|
Yasser Arafatwa posted:Why weren't you playing femshep? I didn't actually install the mod, I just watched the example video that the mod creator posted which was with the default male Shep. I had both male and female characters in all three games.
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 19:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 02:32 |
|
|
EDIT: Yeah, I already said this before, I'm an idiot.
wafflemoose fucked around with this message at 21:05 on Sep 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 20:31
|
|
|
You said that before. And frankly, I think the Starchild bullshit is better than that terrible Happy Ending mod.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 20:38
|
|
|
I like to form my opinions around hyperboles as well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 20:40
|
|
|
Dr. Abysmal posted:I could never get past how cobbled together the happy ending mod was. Not just the dude mumbling "we have Shepard" into his desk mic but everything is hacked together from recycled Joker lines and old ME2 cutscenes. My favorite bit was Shepard taking Liara's place in the memorial wall scene so he suddenly had a feminine walk. I know Mass Effect isn't mod friendly at all but it was just silly to me and I was surprised how many people were saying it was great. I liked it for the content, not killing the geth and showing Shepard with his crew in particular. Don't think anyone actually thought the quality of the mod is good, just that unless Bioware themselves decides to redo the cutscenes hacked together lines is as good as an amateur can make it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 21:03
|
|
|
I wonder what was Bioware's thought process was when making that ending. Frankly, it screams "Our budget ran out lol." Also, what is a good bonus power for a Solider. I know it's the most boring class in the game, but I like the variety of bullet powers and the Adrenaline rush Rush power. You can keep your fancy tech and biotic powers, guns work just fine for me. 
wafflemoose fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Sep 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 21:08
|
|
|
Starhawk64 posted:I wonder what was Bioware's thought process was when making that ending. Frankly, it screams "Our budget ran out lol." Also, what is a good bonus power for a Solider?  Seriously though they thought their ending was thought provoking and deep, and the people who wrote it were by and large not the people who wrote the rest of the franchise, which is why it sort of comes out of left field. They imagined that being profound was more important than being tonally consistent, which is why it failed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 21:14
|
|
|
Starhawk64 posted:I wonder what was Bioware's thought process was when making that ending. Frankly, it screams "Our budget ran out lol." They would've just told it better, and actually give us a final boss!
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 21:17
|
|
|
Bholder posted:Pretty much, but I think the Starchild would've stayed either way alongside the Reaper background and all that funny stuff.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 21:20
|
|
|
Starhawk64 posted:I wonder what was Bioware's thought process was when making that ending. Frankly, it screams "Our budget ran out lol." Also, what is a good bonus power for a Solider. I know it's the most boring class in the game, but I like the variety of bullet powers and the Adrenaline rush Rush power. You can keep your fancy tech and biotic powers, guns work just fine for me. At least one interview mentioned the ending being written by 2-3 guys in a office separate from the rest of the writers and devs. So it stems from a lack of discussion and chances for other people to offer changes. You could also argue that they had written themselves into a corner, leaving a lack of options, like still having Rachni even if you killed the Queen in the first game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 21:26
|
|
|
Strange Matter posted:Does anyone else remember the Mass Effect 3 ending generated that had something like 18 different endings based upon half a dozen major choices throughout the three games? That's basically my canon ending for the game because all of them lead very organically from the choices you make, and cover a very wide range of 100% Happy Successful Future ending to incredibly Grimdark. The best part, however, was how it incorporated your Renegade/Paragon score, which purely determined how Shepherd reacts to the ending. I think one of them had her siding with the Krogan as they start a new war, which was pretty much how I saw it happening. I haven't heard of this, but I'd really like to know about it now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 21:28
|
|
|
Captain Geech posted:I haven't heard of this, but I'd really like to know about it now.  Also I think Bioware claimed just a few months before release that Mass Effect 3 would have 18 different endings.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 21:40
|
|
|
The lesson of Mass Effect 3 is that you should never make unstoppable killing machines your main enemy. By their very nature, the only way to defeat them is an "WE WIN" button. I would have preferred the Reapers being stuck in Dark Space after you stopped their Vanguard in ME1. Kind of like the ending to the first Hellboy movie. The Citadel would make a great setting for future games. Just let me play a cop who works the beat going up against gangs and some sort of Moriarty nemisis. That said, Citadel DLC and the "good-bye" moments on Earth are in my top list of favorite game moments.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 21:42
|
|
|
Kibayasu posted:
Well, technically the original game had 6 "different" ones, maybe consider the Destroy ones twice for the Shepard breathing scene and I guess if you add all the permutations of who can exit the Normandy in the crash scene you can get to 18 
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 21:44
|
|
|
I don't think they claimed that it would have 18 different endings. They did claim that it wouldn't be a DXHR "press button A,B,C" to choose an ending, which is basically flat-out wrong, though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 21:46
|
|
|
Actually no, it was a real thing. I found the site that it used to be hosted at here: www.writing.com But as you can see it loads to an error page, so it's probably been removed. It's a shame too, there were some really awesome scenarios there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 21:49
|
|
|
Fag Boy Jim posted:I don't think they claimed that it would have 18 different endings. Funny thing is, all Bioware games has endings like this. Maybe except Dragon Age, but I think you can count "will you have sex with Morrigan" as a choice like this...
