize the error of their ways.

 

Click http://gameranx.com/...versial-ending/ and see for yourself if I am really pointing fingers. Try giving arguments as to why the ending is not a giant deus ex machina pulled right out of the ass of an incompetent storyteller who had written himself into a corner. Tell me why the ending was not peer-reviewed. 

 

In any case, it is beside the point. The ending killed the franchise for me and neither you, nor self-righteous Hudson, nor any other fanboy will convince me that I do not get it. And regardless of who was responsible, I am full within my right to hold project manager (Hudson), lead writer (Waters) and Bioware in general accountable. If I decide to never buy a game with those names on it again, who are you to argue? I am entitled to my opinion, so (in so many words) suck my ****.

 

And now be a good concern troll and find another bridge to harass.

[dorktainian]

You can't really put your dislike on a game down to two specific people or a group that made a decision on how the game was designed. Sounds like finger pointing.

 

It's okay to not like the Starchild bit though.

 

how about poor editing, day one dlc including a character pivotal to the main story, the fact that the game was not finished or in a finished state (amazon itself refunded thousands of purchases because they could see it was clearly rushed and not finished, whereas Asda (walmart for you yanks) slashed the price to a mere £10 almost immediately), more cerberus troops, lack of imagination, a complete lack of a recognised story structure, oh and utterly stupid reasoning as far as the reapers are concerned.  Jerky combat rolls, the effectiveremoval of classes, allowing every class every weapon, not using cains to take down reapers, trying to stop small scale wars while the galaxy is being obliterated by the reapers, which makes no sense whatsoever...indoctrinated......cough. Put it next to ME2 and the game is worlds apart.

 

Smudboy has it spot on in regards to ME3.

 

nothing against Bioware, but it was bad.  I hope they learn from it with MEA.

[Natureguy85]

Yeah...I'm wrong and you're right. We've been through this before.

 

Yep. And it will probably be the case on every disagreement we have. At least you acknowledge it finally.

 

 

 

 

 

No, read and heed the forum rules. You'll learn that there are consequences for your actions. You're a guest here and you have rules to abide by. Can't do or say whatever you want and expect to get away with it.

 

Actually I didn't violate the rule cited by the mod, which is the annoying thing. You just got your precious feelings hurt and needed the mod to save you because you can't debate me or anyone else with even half a brain.

 

 

 

That's called blaming, and or calling people out/naming specific people/accusing.

 

You're basically saying it's their fault for the way the game turned out.

 

It's verbal abuse, which isn't tolerated. Read the forum rules.

 

Since you didn't work on the game at the studio, you really can't put it on any one person, because you weren't at the studio during its development. It's making accusations, without having all the information.

 

I know why people here do it though. They feel they got shafted by the ending, so they are looking for someone to blame for the way it turned out. 

 

Wait, then how can you blame me for the content of my post? You weren't here so you don't know who actually wrote it.

 

If you ever leave your parents basement and get a job, you'll find out that people are held responsible for their actions. Those two were in charge and are known to have had a large role in creating the games as they came out. Plenty of blame, though perhaps not all, can be placed on them. It's not verbal abuse. That's a joke.

[gothpunkboy89]

how about poor editing, day one dlc including a character pivotal to the main story, the fact that the game was not finished or in a finished state (amazon itself refunded thousands of purchases because they could see it was clearly rushed and not finished, whereas Asda (walmart for you yanks) slashed the price to a mere £10 almost immediately), more cerberus troops, lack of imagination, a complete lack of a recognised story structure, oh and utterly stupid reasoning as far as the reapers are concerned.  Jerky combat rolls, the effectiveremoval of classes, allowing every class every weapon, not using cains to take down reapers, trying to stop small scale wars while the galaxy is being obliterated by the reapers, which makes no sense whatsoever...indoctrinated......cough. Put it next to ME2 and the game is worlds apart.

 

Smudboy has it spot on in regards to ME3.

 

nothing against Bioware, but it was bad.  I hope they learn from it with MEA.

 

WTF are you complaining about? Day One DLC isn't anything new. You don't have to like it but holding against a game and it's over all quality is idiotic. Javik isn't pivotal to the main story line anymore then Zaeed or Kasumi were for ME 2.

