|
|
|
Thing is, not everyone can access multiplayer.
I did the multiplayer maps, classified as the N7 missions in single player, but if what I'm understanding is correct, you're saying the Galaxy at War thing is a requirement to get the real ending, if this Indoctrination and the 'real ending' DLC is to be believed.
Those Halcyon Days...
What the... people answered my questions ?
I disagree with half those answers, but I'm done bashing ME3 :P
I don't have a problem with MP, but the issue is that you need to play it in order to get the hint that Shepard lives in the end on your first run. Other than that, it's all cool.
nyan nyan nyan nyan nyan nyan nyan nyan nyan nyan nyan nyan nyan nyan
I thought that Indoctrination was a process where the more indroctrnated a person was, the less free will and more burnt out their mind was. If there was very little forcing going on, they had more free will (to an extent) and were more like themselves, but it wasn't nearly as strong. Saren more or less confirms this in his own way near the end of ME1 when confronting him, how he's praising Sovereign left and right and it takes multiple Charm/Intimidate checks for him to realize that he is indoctrinated, and how he has to quickly force the gun to his head to pull the trigger.
#354
Then they probably shouldn't be downloading a game via an online-connected digital service that requires an Internet connection to authenticate.Originally Posted by Stingra
Unless there are some issues with MP connectivity that I am unaware of, in which case I apologise. But the excuse of "I don't have an Internet connection" doesn't really wash these days, especially considering that you need to download significant amounts of data to actually play the game (as far as I am aware).
Furthermore, you miss out on one possible ending. Which, if you've already played the game, you know how it goes down. It does not affect your enjoyment of the rest of the game at all, and doesn't change peoples' opinions on the ending of the game itself either (which I gather are unified in their negativity).
I am an Iron Warrior! Iron Within, Iron Without!
So yeah, like one of the most recent comments said, all of what Sovereign said turned out to be bullshit because of a Deus Ex Machina pulled from a volus' ass.
See, nowhere in that clip does Sovereign even hint at reaper babies, dark energy build up, or synthetics being evil because you know why? The awesome writers who likely had Sovereign written didn't plan on such stupid reasons. The reasons given for the Reapers doing what they did was simple: "You exist because we allow it. And you will end because we demand it." Nothing benevolent at all there.
I don't have an Xbox Gold account. So that's why this is an issue for me. I tried multiplayer with the pass, didn't like it, and went on playing the campaign. I didn't realise multiplayer was required to 'complete' the game back then.
Yes the endings are shit and don't give any kind of closure. Yes 100% completion barely changes anything. But I'd still like my Shepard to survive. Now there is one way, and one way only in which you can get Shepard to survive. You have to pick paragon or renegade at certain points. Complete paragons and complete renegades won't survive. If you don't play in a very specific way, make sure you've bought all the current and previous DLC (which I don't have) and have played those in a very specific way, you won't be able to survive the assault on Earth. It removes all the roleplaying from a roleplaying game.
You should be able to get over 8.000 war assets in single player according to Bioware, and that's simply not true. I've finished every quest in the game, picked up every item, scanned every planet and system and did everything I could to get the most amount of troops that I could, and I'm still about 1100 war assets short of the required amount to survive. The closest I have yet seen is about 7500 and that was with all the DLC and a perfect playthrough with all the sidequests. That's why I think it is unreasonable.
And this is just a small difference in the ending. What is going to happen with Dragon Age 3? Will I need a specific playthrough of Dragon Age 1 and 2 plus all the DLC and companions in order to get the best ending in that game?
#357
@Nalkor: Their goal isn't benevolent, it's self-preservation at all costs. After the "dark energy crisis" would have been solved there is no reason for them not to keep doing what they were doing so far.
@Kronoch: Disregarding the MP thing which I agree on I was able to get the "best" ending by simply roleplaying my own Shepard so I'm going to have to disagree with you about it being "specific".
Egregious Professor Of Cruel And Unusual Geography
@Rincewind - I still think the Reapers got derailed as villains when ME2 hit and the writers from ME1 were no longer present. Plus, making things up as you go along can create issues for the lore and plot.
@Rincewind - So you got over 4000 EMS at Galactic Readiness 50%? Because if you did, you'd be the first.
#360
@Nalkor: IMHO ME2 provided a reasonable explanation for harvesting species instead of simply annihilating them. The main difference between life and not life simply reproduction. As far as motives go I found it to be excellent as it simply drills down to the very basics.
