Mass Effect 3 discussion

Ok. I've ended it, having the best possible ending(I guess. Not all my party members lived thru whole trilogy anyway) and I must say, game wasn't that bad. Finale, on the other side - was plain bad. Especially after seeing all possible endings. Not much work Bioware, huh? I would love to see a wall of text like in Baldurs Gate, telling me what happened next.

But all in all, I enjoyed the story of commander Shepard. I guess I will miss some of these characters. Consequences of my actions were hardly visible but oh well, it was still a cool journey.
 
Finished the game on insanity. Was stuck near the end when two banshees attack and the checkpoint ate the Hydra Missile Launcher I placed on the ground. Luckily I had a save from 10 minutes before and was able to save the heavy weapon for one of the banshees.

Anyway endings, Legion and Mordin can get great ones but the game can't?
 
dutchie, not sure if you have been keeping up on the subject...

ill do spoilers even though its not about mass effect.

[spoiler:05648a7720]
physics tells us that gravity is the weakest force, and they cannot find a reason. so now its become at least a well known fringe idea that gravity only appears to be weak when in reality it is so strong it bridges dimensions.

so what we measure out of gravity is not the entire "effect" of gravity as some of its effect bleeds into other dimensions. that would explain why gravity is so weak.

so how would this gravity bleeding off into other dimensions look/feel/work? incredibly similar to how dark energy appears to work. so what we perceive as dark energy may actually be the gravitational effect from mass in nearby dimensions bleeding into ours.

that would make your whole dark energy thing kinda moot unless they wanted to stipulate that when they "create" dark energy what they are actually doing is creating mass in a nearby dimension, which can be dangerous for that dimension. see exotic particles.
[/spoiler:05648a7720]
 
Hi TheWesDude,

I acknowledged that my explanation on Dark Energy is not scientific correct (I really should research the subject), but I wanted to come up with an explanation behind the Reapers that did not revolve around what we got in the game.

I thought it would be cooler that the Reapers are revealed to be celestial engineers who seek to prevent the universe ending long before it had reached the end of its natural lifespan, and that the damage was caused by the technological infrastructures of advanced civilizations.

Would it have been used I would of course have researched the subject much better and come up with a better and scientific accurate explanation like you suggest.
 
IMO the Reapers should have been what we saw in ME2; monsters who reproduce by harvesting advanced civilizations who have proven ''worthy''. They would have had a purpose, once, but it would have been lost, so the cycle would continue just because they knew nothing else. Make them a bit more tragic, instead of pulling a bullshit reason out of your ass by way of the god-child.
 
^^^^^

Actually I like that one too.

Or actually a goal beyond our comprehension but that they come to our galaxy from time to time to harvests civilizations to increase their numbers.
 
I just dislike the trend I'm seeing that every villain must have hidden depths, an agenda for the common good, ect. The Illusive Man had it, and it really fit him, and made his final scene powerful. But after that the game attempts to make us buy the mecha-chtulu, kilometers-long evil sentient starships are actually trying to save us by wiping civilization out every 50k years.
 
generalissimofurioso said:
Some gig is towing his complaints about the game to the FTC.

This gonna be funny.
Click to expand...

Serious?

I know its a poor ending and I also don't like it but that is sort of like complaining about the ending of a book or a movie and expecting the writers or producers to change it.

Well if there is a big enough public outcry it might happen but it still feels weird.
 
the problem is what might happen if they really manage to get trough with this?

I am not sure if that would be really that great.
 
Ilosar said:
I just dislike the trend I'm seeing that every villain must have hidden depths, an agenda for the common good, ect. The Illusive Man had it, and it really fit him, and made his final scene powerful. But after that the game attempts to make us buy the mecha-chtulu, kilometers-long evil sentient starships are actually trying to save us by wiping civilization out every 50k years.
Click to expand...
I think the real problem is Bioware's obsession with making cinematic gaming which leads them to go full on epic. The series didn't need the Collectors, dark energy or even the Reapers, I'd rather they had concentrated on galaxy building than galaxy ending. Less star systems, and less planets per game but making each planet more fleshed out and unique, most of the side missions in ME2 mights as well have been on the same planet as the only real difference was the sky box. Likewise Illium could have easily been on the Citadel as on a planet.

Same with the aliens, it would of been nice to really get to know the races other than by info dump to the codex, so much potential material to explore. Human - Turian tensions, Human - Batarian tensions, Turian, Asari, Salarian dominance of the council. The Prothean mystery didn't need to be anything more than they built ai controlled ships, the Reapers. The Reapers turned on them, they wiped each other out and 50,000 years later the Quarians made the same mistake and their creations the Geth find a Reaper ship and start looking for Prothean technology to repair it.

Sometimes people just think too big.
 
Kilus said:
Finished the game on insanity. Was stuck near the end when two banshees attack and the checkpoint ate the Hydra Missile Launcher I placed on the ground. Luckily I had a save from 10 minutes before and was able to save the heavy weapon for one of the banshees.

Anyway endings, Legion and Mordin can get great ones but the game can't?
Click to expand...

You know, this is sad actually, the game has very great moments but the end ruined all.

The mission on Tuchanka is really great and dependable of your decisions in previous games, it really brings weight.
The Quarian x Geth conflict could have a better development, specially regarding Admiral Xen, but none the less, the feeling is very good.
The Citadel is a live location, it changes based on what's happening, your squad is in various locations and have different needs, as well in the Normandy, you always have some of them engaging in some conversation or discution in various parts of the ship.