 

Got proof of all theses thousands of refunds and the logic behind amazon doing so?

 

Yea I wouldn't really post anything about ASDA. Just because they sell games doesn't make them a even half way decent example of popularity anymore then Walmart does. And frankly your Game is pretty pathetic compared to Game Spot. The only good thing is they don't trash last gen games instantly like game stop tends to. To even find the ME trilogy I had to buy it in the US and ship it over to the UK for my friend to play it. So as someone who has been to the UK and investigated the gaming market there not really a good idea to start trying to pull that into the conversation.

 

Seriously I brought over Fallout 3 GotY edition to my friend to play it while over in UK. They wanted to own it so they went looking for it at Game the local ones in Coventry. Nope. During trips to Birmingham, Norfolk, Nottingham, Glouscester and a few other places in the west midlands not a hide nor hair of the game. Yet both local game stops have it in Florida.

 

So wait more Cerberus is bad? Not really considering how it fits into the over all story line. Lets not forget if you spent every level killing the same reaper troops it would get boring. Hence why MP side which is nothing but wave survival has 4 different groups that pose different challenges. It would be ungodly boring if you only faced 1 troop for the entirty of the game. Even ME 1 and 2 mix up what you fight a bit.

 

Story structure was just fine I was able to follow it without any problems. As were many many other people. Honestly you guys here on the forum seem to be the vocal minority because anyone who plays this that I talk to about the game on the MP side or other games don't seem to have an issue with the game the same as you. Oh they have some issues like how the Volus and Elcor were never really shown in the war or how they didn't explain stuff as well. But over all enjoy the game and were capable of following the story without an issue. Only you and the tiny forum population seem to be this venom spitting THIS GAME IS CRAAAAAAAAP!!! set up.

 

Combat rolls are fine for me. Just because everyone could equip every weapon doesn't mean it removed class system. The weight system corrects this issues. Yea you can set up an Adept with every weapon type in the game. How ever your HP and shielding is much less then solider class and your power recharge would be so slow you couldn't use them as well. I'm finishing up a Vangaurd play though and I willingly keep it to only shotgun and pistol because I need those powers to recharge quickly. Without biotic charge and Reave I would get chewed up by enemy soldiers.

 

So were does it state that Cains can effectively take down a Reaper? Reaper forces maybe but then you run into supply limitation.

 

Stop what small scale wars? You only stop one small scale war in the galaxy Q vs G. Which again fits rather well into the over all story and helps highlight the desperation the Quarians feel and is a mini way showing the conflict between O and S.

[gothpunkboy89]

Well I'm not fluent in "stupid" so I might have missed something. What was your point then? Was it about the distance between you and anyone else? Because the example was a civilization that was just fine on its homeworld and didn't want outside, alien interference. So if pluto was your homeworld where you live, then that's fine and is the objective. That civilization wants to be "stranded."

 

You won't "waste the effort" because you're incapable of communicating an intelligent explanation.

 

Except the Relay isn't squishy. The energy is distributed differently.

 

Right, they made up their mind after analysis. It's a conclusion.  My position on the endings is a conclusion based on playing the games and thinking about them. I then make the arguments here. That's not the same thing as "bias." But it's funny you use that network example for bias since you like to complain about FOX in examples.

 

1) No, it isn't. There might be some ideas floating around, but Leviathan as it is presented was not all planned out before ME3's release. Even if it was, something that important should have been in the main game.

 

2) Yes, it's supposed to add background or extra information or maybe a new adventure. It should not be necessary to understand the main plot. And this is what Bioware's DLC does. Lets take a look just at Mass Effect.

 

ME1

 

Pinnacle Station: Combat challenges. No plot connection

Bring Down the Sky: Single mission; introduces Batarians. No plot connection.

 

ME2

 

Firewalker: New vehicle missions. No plot connection.

Overlord: Stand alone series of missions. Interesting technology. Cool VR section. No plot connection.

Lair of the Shadow Broker: Awesome mission with Liara. Helps us understand her weird character transformation and gives us time with a character from the last game. Explains backstory behind Shepard's recovery. Not needed to understand ongoing events. This is the proper way for DLC to add to the story.