In my own head I think what the Reapers are doing is because they can no longer evolve. The Leviathan of Dis proved that they have remained essentially unchanged for the last billion years so they need the organic races to do the evolving for them, harvesting their culture, intelligence and innovation.
@Kronoch: I said "disregarding the MP thing which I agree on" because I was referencing to your claim that your roleplaying doesn't influence the ending.
Playing through the mission in Sanctuary, the logs scattered about describe their research into indoctrination and husk-transformation. Apparently adrenaline speeds up the process significantly and after the Thessia mission Joker points out that EDIs readings indicate Shepard is under more stress than he was during the Skyllian Blitz (war hero background). It could be that Shepard's chronic adrenaline level by the end of ME3 has primed him for rapid indoctrination.The theory of indoctrination therefore implies that Harbinger managed to indoctrinate Shepard in record time (we're speaking of a few hours/days at worst) while he wasn't even conscious. From what I know of indoctrination, this doesn't really feel like it fits.
RE: The issue in general, and Gorb's arguement
So the game should effectively punish the player for not wanting to play multiplayer? Heaven forbid some of the playerbase not want to play multiplayer, and after paying out money for a license to play the game too. I get that Bioware want to see people play and enjoy the work they put in to multiplayer, but forcing people (who might plausibly not enjoy multiplayer) to play multiplayer for the sakes of the singleplayer portion of the game is frankly annoying in my opinion. I have no problems with Bioware offering players the choice of boosting their War Assets score by playing multiplayer, but forcing them to play multiplayer to get their desired ending in singleplayer no matter how well they do in singleplayer? I draw the line there with the way it is currently implemented.
What's so wrong with letting people who buy your game to play the game how they want, within legal and logical reason. A lot of people I know who bought Battlefield 3 never even touched the singleplayer campaign despite all the work that went in to it, should everyone now be forced to play the singleplayer campaign if they want to get the best weapon unlocks or something of equal status? Well I disagree with this and a few other things to do with ME3 so I've voted with my wallet and not bought the game, nor can EA use any of that "piracy is costing us sales" spiel on me either because I'm better then to allow them that excuse. I doubt EA will really feel the effect of my decision, but oh well.
Now I'll let you folk get back to discussing the meat of the game.
One percent of the Blood Gods consume 99 percent of the blood and skulls. #OccupyTheSkullThrone
"Repent! For Tomorrow You Shall Die!"
STEAM & GFWL: Malkael (Brother Malkael)
It's been stated by Bioware quite a few times that multiplayer isn't necessary to get the best ending. It just makes it easier.
#364
As with a great deal of things stated by Bioware that is simply not true. You cannot get 8000 strength in the game without playing multiplayer.
Yea I'm hitting 7500 right now, have not touched Geth missions yet. This is with a 100% readiness. That seems nuts on how someone could get 8000 or 16000 worth of points is just wow. The only way it would be possible is IF they allow you to keep your old numbers when playing a Game+.
What the freakin hell. New bug it seems popped up in my game. Started playing, got Tali, noticed her lvl is 1. What? Odd I thought, then while fighting I noticed MY level was 1 as well. Yet the promethien still had his normal lvl. It almost looks like Tali killed my lvl? Lost 45 mins of gaming, going to try to see if it happens again later tonight.
It also was odd when Normandy had 0 gas, my credits gone and my gels gone. I don't seem to be alone on this. It seems to happen from quick saves. Once it happens if you don't see it and run a save before it your now stuck lvl 1 again. Nice.
I'm just aboutYea I'm hitting 7500 right now, have not touched Geth missions yet. This is with a 100% readiness. That seems nuts on how someone could get 8000 or 16000 worth of points is just wow. The only way it would be possible is IF they allow you to keep your old numbers when playing a Game+.and I've got 7000 with an rating of 50%, that gives me 3500 EMF when from what I understand the best endings require 4000+ and 5000+. I've imported 1 & 2, scanned every planet, done every side mission bar 1 that expired. Unless I get 3000 war assets between now and the end I'm not going to get the best ending via singleplayer alone.Spoiler
to attack The Illusive Man's base
It's not a question of being able to play multi player, I just don't like it, and it tying into the singleplayer in such a way is highly annoying.
#367
To be fair even if you just lose 5 matches you will still get enough multiplier to get over 4K but this should not be fucking required.