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 21:55
|
|
|
Bholder posted:Funny thing is, all Bioware games has endings like this. Yeah, like, people love the journey from "he-who-gets-killed-by-rats-in-one-hit" to a literal capital-G God in the Baldurs Gate series, but even that one ends with an actual "Become a god? Y/N" dialogue box choice.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 21:56
|
|
|
Strange Matter posted:I don't think there was ever going to be a final boss. Casey Hudson said that it was the plan originally to have the player face off against a dragonlike, reaperized Illusive Man but they cut that because it would seem "Too Video-Gamey". Which makes a lot of sense, you know. Which is why Martin Scorcese replaces the climaxes of all his films with pictures script printed on the screen, so that it wouldn't be "too cinematic." I get what you're saying, but to be fair that sounds like a really dumb boss fight and I'm glad it didn't happen (hello there stupid Dragon Age 2 end bosses). BrokenKnees posted:At least one interview mentioned the ending being written by 2-3 guys in a office separate from the rest of the writers and devs. So it stems from a lack of discussion and chances for other people to offer changes. You could also argue that they had written themselves into a corner, leaving a lack of options, like still having Rachni even if you killed the Queen in the first game. It's like that writing game, where a bunch of people each write a page of a story without checking in on what the other writers are doing, except instead of laughing with friends and throwing your ridiculous product away when you're done, you sell it as a AAA video game and make millions of dollars. Oh well I still like the game though
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 22:18
|
|
|
Fag Boy Jim posted:Yeah, like, people love the journey from "he-who-gets-killed-by-rats-in-one-hit" to a literal capital-G God in the Baldurs Gate series, but even that one ends with an actual "Become a god? Y/N" dialogue box choice. This. Baldur's Gate is still the best RPG series ever. I can understand the disappointment with the ME3 ending, but I thought the reaction was overblown. It is a genuinely fun game, and I myself refuse to let the last 10 minutes of it taint my enjoyment of the rest of the game. But I wonder what the people at Bioware were thinking. Who goes and says: "We will have two writing teams, one for the game itself and one for the ending. Oh and regular and close contact between the teams to ensure a seamless product is not necessary." Why? What do you get from this? I cannot understand this one bit. What is the advantage of this approach? Although they did write themselves into a bit of a corner, I don't think there could have been to much of a different ending besides Shepard wins, Shepard wins with big losses and Shepard loses. Which would probably not be terribly satisfying. Torrannor fucked around with this message at 22:54 on Sep 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 22:49
|
|
|
The ending weren't written by a whole team. According the information leaked by Patrick Weekes, it was just Casey Hudson and Mac Walters who locked out the rest of the writing team in the 11th hour, quickly threw a draft together, and then finally used their fiat as producer and lead writer to force their draft pretty much unchanged into the final version of the game. The most prevalent theory is that they were compelled to do this because the previous ending draft had been leaked and they wanted to prevent it from happening again.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2013 23:43
|
|
|
Burning Mustache posted:Ehh, I don't think this is a necessity. Harbinger should have been a lot more present in Me3. They built him and the Illusive Man up as villains in Me2 but you only really interact with the IM in Me3. Harbinger should have been all up in your business a lot more often.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 00:06
|
|
|
EDIT 2: As others have noted this is technically still the spoiler thread, so in order not to turn this post into a single, huge, black box, I should note that  THIS ENTIRE POST IS A SINGLE MASSIVE SPOILER OF ME3 -- DON'T READ IT IF YOU HAVEN'T FINISHED THE GAME Torrannor posted:But I wonder what the people at Bioware were thinking. Who goes and says: "We will have two writing teams, one for the game itself and one for the ending. Oh and regular and close contact between the teams to ensure a seamless product is not necessary." Why? What do you get from this? I cannot understand this one bit. What is the advantage of this approach? I think it was probably not a conscious, deliberate decision that seemed like the best idea