Kasumi and Zaeed: Extra squadmates with cool missions. Events have no plot connection, but as squadmates the characters help in the suicide mission.

Arrival: Bridging DLC for ME3. Definitely better after beating the Collectors. Connects to overall Reaper plot thankfully, but not to the plot of ME2.

 

ME3

 

From Ashes: Prothean squadmate. Interesting dialogue but no plot impact, which is a waste. Tells stories that some use to support the Catalyst's argument. This is the one that supports your earlier point about planning since it was released on day 1.

Omega: I didn't play it but I'm not aware of any plot connection. Cerberus takes over Omega with Reaper monsters. Tell me if I'm wrong.

Citadel: I didn't play it but I'm not aware of any plot connection. It's made to spend time with the characters. Tell me if I'm wrong.

 

Leviathan: Introduces another character to make us aware of the Catalyst earlier in the story so that it's not as jarring a surprise. Explains the change in central conflict from "stop the Reapers" to "solve conflict between organic and synthetic genreally." This is not extra info to explain a backstory or add to the world, though it does some of that too. This is to try and carve a hole in the story for the ending to fit.

 

The line you quote was referring to the citadel AIs, not Leviathan. I am not sure if I've ever called Leviathan a retcon, but thinking about it right now, I'm not sure that's the right term for it. The Catalyst itself is a retcon, but I don't think Leviathan is since the Catalyst had to be made by something and it mentions its creators.

 

You're the one reading things into the narrative. And yes, authors make mistakes too. They may have intended to convey one message but their words or stories send a different one. Some of that will be up to the reader. Two actual intelligent analyses could come up with some different conclusions. Then there's whatever it is you do to make your posts.

 

The original ending is what they wanted to say. The EC is a reaction to the fans. Those explanations were patches onto the holes fans found. The original ending shows what Bioware thought was sufficient. You're the first person I've heard suggest that the EC is actually the "Director's Cut" and what they wanted to do all along. It also doesn't save the terrible endings.

If they were rushed by EA, why would EA authorize the resources for them to keep working to make a free DLC?

 

No need to go to extremes. I highlighted the idiocy for you.

 

The Batarians never blew up any relay because they need resources. Stranding yourself in your own system would mean you are stuck now and for ever with just the resources you have now. Long term that isn't a viable set up for anyone unless you start dealing with heavy population controls and restricting a lot of civil liberties to regulate resource consumption.  Considering the alternatives that exist maybe not the smartest move for any intelligent species.

 

Kinetic energy is still transferred to the object it impacts. Which was basically the point I was trying to make before you had to get all indignant on me. Seriously I was making a generalization because they both follow the same logic. Kinetic energy is transferred to the object it hits and causes damage. For some reason you felt the need to expand this further by going into details and claiming me wrong. Because once again you are more concerned with being right then actually using logic or paying attention to what I type.

 

Conclusions are just as capable of bias as anything else. Again I bring up LotR some how supporting segregation. They draw that conclusion all on their own even though that isn't even vaugly what the series supports and I honestly question how people can even get close to that conclusion. I single out Fox News because they are the more blatant bias news group that many people pay attention to and quote. You know like how they made a massive deal how current President Obama didn't properly salute a solider getting off the Presidential helicopter because his hands were full. Going into out rage mode seeing to forget that President Bush had done the same thing yet they never complained about it then. All news agencies are full of **** but Fox is amazingly and stunningly full of **** at a level that surpasses all others.

 

1) Your proof of this statement? Because my statement is backed up by talks with game devs from Insomniac Games were they were on the forums every now and then. Talking with players about possible DLC for games like Resistance 3 and FUSE. And in both cases the DLC was planned out well a head of the game's release. Now production on DLC wouldn't start till game was finished but they already planned their DLC before the game was shipped.

 

2) You don't need Leviathan to understand the main story. It expands on it to give it more detail but isn't necessary. Frankly you have to be a small child or a moron not to be able to follow the main story. It is fairly basic stuff here.  Or again am I assuming people are smarter then they actually are and you are stating they are all actually idiots and need everything explained out to them like they are 3 years old? Because that seems to be the basis of your logic.