"Yea I'm hitting 7500 right now, have not touched Geth missions yet. This is with a 100% readiness. That seems nuts on how someone could get 8000 or 16000 worth of points is just wow. The only way it would be possible is IF they allow you to keep your old numbers when playing a Game+. "
i have 490 quarian war assets and 815 geth war assets. save both and you'll have almost 9000 assets, more than enough to get the "best"* ending if you make the right choices and choose destroy (although you need 10k total assets to get it regardless of choices)
*"""""""""""""""best"""""""""""""""
I'm short and misanthropic. I'll bite your nipples off.
You people should have used much more spoiler tags, just did the geth mission and read too much here ;-) but all the ranting about the end making me courious so I can´t stay away from the the thread ;-)
As I don´t want to play MP, how many points do you need for the best Ending? Are there other requirements to get the best ending?
I will use Google before I ask dumb questions!
#370
It is possible, it's just very difficult, I've seen reports of people having upwards of 4100 EMS at GR 50%. You can also get the 'Shepard Lives' ending with fewer than 4000 EMS, so it's not such a big deal. You can also not get it with more than 4000 EMS. What the actual requirements are for that ending, however, are unknown.
Well then, I stand corrected. So the ending requirements posted by IGN were wrong?
I was wondering something. Aren't spectres independent from their respective races/militaries? The other Spectres you meet don't seem to be part of any organisations, unless I'm forgetting some. Shepard seems to do an awful lot of work for admiral Hackett. My personal favorite is with Arrival, when Hackett says you should consider this one "a personal favor". Completely ignoring the fifty personal favors you already did for him. But then you get arrested by the alliance military instead of the council. And Saren was also investigated by the council but not the Turian army...
But then in Mass Effect 2 you're neither a Commander nor a Spectre (depending on the ending of ME1). But in ME3 you're again Commander and Spectre. So perhaps it is just an additional title. But you can do pretty much whatever you want.
Regardless, I kind of like Hackett. He's got Presence.
#372
You aren't arrested by the Alliance military. Shepard turns himself in, or at least he did in my playthrough.
But yeah, apparently most Spectres aren't part of any military organization or anything, but Shepard is still in the Alliance military.
@langy, the requirements ARE known:
Spoiler
4k and save anderson, choosing destroy, or 5k and chosing destroy, regardless of whether anderson dies
#374
Those requirements are incorrect, Fish. You can get that ending even without the 4k, or you can miss it even with the 5k.
I hereby propose that Shepard has been brain damaged back on Virmire and everything else is a hallucination while he's in coma at the hospital on the Citadel.
That's quite possible seeing how often Shepard caught sniper bullets and rockets with his face in that level.
Well, finally finished. It's just like they ran out of time to make an ending and cobbled something together at the last minute, totally unacceptable for the end of a trilogy like Mass Effect. Whoever thought a shitty little sequence followed by a couple of low quality movies that said nothing was on a par with the quality of the rest of the game and series needs a serious bollocking.
#378
The only problem with that idea, Jonny, is it takes a good bit of time and money to create those ending CGIs. It would have been cheaper to do a more proper, less stupid ending without all the multicolored CGI lights. It's more likely that either the writers actually thought that was a proper ending to the series, or they intended it to be an 'indoctrination'-type ending and are eventually going to release a 'new endings' DLC.
Let's hope that DLC actually comes and is free, this time... Because while I can somewhat accept having an important (as far as universe goes) character be reserved as DLC since he has no impact on the overarching story, I'd have a very hard time to digest the fact that the proper ending is being locked away behind a pay wall.
"Those requirements are incorrect, Fish. You can get that ending even without the 4k, or you can miss it even with the 5k."
interesting. source?
Considering half the endings are just reworking light colours it can't have taken them that long, it must amount to no more than about 1:20 of original CGI in the end right?
For those posing the indoctination ending, please can you explain the integration of synthetics and organics for me, considering you need a lot of war assets to even get that ending, how does it factor into your interpretation of the ending?
(Formerly "The Herald")
"The bible is like an EULA. People just scroll past everything and click "I agree" without reading it."
-Moe
#382
#383
I get the feeling that the people that developed the single player and the ending were two entirely separate teams as well.the people that developed the MP was a seperate team.
I HAS WRITTEN A BOOK!
As soon as the cover artist, proof reader and everything else I rely on other people to do is done, I'll let you know.
