|
It's probably these:quote:Quarian Liveship | Elkoss Combine Arsenal Supplies | Only available after Priority: Geth Dreadnought
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 07:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 18:49 |
|
|
Lycus posted:It's probably these: Thanks fellas. Will check it out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 07:55
|
|
|
Tirranek posted:While I think it's a cool concept, it was probably a smart move for them to tone it down. People got mad enough at Leng's attention-seeking email as it was, can you imagine how they'd have reacted if Liara had bought it, too? I'm curious about that. Liara has a lot of vocal haters. So quite a few people would have been happy about that scene, instead of upset. So the story wouldn't be getting the impact they were going for. I also feel like the choice they were setting up would lose a lot of its tension because - it's Liara vs. Vermire Survivor. For most players, that's going to be an easy choice that they aren't invested in so while Shepard gets torn up, the player doesn't really care. If you hate Liara, then how is that a dramatic edge of your seat moment? It's an easy choice. And if you're a fan of Liara, it also loses its' impact because obviously you're going to save Liara and not really be choked up about losing the Vermire Survivor to save her. Liara is kindof too...binary of a character when it comes to what players think of her, I think, for choices involving her survival to have the impact the writers would want. People tend to either love her or hate her. Personally, I think better choices are ones that involve characters players generally have about the same investment so there's going to be tension over it. Though that's if you insist on going "one of two people have to die, choose one" route which I don't like anyway. It's for that reason I'm really glad they decided to not re-use ME1's forced choice. ME2's Suicide Mission style is a much better way to handle character death. And well, ME3's character deaths were generally well done, too. But while ME3's were forced, it was still based around your choices and consequences of your actions, not a binary no matter how you played, choose 1 of 2 to survive choice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 09:03
|
|
|
Liara doesn't die at Thessia in the draft, it's just a straight confrontation with the Survivor. Where do you people get this stuff
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 09:19
|
|
|
I haven't read the draft. I'm kindof confused. It's not a "you can either save the Vermire Survivor or Liara" choice? I wonder where I heard that it was, then.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 09:44
|
|
|
Liara's not gonna have possibly died in any draft of the game because she's potentially one of only three remaining party members and the only biotic on the team.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 10:06
|
|
|
I wish she had died.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 14:28
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:I'd have cheered if Liara died. I've been trying to get rid of her for three games! When the extended cut first came out it used Liara for the "Joker we need to go" bit and the plaque. I was really annoyed because I hate Liara but it's based on who you talked to the most, and since Liara's there from the start of the game you talk to her most by default. I got around it by bringing her along on the final mission so she got injured and evacuated. It's as close as I could ever get to killing her.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 15:14
|
|
|
2house2fly posted:When the extended cut first came out it used Liara for the "Joker we need to go" bit and the plaque. I was really annoyed because I hate Liara but it's based on who you talked to the most, and since Liara's there from the start of the game you talk to her most by default. I got around it by bringing her along on the final mission so she got injured and evacuated. It's as close as I could ever get to killing her. See what I mean? With people like this guy, and people like me, there's no way a Liara death choice would ever have the dramatic tension they'd want, lol. To him, instead of choosing to save the other person, the choice is instead to kill Liara, so what the game would present as a dramatic scene, he's happy over instead of upset. And for me? I would just obviously choose to save Liara and so the choice loses the same impact also. But that's why it's best if who lives/dies is based on a series of choices throughout, consequences of your actions overall, and not just a dialogue box "Which character do you want to live and which do you want to die" that you always encounter. Though there's also the reasons Lt. Danger pointed out. She's too critical for gameplay reasons, which is why the series only lets her die once you're at the literal end of gameplay and have no more squad based fighting to do.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