There's also very funny moments regarding some conversations you hear, Kasumi mission is a very funny one, the PSTD asari soldier's story could have a relation to Joker and so on.

But instead of this, we all have to bear the terrible endings.
Really, what the hell Bioware was thinking?
They didn't know how to end the game or they suffered pressure for releasing it fast?
For those wandering, there's a entry in the Codex > Secondary Codex > The Reaper War called "Desperate Measures" that simply invalidates everything post-Shepard choice in the Citadel.
And for the record, I don't mind Shepard dying.

Is curious actually, the game explaning why his end is crap and a PoS. :roll:


Oh, and the whole issue hit CNN (4.00 min in the video):
http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/tech/2012/03/17/new-video-game-reviews.cnn

Bioware is in full PR damage control this days, go take a look on the ME3 website. Guess what?
Yep, some "MP tournament" giving away...weapons! :shock: :?
 
Crossposting:

The point of the entire Mass Effect series is that life has a choice. ME wasn't about a pretentious AI from the Citadel controlling the Reapers to supposedly save organic life, it was about making a difference in the galaxy, about choosing your own fate, rather have it determined by ancient war machines. We spend the entire game building up the largest military force the galaxy has ever seen, uniting the species for the first time.

But the ending pretty much ignores that, ignores everything and presents three arbitrary choices that are completely disconnected from the rest of the game, both plotwise and thematically. You make several hard choices and expect to see them come back. But no, the author seemingly thought that trying to pull off a 2001 was more interesting.

You know what would be more interesting? EMS directly determining the success at Earth. The Crucible playing an actual strategic role. The Illusive Man representing a Renegade choice, not a Reaper puppet that studied how to make Reapers his puppets (uh, yeah, think about the logic here). Finally, the game giving the player feedback on the choices they made. Did Krogan Rebellions happen again, as Salarians feared? How did the Asari react to losing their homeworld and what was the impact? Long term Quarian/Geth development?

That'd make the Stargazer bit meaningful, shown that Shepard really did have an impact on the galaxy. But as it stands, Aldrin's effort is completely wasted.
 
So will they eventually release a "patch" for the end?

I really hope they will not charge money for that ... for the case they really do it.
 
What I don't get is Fallout was released in 1997 and showed how to do a awesome ending that ties up all the choices a player has made. Just copy that, really a narrated ending to a RPG(even a action one) outlining the effects of the player actions should be a industry standard.

brfritos said:
Bioware is in full PR damage control this days, go take a look on the ME3 website. Guess what?
Yep, some "MP tournament" giving away...weapons! :shock: :?
Click to expand...

That has nothing to do with any ending stuff. Operation Goliath is a normal multiplayer event.

Also really Synthetic life as a concept is the big bad? Try 1% population growth for 2000 years. I really wish the reapers were the solution to ordinary population growth.
 
Ausdoerrt said:
^ Oh cmon, Bethesda did it and got away with it, think Bioware would be different?
Click to expand...
hmm though they more or less continued the story.

Its not like they completely reworked it.

Thats what I mean. If they completely rework it AND charging money for it? Would be a new low in my book for Bioware. Not that I know what the ending is like. So I am neutral with it. Just saying. They should give it out for free.
 
They say the best part of a good story is not about the destination, but the journey. In Mass Effect's case, the destination just makes the whole journey pointless.

It's very much like Fallout 3 in that the "fiction would have to be changed" through DLC to find more explanation or a satisfying end. I certainly wouldn't want to pay for an epilogue that should have been included from the start.

My big problem with an approach like Broken Steel "fixing" the vanilla ending, that even though it "continued the story," the results of those actions I had taken are completely marginalized (poisoning the purifier really doesn't have a noticeable effect aside from mostly nameless npcs lying in bed) and made pretty much moot the themes up to that point. The same would be true of any fix to ME3's particular endings.

Unless they make one hell of a DLC that completely reworks the ending or actually shows what the different color schemes do, the entire Mass effect experience was pretty much for nought.
 
Kilus said:
What I don't get is Fallout was released in 1997 and showed how to do a awesome ending that ties up all the choices a player has made. Just copy that, really a narrated ending to a RPG(even a action one) outlining the effects of the player actions should be a industry standard.
Click to expand...

Well they copy FEAR's style when Shepard is dreaming, so why not?

Anybody viewed the video from CNN? The "better part" is when the host says that games are from children and teenagers of 14/15 years old, in wich the reviewer corrects her - much to her own surprise - that the average gamer's age in US is 30 years old.

Really, people still think games are only for children/teens?
 
I'm just adding two additional thoughts to this discussion, probably both of which have been brought up several times before. but I can't really be bothered following this as I think it's pretty ludicrous all-in-all.

1. the consequences of your actions are NOT thrown away. you see them play out before you all throughout the game, and then it leaves it up to your imagination what happens after the ending. the game itself IS the slideshow telling you what consequences your earlier actions had. did you seriously expect bigger changes in the game depending on your actions in a game from Bioware? especially after ME2?

2. this is someone's artwork. wether you view games as art or not, this is still someone's artistic creation. they decided where they wanted the story to go and they have all the right to do so. the gamer's have all the right to be upset about it, but demanding that they change it is ridiculous. do you demand the ending of a movie or a book to be changed when you're not happy about it? no, you walk away and decide that you simply didn't like it.

all this actually kind of reminds me of Stephen King's "Misery". but even more sad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top