#384
Err, what?See, nowhere in that clip does Sovereign even hint at reaper babies, dark energy build up, or synthetics being evil...
Reaper Babies: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...FIjTGt0#t=146s
2:25 - 2:49 "They're harvesting us..."
I wonder why they would harvest us?
Synthetics being evil: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...IFIjTGt0#t=68s
1:08 - 1:34 "We are the end of everything..."
Gee, that's nice
Luckily you're right about one of the points. If the ending was due to some build up of dark-energy I would have been legit pissed since that's scientifically 'tarded.
Chaos, Cycle: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...FIjTGt0#t=101s
1:42 - 2:03 "Evolve.. Advance.. and at the apex of the glory are extinguished..."
Hmm, think I've heard this before...
A certain Prothean VI maybe and the child? I wonder, perhaps the game made more sense than you're giving it credit for. The current ending just isn't very happy. My theory is everyone is grieving (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model) for their loss.
To this day, I refuse to believe that the harvesting mentioned by Sovereign was for making Reaper babies unless directed to a source where an ME1 writer confirmed such.
#386
I'm gonna leave this here and see how you guys react to it. (or just read TL;DRs)
Ending
The game’s final scenes are certainly problematic. There are some things that don’t make a ton of sense—can someone explain the actions of the Normandy in those final moments?—but many of the complaints about the game’s ending ring false, and show more about video game fans than they do Bioware.
Let’s look at a few of the common complaints. The first thing that some people have said is that the ending is a giant deus ex machina, and that’s certainly a valid criticism. The final scenes progress a certain way no matter what you’ve done or what you’ve chosen in the final moments. The game becomes a Choose Your Own Adventure book at that point, or at least it does a poorer job of hiding the linear nature of your choices.
My counter-argument is that the deus ex machina was dropped into the story at the beginning of the game. Earth is attacked by Reapers, Shepard is forced to accept a strategic retreat, and just like that there is news of a super-weapon that may hold hope for the entire galaxy? The writers’ hands are obviously at work early in the game, and the setup is monstrously obvious: We must race against time to create this amazing piece of alien technology that can save us all! It’s like a higher stakes version of the novel Contact. There was certainly a large and obvious plot point dropped into the game, but it happened right off the bat.
Also, who was that kid that Shepard spoke to at the end of the game? We saw him die in the early section of the game, and the dream sequences let us know that he has been haunting Shepard for some time. The ghostly manifestation of the child at the end of the game is the Reaper technology finding a form that’s important to Shepard, and it’s also oddly subversive. How do you expect someone to make a decision that impacts the galaxy when you are speaking through the mouth of a child who reminds that person of their own failings in dealing with the crisis at hand? In some ways the child represents Shepard’s worst fears, and all the people he couldn’t save. It makes sense.
Lastly, the choices presented to Shepard at the story’s end have been criticized as being magical, but the game has had no problem presenting Prothean technology as being so advanced that it might as well be supernatural. The Citadel and the Relays are both Reaper technology that was constructed before the Protheans, and are both examples of powerful technology that is barely understood in the game’s universe. The abilities of the super-weapon at the end of the game continue the internal logic of Prothean and Reaper supremacy.
Hell, even Arthur C. Clarke noted that “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” The Protheans are clearly sufficiently advanced. Even if they weren’t, it’s not like Biotics are ever covered with anything except a hand wave. You have to get those casters in the game somehow, right?
But my choices meant nothing!
My choices were meant to mean something in the game, but they don’t! It’s all arbitrary! This is the argument that makes the least amount of sense; the forty or so hours before the ending scenes are filled with meaningful moments that deal with your choices. Characters live, or they die. You have to make tricky decisions when dealing with the many races and characters in the game, and past choices will either look wise in retrospect or come back to haunt you. Mass Effect 3 often left me stumped, sitting in front of the television with the controller in my hand, weighing my options.
These choices aren’t arbitrary. I’ve spoken with many people who have played Mass Effect 3, and their experiences have but the slightest resemblance to my own. The difference is the choices we made, and how the game treats those choices. The fact that players ignore an entire game that’s all but made up of consequences only to complain that a five minute movie didn’t pat them on the back for what they’d done is insane. The meaningful nature of your personal game is thrown out because you didn’t get the ending you wanted? Or because the game doesn’t give you a rehash of everything you’ve done in the final cut scenes?