I think a lot of the Liara backlash is about how they obviously crammed her down players' throats. She's one of the most detailed characters (visually), she appears in large sections of all three games, and as the Shadow Broker, she plays a critical role in moving the plot. You have basically zero choice in your decision to interact with her. Pile on to that the terrible romance subplot with her, which they also try to force down your throat every game. It wouldn't be so bad if the romance writing wasn't ripped from high school poetry or cheap grocery store novels, but I'm not even sure it's up to that level. The whole "I'm a hundred year old teenager" thing was also pretty dumb and creepy the way they used it. Liara is basically the embodiment of the lack of actual choices in the series.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 15:44
|
|
|
Most of that is your subjective opinion, but there is a point I agree with you on - even as a Liara fan, I don't like how much interacting with her is mandatory. Like...I wish a lot of her scenes only happened if you were in a romance with her, and interacting with her was cut way down unless you chose to interact with her. The reason I want that, is I feel like a lot of the scenes are cheapened to know they are pretty much exactly the same, and just as mandatory to see, even if the player's Shep had very very little going on between him and Liara and was certainly not romancing her. Things like the VI scene in Shep's cabin were really really cool to me at the time, but then I find out that scene is not unique to a Liara LI and it happens anyway and it's just like...well now it doesn't mean as much. And don't get me started on the Thessia fallout. Again, this is a reason Citadel DLC appealed to me. There's a satisfying amount of Liara content for me but only because I actually romanced her, so someone else's Shep can have entirely different scenes. There are enough scenes specifically to enhance a Liara/Shep romance and not be generalized. E - Complaining about Shadow Broker is silly though because that's actually "business" and related to Shep and his crew getting ahead. There's a lot of LI content but that doesn't have to happen unless you actually romance here, at least I think so. I'm pretty sure you can go through LotSB with a pure business mentality approach to dealing with Liara. What I think should be optional is all the semi romantic and chemistry building scenes between her and Shep. That should only happen if you as a player actually want your Shep to be friendly with her as more than just Commander/Squadmember But then again, there has to be a certain amount of leeway since no matter what you feel as a player, when it comes to literally everyone on the squad, Shepard is some level of friends with them and can hold up conversation and banter, right? It's not actually possible to play a Shepard that actually dislikes any squadmember in any of the 3 games, right? But that doesn't mean Shep/Liara need to be forced to have romantic dealings. Aristobulus fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Aug 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
Aristobulus posted:Most of that is your subjective opinion, but there is a point I agree with you on - even as a Liara fan, I don't like how much interacting with her is mandatory. Like...I wish a lot of her scenes only happened if you were in a romance with her, and interacting with her was cut way down unless you chose to interact with her. Yeah, mostly opinion, but in a game series that built itself up on the idea of giving the player choices, it feels wrong to completely remove the player's agency from the most important character in the series. It becomes a binary decision of either "she's the love of my life" or "she my best friend forever." All of that adds insult to injury when she is obviously the character they spent the most development and writing time on. The people who were turned off by her had no choice but to deal with it for all three games. Imagine a character you didn't care for (James maybe?), then imagine that they show up in every single game and constantly badger you to make sweet spacelove to them. By the time a person does a semi-completionist run of the trilogy, they've probably spent some 300 hours with the characters. That's enough time to watch Lost three and a half times, and I think we all know how strongly the internet feels about those characters. It is no wonder that the people who found her kind of annoying in ME1 found her intolerable by ME3. For anyone who likes or romanced Liara, I doubt they would ever notice. But, if you have ever tried a no-romance or humans-only playthrough she wears out her welcome pretty quickly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