ever to them as much as a result of a combination of lack of time, pressure, mismanagement and not really knowing what to do. Stuff about previous ideas on the ending leaking out at some point probably didn't help either. Or at least I hope it was like that, but I'm willing to give them the benefit of doubt here. Torrannor posted:Although they did write themselves into a bit of a corner, I don't think there could have been to much of a different ending besides Shepard wins, Shepard wins with big losses and Shepard loses. Which would probably not be terribly satisfying. There's "Shepard wins" and then there's "Shepard wins". There is an infinite number of possibilities they could have made Shepard win. And at the end, even in the (lovely) endings we got, Shepard still always wins; He defeats the Reaper threat and saves the races of the galaxy (with the exception of the Refuse ending and some nuances like the Geth biting it in Destroy or other races being killed depending on your previous choices, but that's beside the point I'm going for). But it's not like they didn't have a lot of wiggle room here or that they wrote themselves in that much of a corner by the end of ME2. In some regards they certainly did and there was bound to be some bullshitting going on (like how the Reapers would be able to get to the Galaxy in a reasonable time frame after all that had been established and after all Shepard had done up to that point), but I think most fans would have been ok with some bullshit or "retconning", if you will, if there had been a more satisfying conclusion to it all. Like the popular idea of ME3 ending similar to ME2, with a galactic suicide-mission-style final chapter and all the bells and whistles that come with it, and possibly Shepard punching Harbinger in the face, that gets thrown around a lot. That probably would have been the most straightforward and uncontroversial way to approach it (though many people would consider this lame because it's a typical happy ending and that Mass Effect absolutely must have something more sophisticated than that, which I personally find to be terribly silly, and I see absolutely nothing wrong with a "stupid", Hollywood-style happy ending, but I digress). More over, I don't even think such a huge number of fans would have had a problem with a more "bittersweet" ending with a lot of losses and all that if it would have been presented believably and reasonably, and if they would have kept everything happening in the ending within the focus of the established plot and universe up to that point. Instead, and I think this is one of the most important reasons for the clusterfuck of a situation and the reactions we ended up with, they decided to blow up the scope of the entire Mass Effect universe and of the trilogy a couple of orders of magnitude in the last ten minutes of the game. And one can argue about how the explanation for the origins of, and the reasons for the Reapers' existence and behavior make sense in retrospect due to previous common themes of the series and hints and side plots all day long, but the reveal really does come out of the left field and it all goes from a pretty straightforward "Reapers = unambiguously bad, must be destroyed" to "everything is inevitably poo poo and the Reapers are our only hope" based on what an AI in the form of a little boy tells you in the final ten minutes (the entire presentation is another huge problem here) and despite the tone feel that has been established throughout the series. The very fundamental premises (Reapers = threat to all organic life, organics = bros and making a pretty kickass galaxy if they work together (or if Shepard kicks their rear end into doing so)) of the Mass Effect universe get challenged in those last ten minutes, and the "solutions" to this newly introduced problem (which is orders of magnitudes bigger than anything the trilogy dealt with up to that point) further completely alter the universe that the people learned to love and get invested in (and specifically, the authors' clearly intended, only proper solution, Synthesis, does that) and that is the biggest crux of the entire clusterfuck I think. Now I don't even think this is an inherently or necessarily terrible idea and I guess Hudson and Walters genuinely thought it was pretty clever (and I don't mean any sarcasm or ridicule here) and I can even see why and really appreciate that, but I obviously don't think it worked out too well for this series where players spent 100+ investing themselves in that universe and hoping for a trilogy end that would pave and open up the way for many future games and stories taking place in this universe. I've said before that I think if the entire main plot of the series, condensed