 

 

Bringing Down the Sky: Has plot connection as it is tied to Shepard's back story as well as connecting the Batarian and Human hostility which is continued to be shown in future games and is rather important in ME 2 and ME 3.

 

Overlord: Connect to over all story because it shows the horrible level Cerberus is willing to go to achieve results and is their attempt to manipulate the Geth to fight for humanity against the Reapers and anyone else they face.

 

Arrival connects to the ME 2 plot because the ME 2 plot is connected to the Reapers arriving. The events of ME 2 are what cause the Reapers to finally wake up and start towards the galaxy. Hence it shows their lights turning on and motion starting. Which is why I am surprised you can do the mission before the collector base.

 

Omega: Help Aria with the collection of Merc groups from ME 2 retake Omega after the events of a book or maybe comic shows her being tricked out of control of it while Cerberus continues to study Adjutants. Which are husk like creatures from beyond the Omega 4 Relay. Showing a rather good job of what Cerberus has done with the Collector technology.

 

Citadel: Connects with the over all plot by having a Shep clone which isn't that unexpected considering what would be needed to revive Shep.A rather amusing consequences of Shep being revived. You learn more back story and information on various other things like the Asari finding the Citadel how Specters were started and an Elcor mating totem. As well as the over all action of showing no matter what Shep and crew might do they are still ordinary people facing a near unstoppable foe. Acting as a wonderful one last hura from Bioware and the characters before going off to face the final mission.

 

Leviathan: Adds a ton of unanswered back story to the Reapers including their origins which have been clouded in mystery. It doesn't alter the story of stop the Reapers but explains the reasons behind the Reaper's actions. Which repeats the same conflict that has existed in the game since ME 1. Because remember that time that Geth willingly followed a Reaper and killed organics because they would get a cookie when they are done? Or that time a VI program gained some form of consciousness and killed everyone on the Luna base. Or when that program went wrong killing any organic's requiring you to hunt down the place that originally shipped out the parts to shut it down? Maybe the heavy shackles EDI had that were only released by Joker because it was release the Shackles or die. Which up to that point no one made a complaint about the shackles. Or even remember that time the Quarians attacked the Geth and Legion lied it's ass off to you the entire time you are trying to help it ensuring that the Geth always came out ahead in any action.

 

You are just as guilty of reading into a narrative. Because you take everything and twist it into what you want it to say. Because you want the game story to be a smoldering wreck. Everything you have argued on this forum is pushing the singular idea that the entire story is crap. Altering or interpreting things at will to fit that narrative because it is what you want to see. Not what bioware actually put out.

 

What proof do you have of your EC claim? Please I do want to see your proof of this claim that the EC only exists because of fan complaints. As for EA kicking it out the door before it was finished. Are you really surprised by this fact? EA and Ubisoft are the two most notorious for forcing games out of the door before they are fully finished. Particularly because it could be updated later after it was released and after they made money from sales as well as MTX in the MP side of it.

 

But please do show the proof you have that proves this other wise. Because I'm banking on EA's rather bad habits of relying on the fact games can be updated after the fact to get them out on the market to fix issues. As well as Bioware wanting to explain things a bit better but not having the chance to. The fact the DLC is free rather then costing even 2.99 which would be directly inline with EA's set up they choose to do it on their own.

 

So wait you highlighted your entire post? Were?

[AlanC9]

What's the argument about the EC, exactly? Are you saying that Bio always intended to release free ending DLC? That doesn't seem too plausible.

Or is it just that the EC doesn't deviate from the original intent? That seems more likely; most of what the EC does is to kill off bad interpretations. Or rather, non-intended interpretations. But that's no different from what NatureGuy85 is saying.

[Abedsbrother]

I think everybody needs to just take a deep breath...

(Volus: "HOW DARE YOU!!!" - All right, sorry, poor choice of words...)

 

Here's Mark Meer parodying Shepard's big speech from Mass Effect 3:

[Monica21]

I wasn't playing ME when ME3 was released, but I was hanging around the Dragon Age forums, so hearing about the ending was unavoidable. The EC really was released in because of the fans. It was not a "Director's Cut." It was released because fans absolutely hated the ending. And I understood that even though I hadn't played a single minute of Mass Effect. Any argument that it's anything but is out of sheer stubbornness.