Hopefully all of the controversy about certain polarizing characters in this series (like Liara) will even out once the franchise moves on and all of the weird character fandoms from the first trilogy die off. Bioboards people are sometimes even worse about shipping wars than Harry Potter fandom. When Bioware inevitably canonizes certain things about the original trilogy (which will include Shepard being a boring white dude who romances Liara), people will be initially outraged, then stop caring and move on. 2house2fly posted:I never really got how come it's a bigger deal and a more crushing loss when Reapers invade Thessia than any of the other planets they've invaded throughout the game. You've gotta remember that they're trying to set Kai Leng up as Shepard's Big Archrival throughout all of this, so a big part of Thessia is that it's the first time Shepard has ever suffered a direct and inarguable personal defeat. People react differently to that kind of intimate defeat than they do to watching their people suffer in some titanic clash of civilizations that takes place on an incomprehensibly vast scale. Kai Leng is dumb, so it's not surprising that players don't really care, but the idea makes some kind of sense on paper. Also I think Thessia is maybe supposed to be the Alderaan of this setting, insofar as it's this iconic, galaxy-wide cultural touchstone for peace and enlightenment whose loss causes disproportionate trauma even to people who have never been there. Shepard has just been to Palaven and seen that the turians, fanatical militarists that they are, are ~holding out. She probably gets to feel some kind of hope that Earth might be holding out as well. She's been to Tuchanka and gotten some major stuff accomplished. Then Thessia happens. She goes from helping these fortress-planets successfully defy the invaders to watching helplessly as a peaceful utopia is utterly crushed. It's traumatic in and of itself and probably pokes a hole in whatever hope-balloon she had managed to fill up with regards to Earth, just by reminding her of how scary and implacable the Reapers are. Can't come out of that situation with any bravado. PupsOfWar fucked around with this message at 17:42 on Aug 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
2house2fly posted:I never really got how come it's a bigger deal and a more crushing loss when Reapers invade Thessia than any of the other planets they've invaded throughout the game. Thessia is a "big deal" because it begins the downward slide of plot devices and hocus pocus the main writer wanted which leads up to the end of the game. Also it is the planet of sexy blue space elf waifus so I'm sure the Bioware forums were devastated. Now Tuchanka, that planet is where the party is at.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
The thing I like about the Thessia mission is how you fight and fight and fight till you get to the temple and then it is all peaceful. No devastation and the reapers are just like, meh..we'll go somewhere else. This is only slightly better than getting to that base camp and being like, "turrets? I LOOOOVE turrets!!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
Yea that wasn't the two I was thinking It's these:  edit: i tried checking out the wiki but it only lists six ships and frankly i think a couple are wrong VVV Thanhks. I thought it looked me2'ish. I'll have to go back and get that dlc I suppose. GET MY BELT SON fucked around with this message at 02:11 on Aug 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
The top left one isn't available in an ME3 store, it's from Lair of the Shadow Broker in ME2. If you're on an import with LotSB, then it's lying around somewhere in the Normandy. Lycus fucked around with this message at 02:12 on Aug 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 02:09
|
|
|
The fighter is available after the Sur'Kesh misions in a shop on the Citadel.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 14:59
|
|
|
Is any of the DLC worth picking up asides from the multiplayer stuff?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 00:12
|
|
|
I think it's all good stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
ThCawdor posted:Is any of the DLC worth picking up asides from the multiplayer stuff? Depends on how much you like the game and the series overall. Assuming that you like both, then yes. And you should definitely get the Extended Cut That said, Citadel > Leviathan > From Ashes > Omega If you DON'T like the series however then Citadel is nothing more than 4 GB of the game jerking itself off.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 00:17
|
|
|
From a gameplay/fun perspective, I would personally would put Leviathan last for ME3, I think what it mostly has going for it is that sets up the ending.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