Also, the final decisions you make in the game determine the fate of damn near every living thing in the galaxy. Of course your decisions matter, the result of those decision is simply not made explicit. What the game doesn’t do is rub your face in your choices. There is much left to the imagination, and in my opinion the player is given more than enough closure for a satisfying conclusion.
Why is everything so sad?
This is the last complaint, and it’s the one that seems to make players the most defensive. No matter what you do, no matter what you choose, no matter what happens in the game, the ending has a certain amount of pathos and despair. There is no “happy ending.”
Different players deal with this in different ways. Some are begging Bioware for DLC to offer new endings, “better” endings. They want a happy Shepard on the bridge of the Normandy, drinking a beer with Joker and talking about the good ol’ days. That’s an ending you can’t get at the moment, or at least we don’t believe so. Some people are asking Bioware to “fix” the ending so that it’s better, as if they’ve been cheated by a game that doesn’t offer the pay off they had hoped for since the series began. They put in the time and effort to “win” the game, and they want some happiness, dammit.
“Mass Effect 3 emotionally wrecked me. It’s Bioware’s game so it’s their choice. And obviously the game was effective to get that response, but I still feel like shit,” one fan told me. “I don’t play games to feel like this after [they’re over]. How do I trust Bioware to not wreck me again if I decide to join them on their next epic?”
Here’s the rub: You don’t know that they won’t wreck you again. This is one of the amazing things about dramatic works. You begin to like your characters, and maybe even love them, and there is nothing keeping the people who have control of those characters from killing them off or making you feel complex emotions. Good drama is much like life; you don’t have much control over the fate of people you care about. They come and go. Gamers are used to the idea that if they do everything right, they are owed a happy ending and they get to keep the image of their happy avatar forever and ever. Bioware was going for something a little braver, and much heavier. This move was telegraphed multiple times throughout the game, and it wasn’t hard to catch. There was never a guarantee that Shepard would survive, and it was all but promised the journey would come at a massive mental and physical cost. The ending kept the tone and thematic arc of the series.
Mass Effect was always built around the idea of choice, but that choice was only given around certain events that will always happen. No matter how you play the first game, the antagonist will always be the same. Shepard will always die at the beginning of the second game. Mass Effect 3 will always end with Shepard on the Citadel, making his final decisions. You always had room to explore the world and try to save or punish the characters around you, but Bioware kept a tight hold of the reins. This doesn’t make the ending worthless or your choices arbitrary, it simply means that there was a specific story to tell, and it was your job to play a role in that story. How you acted was up to you, but Bioware always controlled the beginning, middle, and end of your journey.
This is a game you can’t win, not in the way people are used to. Seen in totality, the story is now a tragedy, not an adventure. The only thing you can do is save who, and what, you can. For me, that’s a much more satisfying and emotional story arc than ending the game with Shepard beating the odds once and for all. The lesson of Mass Effect is much more brutal, and honest. Heroes die.
Even if you disagree with everything I’ve just said…
It’s possible you still think I’m full of shit, and I can accept that. Your Shepard isn’t my Shepard, and we may have very different ideas about the best way to present a story to the player. What makes this conversation so thrilling is that there is finally a science fiction setting in video games that features believable characters. We are almost forced to be passionate about what happens to them. We’re arguing about this because we care about the game, and the people and places in it. That’s an amazing accomplishment.
Even if game’s ending wrecked you emotionally, you became enraged, or you are now boycotting Bioware, at least the writers got under your skin, into your head, and made you take some kind of action. The backlash against a game’s ending may be the biggest compliment anyone has ever paid a developer.
E=mc^(OMG)/wtf
Well the ME1 writer was on the ME2 team so they either had harvesting as a reproduction motive in ME1 or they created it as an explanation during ME2's development. I'm betting in ME1 they had little more than a vague idea about where the series was going.
EDIT:
Ok I agree with alot of what you've said there Afoxi, its worth pointing out hat the Cruitable was probably Reaper technology at the beginning of the cycles. It s power is also a giant plothole because if the Repaers had that much power, why didn't they create such a machine that wiped out all organic life above a select tech level every 50k years? with the reapers as a back-up system. I agree with your opinion that a lot of people have complaints about areas of the game that are basically their opinions, its not a flaw with anything the devs did with ME3.