into a short story, would probably get away really, really well with what they were going for with the ending. But for the game, not so much, and most certaonly not in the way it was presented (especially in the original game without the EC back in the day). Though I don't think it's a single aspect alone, like the presentation, "not a happy ending", being controversial and challenging, Shepard dying, being "bittersweet", contradicting previously established lore or massive plot holes are the reason for all the outrage, it's the specific combination of that along with the story these guys figured they wanted to end this with and the fact that this combination so utterly changes the outlook for any (chronologically) future games set in the rather awesome ME universe that got people so worked up. So I think while they wrote themselves in a corner with some regards, people would be forgiving about pulling plot holes or re-writing established lore, or having Shepard die, or doing a more unorthodox and "challenging" conclusion, as long as the result feels satisfying to the consumer of that story, as trivial as this may sound. Shepard wins in the endings we got, but not in a way that people feel satisfied with, and there would have been an infinite number of different possibilities for Shepard to win that probably would have satisfied most fans. At this point all I can sum it up with is that while there are tons of micro-aspects that you can critisize, (and possibly find pretty "objectively" wrong or terrible things with) like presentation, plot holes, that definitely went wrong for a multitude of reasons, for me, personally, the biggest issue is just that I ... I guess I didn't like the story they ended up telling us :I It's really that simple. "Duh!", right? Or so I like to tell myself. And now excuse me while I'll seek therapy for still typing this at this point in time.  E: Vigilance posted:Harbinger should have been a lot more present in Me3. They built him and the Illusive Man up as villains in Me2 but you only really interact with the IM in Me3. Harbinger should have been all up in your business a lot more often. I agree, and I suspect the absence of Harbinger was a logical conclusion of the shift from Reapers being these terrifying, utterly alien and super intelligent ...things far beyond our comprehension to mere technical tools of the Catalyst, void of any personality or agency. Burning Mustache fucked around with this message at 08:18 on Sep 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 00:24
|
|
|
Burning Mustache posted:I agree, and I suspect the absence of Harbinger was a logical conclusion of the shift from Reapers being these terrifying, utterly alien and super intelligent ...things far beyond our comprehension to mere technical tools of the Catalyst, void of any personality or agency. I dunno, the games preceding it already did a pretty good job of establishing the Reapers as being devoid of personality. I thought Harbringer was a chore to deal with before the second game even came to an end.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 01:05
|
|
|
Ehh, I kinda liked ol' Harby v vHis continuous presence throughout ME2 got a bit much but his speech at the end of the game and especially that confrontation with him at the end of Arrival were pretty cool I think. Sovereign still has him beat by 
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 01:10
|
|
|
fancy stats posted:I dunno, the games preceding it already did a pretty good job of establishing the Reapers as being devoid of personality. I thought Harbringer was a chore to deal with before the second game even came to an end. I loved the Reapers as they were in the first game. Sometimes giant robot space leviathans will show up and murder your entire galaxy, because this is space and space is scary and there's nothing that you can do about that. It worked well with the idea of Mass Effect as looking at the concept of humanity coming into contact with other alien species in general, and Best Human Shepard representing the forefront of human efforts to interact with a complex galaxy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 01:10
|
|
|
Strange Matter posted:Actually no, it was a real thing. I found the site that it used to be hosted at here:
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 02:11
|
|
|
Burning Mustache posted:Ehh, I kinda liked ol' Harby v I ended up being a bit disappointed with him in Arrival, but I absolutely love his speech as Shepard races for the Normandy at the end of ME2, I thought that was just fantastic. His complete absence from 3 was just bizarre to me, were those brief mentions of him towards the end in the original game or only added in the Extended Cut?