ThCawdor posted:Is any of the DLC worth picking up asides from the multiplayer stuff? All of the story ones, sure. Citadel is fantastic, Leviathan has some neat stuff in it and is pretty crucial to the story, it makes sense to have From Ashes - even though he's not that interesting as a character. They tried to subvert your expectations but it was done poorly. Omega's kinda unnecessary. Play Citadel after you beat the game+other dlc proper. It's the ending to the game that's better than the ending to the game. Plom Bar posted:Depends on how much you like the game and the series overall. Assuming that you like both, then yes. And you should definitely get the Extended Cut Drifter fucked around with this message at 00:33 on Aug 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 00:29
|
|
|
I never assume anything with regards to goons, liking things, and spending money.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 00:34
|
|
|
Citadel is amazing and you should get it. As said, it's the ending of the game that's better than the ending of the game. If you just pretend it's the true ending to the game and roll credits when it's over, you have a perfect experience. It's basically a summary of everything that made ME great in the first place. Leviathan is worth it, From Ashes is the only other one other than Citadel I'd say is must get though because Javik is just so necessary to the game. I wouldn't really say any DLC is something you regret, but only From Ashes and Citadel do I think you need to play.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 00:45
|
|
|
Plom Bar posted:I never assume anything with regards to goons, liking things, and spending money. You know, I suppose a great many of us are very capable of and oddly willing towards hate-participating in things. Point to you, sir.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
Aristobulus posted:See what I mean? With people like this guy, and people like me, there's no way a Liara death choice would ever have the dramatic tension they'd want, lol. It very easily could, but they will never do it. Liara, Tali, Garrus: you can only save one. Huzzah you have your tension. Or you can add other dire consequences pretty easily, eg you can save Liara but it dooms the Quarians to extinction(although that's probably a bad example because the Quarian are basically space Nazis.) It's easy to make it a dramatic difficult decisions though when you add actual consequences and benefits to each choice. It's just that Bioware is not comfortable with that kind of a game creation. Which sorry to beat an old dead horse is why they should have realized the ending didn't work. Their entire game was set up so that anyone marginally paying attention could always chose the optimal answer to everything, having Shepard just win all the time with zero actual consequences made it jarring when suddenly at the end you just straight up die for all intents and purposes leaving your chosen romance character emotionally shattered. If they had like actually forced at least 75% of your team to die in the suicide mission no matter what. And Tali gets PTSD, Garrus develops a serious drinking problem and Liara has survivors remorse because she wasn't there to help. Then they could totally do the ending they did for ME3 and it would fit tonally with the rest of the series. Just well... not thematically which is also a problem of the 'one right answer' part of Bioware's choice system.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 02:13
|
|
|
COOKIEMONSTER posted:If they had like actually forced at least 75% of your team to die in the suicide mission no matter what. And Tali gets PTSD, Garrus develops a serious drinking problem and Liara has survivors remorse because she wasn't there to help. Then they could totally do the ending they did for ME3 and it would fit tonally with the rest of the series. Just well... not thematically which is also a problem of the 'one right answer' part of Bioware's choice system. Who cares if anyone dies in the suicide mission or not? Those three characters could easily have the those same traits anyway while everyone lived.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
Drifter posted:Who cares if anyone dies in the suicide mission or not? Those three characters could easily have the those same traits anyway while everyone lived.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
Trapezium Dave posted:or in Dragon Age: Origins choosing to sacrifice Isolde vs Connor vs neither. Having to choose between two difficult choices is nullified when you know there's a superior third where you don't have lose anything. This is only true if you're meta gaming. Yeah, the fact that there's a 'best solution' is obvious when you're playing the game, but that doesn't mean you have to choose it over one of the compromise solutions (or in the Isolde/Connor choice, the 'worst' solution).