I disagree with the ending choices however, at the end of every Bioware game previously you had at least some way to influence the ending for both your character and some or all of his companions. For example in ME2 you could die and lose everyone or survive and save everyone, the ending has a ton of possibilities. ME3 had one, death and the middle had nearly no effect on that end. Worse the factors that effect the end make no sense in the grand scheme of things, how exactly does having more assets keep Shepard alive during an exploding citadel or make the catalyst figure out a new path?
The sadness of the ending wasn't a problem, the lack of closure and sense were the issues. For something that ends the series you need an actual ending like DA:O, the other two mass effect games didn't need much closure because they were the beginning and middle of the adventure. What's bad is that they actually had more closure than ME3.
Its true we see the results of our decisions ingame when we make them, but you forget that we dont see the results of the biggest choice made in the game, what we do with the reapers. Thats why there is no closure.
Your right if when you consider the fans that got upset by how the game ended due to the sadness, you massively wrong when you consider that a shit ton of fans are pissed because of the glaring plots holes left at the ending.game’s ending may be the biggest compliment anyone has ever paid a developer.
Getting under someone's skin due to crap story telling is not an achievement its a badge of shame.
Last edited by Ewokz; 13th Mar 12 at 4:17 PM.
ZZzzzZZ the indoctrination theories are correct, just read the MassEffect Tweets and from the Producers and they're giving away it all away.
Just hold yer beards and sit tight.
Mordin's death hit me emotionally. Thinking I'd lose Grunt to turned Rachni did too. Losing Legion just as he reached full sentience was painful.
Those are the things that Bioware did right. Those are meaningful, those feel both good and hard. Those are things I wish we had more of.
What did not however touch me emotionally was the ending. The ending left me feeling empty. That's not an emotion, it's a lack thereof.
@Caeltos
So not only does ME:3 have ridiculously overpriced day 1 DLC, force you to use Origin, and have a sprint animation made by Bethesda, you also are going to have to buy another DLC to get the real ending? Am I getting this right? Because I feel like I've dodged a bullet by not buying this game.
Well it left me anger at bad story telling so it did leave me with something.
Maybe its just me but bioware saying the indoctrination theory is correct smacks of a bad door escape plan that they are getting behind to carry themselves out of the shit storm. Worse it means that you basically need to download a DLC to complete the damn game.
EDIT: I need to add that while I will be miffed at this ending being true, I'd also be so happy to have a none plot-holey ending in DLC formPlus having just read a two page post about the indoc ending it does make a lot of sense.
EDIT2: found an interesting point in a youtube comment of all places:
Spoiler
Ok, what i dont get is: When you go back to Earth, you know Citadel is the Catalyst. But then there is this AI that tells you Reapers are its final solution and that it is part of the Citadel, right? If this AI was actually part of the Citadel, why would it need Keepers to send signal to open Citadel? mass relay in ME1 and wouldnt do it itself? Am I missing something?
EDIT3: thinking about the relay shutdown in previous cycles and the omega4 relay in ME2 makes me think that that the relays were never shutdown in the previous cycles. It makes more sense to think that the reapers would have set the relays into an omega type mode where you would need a reaper IMF to survive travel though the relays, considering that the Normandy had such a device it seems likely that the reapers didn't bother with this plan becuase this cycle already had a method for avoiding it.
Last edited by Ewokz; 13th Mar 12 at 5:45 PM.
Considering anything that happens after the sprint is under "indoctrination theory", you can just cop out by saying "but it didn't actually happen!"
This is specifically why I dislike that kind of ending. If you don't know what to do or say, just put something bad with vague hints that something's going on and then say it was a dream/hallucinations/mind control.
It'll probably be free. That would certainly explain why they cut the Prothean DLC from the actual game and made him an priced content, so they could get some extra money from the game, and maybe even help fund the extra-bit of ending. It's open for interpretation. I don't think they would want to shaft their playerbase like this. I just follow their tweets and I've got faith in them. It sort of makes sense, but that's because I've spent alot of time figuring alot of this stuff out, or at least attemt. The sprint animation is fine if you ask me, the only part where it's actually abit humorus is only in the beginning with Anderson. Once you've got all your armor and whatnot, it makes sense to a certain degree, and the animation/gameplay is really fluid and awesome. It's a vaste improvement on all fronts in terms of customization, gameplay feel and etc. It's really all for the better, but alas- it's just my opinion.So not only does ME:3 have ridiculously overpriced day 1 DLC, force you to use Origin, and have a sprint animation made by Bethesda, you also are going to have to buy another DLC to get the real ending? Am I getting this right? Because I feel like I've dodged a bullet by not buying this game.