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 02:15
|
|
|
Strange Matter posted:I don't think there was ever going to be a final boss. Casey Hudson said that it was the plan originally to have the player face off against a dragonlike, reaperized Illusive Man but they cut that because it would seem "Too Video-Gamey". Which makes a lot of sense, you know. Which is why Martin Scorcese replaces the climaxes of all his films with pictures script printed on the screen, so that it wouldn't be "too cinematic." Hands up everyone who thinks the last half hour of the game would have been better if the encounter with the Illusive Man had been a boss battle instead of an argument. I think the major reason described in the art book for 3 was that TIM was always a non-physical threat -- his power is in his resources, determination, and intelligence, rather than muscular force -- and turning him into a big monster would have essentially thrown most of that away. Sort of like the rest of the ending did for virtually the entire series.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 02:42
|
|
|
Awesome! Although Archive.org only seems to have caught a handful of final endings, precluding the one that I would have got with my main Renegade Shepherd. Here are a couple endings from it: Council lost, Collector Base Destroyed, 3001+ Readiness, Paragon Shep Council lost, Collector Base Preserved, 3001+ Readiness, Paragon Shep I can't find any of the Renegade Shepherd endings, which sucks because those were pretty interesting. Jerusalem posted:I ended up being a bit disappointed with him in Arrival, but I absolutely love his speech as Shepard races for the Normandy at the end of ME2, I thought that was just fantastic. Strange Matter fucked around with this message at 02:52 on Sep 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 02:48
|
|
|
CaptainCarrot posted:Hands up everyone who thinks the last half hour of the game would have been better if the encounter with the Illusive Man had been a boss battle instead of an argument. I think the major reason described in the art book for 3 was that TIM was always a non-physical threat -- his power is in his resources, determination, and intelligence, rather than muscular force -- and turning him into a big monster would have essentially thrown most of that away. Sort of like the rest of the ending did for virtually the entire series. Honestly, by the end of the game I was so sick of Cerberus being pushed on us like someones little pet project that I'd have been fine with TIM being atomized as soon as he provided the Reapers with what they needed to win. Say, by giving them full control over the relay network through the Citadel, which was apparently just completely forgotten about during the game. Strange Matter posted:
But just Harbinger and the other Reapers having personalities. All that Cerberus stuff, Shepard's friends, the plot of the other two games, and all those call backs are apparently plainly obvious for newbies.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 02:49
|
|
|
Strange Matter posted:Awesome! Although Archive.org only seems to have caught a handful of final endings, precluding the one that I would have got with my main Renegade Shepherd.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 03:06
|
|
|
Burning Mustache posted:words I think you and I might have disagreed on this specific point in the past, but I still love the idea of "blowing up the universe", because it's absolutely the correct way to sell the fact that you have to sacrifice a lot to win this war. See, absolutely anything in an ongoing franchise is expected to, really, have no effect. Villains and enemies rise and fall, the protagonists do different things, but in the end, the franchise itself must reset to the status quo. It's how, say, a comic book franchise that's been running for decades works. It's what people began to expect from Mass Effect. The thing is, once people expect this, then it's almost impossible to register something as a massive universe-changing event, because, what the hell, everyone "knows" that at some point, the Reapers are going to be gone, and everything's going to go back to normal. Except, of course, that the writers decided that it shouldn't go back to normal. This, in itself, was a fantastic idea, because if you don't actually cause any sort of long-term trauma to the in-game universe, then how the hell is it credible that the Reaper War was any sort of threat? You're just back to square one; evil vanquished, nothing sacrificed. Unfortunately, "Actions have consequences", and self-sacrifice are sort of key themes through the entire trilogy, and deciding to ignore them at the end in favor of an unambigiuously happy ending would have been worse than what we got. I'm not denying here that the ending was poorly-executed, because, lord, it was. But that's why I really hate when people say that "they blew up the game universe" was a negative. The Reaper War, as it was sold, was absolutely not something that should have ended in a "Hooray, back to status quo for Our Heroes!", because that's bullshit. Not out of some grim-dark hatred of happy endings, but because it completely subverts the idea of the Reapers as an existential threat to all galactic life.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 03:30
|
|
|
Fag Boy Jim posted:Words That would have flied in the original ending but unfortunately there are a lot more people who like "traditional" stories and wanted to feel a sense in accomplishment by defeating the Reapers while keeping the setting intact and so Bioware made the Extended Cut to not only provide clarification to whatever was going on with the last 10 minutes but to show that the "Status Quo" was coming back; that there was no "Galactic Dark Age" as some people were visualizing and hated when they first finished it. Edit: I'll come out and say that I like traditional stories and that I was expecting to have the option to have a traditional ending, where Shepard defeats the Reapers and not only lives but keeps his honor intact by not sacrificing his friends or entire species. Unfortunately that was not the case and I had to sacrifice all Synthetic life to destroy the Reapers. It's been over a year and while I still hate the fact that I had to sacrifice Edi and the Geth to, in my opinion, win (which is probably what Bioware expects player who make this choice to feel) I still accept the consequence and the ending as is. But to some people they can't accept that. They want to win "the right way" so they download MEHEM or write fanfiction to have that victory. SgtSteel91 fucked around with this message at 04:10 on Sep 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 04:00
|
|
|
My response to that would be to say that the Extended Cut is hot garbage that was cynically made to placate the people upset at the lack of a "happy ending, look, the relays are getting repaired and everything!"