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
It is meta gaming and you don't have to play it that way, but Bioware tends to shove the meta gaming aspects in your face by having the choice points be really obvious. When the method of making decision is through a dialog choice of "A) I choose X over Y", "B) I choose Y over X" or, "C) gently caress it, I'm taking both" it's hard to ignore the presence of option C. It ties into Bioware's tendency to have binary choices between compassionate & principled versus ruthlessly pragmatic which tend to end up with the either the same result or the "dark side" option tends out to be strictly worse, meaning the ruthlessly pragmatic option tends to come across as going out of your way to be a dick just because.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
Obviously this could go for any of the first game's main choices, but I loved having to choose between Kaidan and Ashley (insert "har har I was waiting to kill off [blank] the whole time!" here) and really wish it had made a significant impact. Yes yes, programming difficulties and all that but it would have been great, especially if it made for different mechanics (maybe a timed section for Kaidan's possibility and a horde section for Ashley's or something). Then saving Kaidan makes it easier to side with the Geth and saving Ashley makes it easier to side with the Quarians. I don't know but simple stuff like that would make the decisions have much more impact.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 05:13
|
|
|
At the very least, I'll give Bioware credit for locking the "best" option if you didn't make certain choices beforehand. I absolutely do not have a problem with there being a best choice, I just have a problem if the "I'll take no consequences" choice isn't something you actually have to try to get. If it's a reward for making correct choices before, that's fine. And yes, the things CookieMonster says about the ending are right, the reason it sucks is largely because it's out of place given how successful Shep can be beforehand and how a strong theme of the games can be Shep constantly succeeding against all odds. The miserable sacrifical sad Shep is only one of many possible Shep themes yet it's the only theme the ending went with, so... But that's something I've talked about before and not going into a ton of detail about now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 05:16
|
|
|
Not saying the ending didn't kind of screw itself, but the point that you demonstrate evidence to the contrary never seemed that strong to me. Yes, you've got an example to the contrary with the Quarians and the Geth (potentially), but that's a few weeks of contrary data compared to millions and millions of years of the same alleged result. It's barely a blip as far as the machine is concerned.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 05:31
|
|
|
The point is more that Shepard is the person who potentially convinced both main non-Reaper villains to shoot themselves in the head after realizing that they were in the wrong, and told the Reapers in no uncertain terms that they were going to get their poo poo kicked in. Then when she confronts the real main villain, she's told "there can never be peace between robots and people. Now that this has been established, you can either kill all robots and yourself, become the new space AI overlord of the universe, or jump into this pillar of pure Bioware choice and fix everything forever. Since I'm a malfunctioning AI, everything I say can be taken at face value," and more or less just accepts it. I don't recall even getting the option of bringing up the Geth/Quarian peace. It doesn't matter that it would've been impossible to convince the Starchild of anything. It matters that Shepard barely even tried.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 10:57
|
|
|
How many people can you drive to suicide in this game? I think it's a lot. Spoilers just in case: People I can think of off-hand: 1. Saren 2. Illusive Man 3. That girl in ME1 in the shipyard I think? 4. Tali 5. Kelly 6. I'm going to count Samara since you can still choose to kill her daughter after so Shepard was just being an rear end At the very least a lot of people commit suicide around Shepard.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 11:12
|
|
|
Toxic Fart Syndrome posted:I think a lot of the Liara backlash is about how they obviously crammed her down players' throats. She's one of the most detailed characters (visually), she appears in large sections of all three games, and as the Shadow Broker, she plays a critical role in moving the plot. No she doesn't. The only contributions Liara makes to drive the actual plot of ME3 are as a) an archaeologist or b) Shepard's old crew. Liara becoming the Shadow Broker is a narrative dead-end and irrelevant to ME3 aside from a few background "I rerouted some mercenaries, Shepard." quips while wandering the ship. +5 warscore (maybe). Your assistant does all the information bartering and spy work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 11:20
|
|
|
Lemming posted:How many people can you drive to suicide in this game? I think it's a lot. Feros has at least one suicide.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 11:21
|
|
|
Lemming posted:How many people can you drive to suicide in this game? I think it's a lot. 4a. Admiral Raan, if Tali's already dead
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 11:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 18:49 |
|
|
sassassin posted:. This is true and another critical flaw of ME3, lol. They had a perfect opportunity to make Liara more useful and it would've made sense too since she was the Shadow Broker and had experience as an information broker, but they constantly passed over having her do anything because they wanted to break in that new character. Geez.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 14:42
|
|