One DLC that's already being planned is "Take Back Omega", but I'm not really that bothered with it, I never liked Omega- nor did I care much for Aria. Unless there's more to it, and the content gets good reviews, I'll probably pick it up. But as it stands right now, I'm more inclined to getting some closure in the game, and some more logical explaination and all.
Thanks to tvtropes on Mass Effect 3, I also found out about what could easily be the funniest dialogue in all of the Mass Effect series:
I think that the creative writing juices were dried up after that little in-game radio drama was made.
Just finished the game. Couldn't believe the ending at all. I went online and immediately found everyone talking about this indoctrination theory. I'm just holding onto this as cannon, because I really can't stand this ending.
Man, this thread moves fast... Anyway, i saw someone mention the old husks from Mass Effect 2 earlier, and yeah, i miss them too, the Praetorian was actually challenging to kill, and the Scion was really annoying, none of the husks in Mass Effect 3 are challenging, although i've only fought Banshees once.
Oh, and someone said that the Praetorian could've been Prothean? It wasn't:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBVjtyxqAbw
Still remember that video like it was yesterday, mainly because i love the idea behind Husks. I am disappointed that all of the Reaper's ground troops are just husks though, in Mass Effect 1 i assumed they were Sovereign's ground troops because he didn't have an army with him, but i always imagined that when the Reapers got to the galaxy they'd be throwing all kinds of super advanced mechanical soldiers, mechs and fighter ships at you, but so far i haven't seen any of that. Kind of disappoint, then again, pretty much everything concerning the Reapers has disappointed me, Sovereign had set the bar too high with his super-dramatic speech, such a shame.
Oh, and yet another disappointing thing, in the end of Mass Effect 2 the Reapers all looked different from one another, but in Mass Effect 3 so far all of them look the same(the biggest ones), like Sovereign.
I don't know what you're talking about man, in the end Shepard just walks away telling Anderson and Udina that the Reapers are coming. Man, it's taking Bioware a long time to make Mass Effect 2, but i can't wait for it, i hope we get to talk with another Reaper, Sovereign made them really interesting.I hereby propose that Shepard has been brain damaged back on Virmire and everything else is a hallucination while he's in coma at the hospital on the Citadel.
Anyway, i decided to even stop paying attention to the plot in this game, it has mores holes than swiss cheese. And if the Indoctrination ending is real, well, it certainly would be better, but i don't see how that would make it a good ending either, especially if the real ending is sold separately.
Indoctrination ending stuff
Haven't gotten to the end of the game myself yet, so i haven't seen everything myself, but, with Mass Effect 2, people used to joke a lot that the Illusive Man was a Reaper because of his eyes, when Shepard got the same implants people started to theorize that he had been tampered with with Reaper tech, this was pretty much confirmed in a comic where it was revealed that the Illusive man's eyes really were Reaper tech magic, so it's kind of obvious that Shepard's face is also full of Reaper tech.
So i'm not really shocked by all these indoctrination ending theories, however, if they are true, then doesn't that mean that the war is not over? I mean, the whole destroy/control/synthesis thing was just in Shepard's mind right? If so, then the Reapers are still rampaging through the galaxy right?
Nakor: There are no words for how amazing that is.
@Shuma That is the problem with that ending, hopefully someone gets into the light thing and sets the catalyst off? Can't see it being shepard after that ending...
Reaper tech doesn't mean it can indoctrinate you mind, though I guess were still not sure what does. Light and noise or something right? pretty sure his eyes/implants aren't giving off any of that
Well, if that's the case then that actually makes me hopeful. Maybe there will be a Mass Effect 4 which "ends the fight" and it wont suck dick.
Or it'll be DLC and it'll piss everyone off more.
Edit:
Indoctrination works when and how the writer wants as far as i've seen, it seems to be completely random.Reaper tech doesn't mean it can indoctrinate you mind, though I guess were still not sure what does. Light and noise or something right?
So can anyone confirm if there is a special ending for having the galaxy at 100% ready from playing MP? Im about to be paying the Illusive man a visit and figure im nearing the end...
Im kinda dreading getting to the end after hearing how many people are dissappointed with it (i havent read anything about it though, aka what happens) especially since ive been loving the game thus far..
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