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 04:04
|
|
|
Fag Boy Jim posted:I think you and I might have disagreed on this specific point in the past, but I still love the idea of "blowing up the universe", because it's absolutely the correct way to sell the fact that you have to sacrifice a lot to win this war. See, absolutely anything in an ongoing franchise is expected to, really, have no effect. Villains and enemies rise and fall, the protagonists do different things, but in the end, the franchise itself must reset to the status quo. It's how, say, a comic book franchise that's been running for decades works. It's what people began to expect from Mass Effect. (Is this still the spoiler free thread because I cannot keep track any more, spoiler boxes just in case I guess) Funny you say it like this because some, quite reasonably I'd argue, concluded that the game universe (galaxy) literally did blow up because every mass relay exploded. While I and presumably lots of others assumed, even after playing Arrival, that this was a different kind of Space Magic Explosion, Arrival was the only other time a mass relay was destroyed and it went supernova. Anyways, I'd say some part of it wasn't just being mad at the status quo not being preserved. Speaking personally, Mass Effect wasn't a property like The Last of Us, Bioshock Infinite or, going much smaller, Thomas Was Alone where that one single game in that one game universe told you all you needed to know. I don't expect or even really want a sequel to any of those games. However Mass Effect was a universe that had so much stuff shoved into it that it really needed to be explored as it was; the Citadel alone could be the setting for several Space GTA's. So sure, the Reaper War should have changed things. (I'm not exactly sure what or how, but change yes.) But unless Bioware basically retconned one-half to two-thirds of their own endings, a sequel isn't really possible. And as potentially neat as a universe is with Shepard, God Emperor of the Reapers or glowing green lines on everything I really doubt those are either of the ones they would go with.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 04:09
|
|
|
I think sometimes that having a Prefect Ending in ME2 colored people's expectations in that if they put in enough work no one would die and you can have a flawless victory. "Because I could get everyone out of the Suicide Mission alive in ME2 by doing the loyalty missions and making the right choices I can defeat the Reapers in ME3 without making a huge sacrifice if I collect enough war assets and making the right choices throughout the trilogy."
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 04:15
|
|
|
See, I always thought that the ease of achieving an ideal ending in ME2 was a significant flaw in that game. You see "Suicide Mission" in that game, and it's a complete joke, any semi-competent player can get out of that mission with zero losses; it cheapens the Collectors/Reapers as adversaries, and by cheapening the obstacles Shepherd has to overcome, it, in turn, cheapens Shepherd him/herself. ME2's cast was so huge that I thought there should be some sort of randomization behind who dies, even in ideal circumstances. Perhaps make an ideal ending possible, but make it clear that it was due to freakish good luck. It'd certainly make repeated series playthroughs more interesting, as very few playthroughs would play out the same way, w/r/t surviving cast members. Feels Villeneuve fucked around with this message at 04:22 on Sep 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 04:18
|
|
|
Kibayasu posted:Anyways, I'd say some part of it wasn't just being mad at the status quo not being preserved. Speaking personally, Mass Effect wasn't a property like The Last of Us, Bioshock Infinite or, going much smaller, Thomas Was Alone where that one single game in that one game universe told you all you needed to know. I don't expect or even really want a sequel to any of those games. Well, it's worth noting that Bioware had originally said that ME was going to be a trilogy, and this game was pretty much hyped as an Ending To The Saga Of Shepherd. You're right that this doesn't constitute an explicit ending of the franchise, but I actually took it as such when I sat down to play ME3 for the first time, so perhaps I wasn't so surprised to see actual universe-changing events unfolding.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 04:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 02:32 |
|
|
I wanted Shepard to live throughout the trilogy. I got attached to the guy and I didn't want him to become an immortal robot god or Space Jesus, dying for the Galaxy's sins. I got what I wanted from the Destroy ending and I'm alright with that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2013 04:30
|
|