Mass Effect 3 - Out Now!

[Terjyn]

Originally Posted by Icemage

I don't think that's strictly fair. There are some map configurations and hacking locations where it's suicidal to keep all four players inside the hacking zone, especially on Wave 10 when you can very quickly get swarmed by Banshees or Phantoms. It's sometimes necessary for one or more players to run interference just to keep the main bulk of the enemy forces off of the hackers.

It's not strictly fair. But neither is what we have now.

And while my suggestion may screw someone over sometimes, the current way screws over everybody.

And, FWIW, in my experience I've seen as many failures because of those guys "running interference" as I have successes because of it*. Shaving off 40 seconds from the hack means that much less time to be overrun.

*Sometimes one of those guys goes down, and the people who are trying to hack get overrun trying to save them.

*EDIT* To make it more fair make the credit zone twice the size of the hack zone or something. There are ways to minimize the problem.

[charnier]

I finished playing SP last night, and I have to say that it's a damn shame that all everyone will remember it for is the ending. There's simply too much good stuff to ignore -

[Show spoiler]the cutscenes with Liara, particularly the time capsule and the final encounter, Anderson and Garrus (I loved the shooting contest on the citadel). Then Mordin's Paragon death on Tuchanka "Someone else might have gotten it wrong". If anything, this game is all about death, loss and sacrifice, and it really rubs it in your face (more effectively than other war games I've played), making the ending all the more hard to bear

.

Having said that, I'm not 100% sure Bioware is right to come up with a new DC and I know that I'm in the minority here, but there is one advantage the current ending had - it is open to interpretation

[Show spoiler]Some argue the Indoctrination theory, but I think the scene where Joker crash lands the Normandy on another planet can be seen another way - it's Shepard's last dying wish that his crew survive - you've got to have hope. To me, it's the only thing that makes any sense, as you have two squadmates in London with you suddenly magically reappear on the Normandy, which is going to need a serious plot contrivance if it was not a dream and did happen that way.

But in any case, one can fit theories around the current ending. What worries me more is that BW will come up with clarifications that fudge the ending even more.

[tarvis]

Everyone isn't focusing on the ending of the game.

[Monkey]

Originally Posted by tarvis

Everyone isn't focusing on the ending of the game.

Same here. Sure the ending didn't make any sense logically but I enjoyed the game for what it was. I don't focus on the ending for most other games either though, I play them for the journey.

[Offender_Mullet]

Originally Posted by Mr. J

I don't know if thats a win or lose! I never depleted every planet in Mass Effect 2. Honestly don't know if 100 pts is worth the time to be honest

Probably not given how the game ends with space magic but it was fun scanning all those planets.

Ok, so I played the hell out of ME3 the past couple days. About 17 hours in, but I'm taking my time. Scanning planets, going back to the Citadel, yada yada yada.

I don't hate Vega nearly as much as I first did, but having an established character in his place still would have been the better choice.

The gigantor breasts on what seems like all females is so comical. And Vega looking like a clubhead roid-rage guy just makes all the Jersey Shore references people have made to this game ring more true.

Javik's awakening scene = *yawn*. Way to make that boring. YIKES.

The last mission I did was Tuchunka. I was fine with Mordin

[Show spoiler]sacrificing himself

, but the cutscene was complete sh*t to be honest. I was expecting more of a dramatic or epic scene. Instead we get Shepard saying one generic line as

[Show spoiler]the last thing you say to him. Then, a couple lines of Mordin humming his tune and *boom*. What a cheap way of showing one of the most beloved characters in the entire trilogy go out like that.

Even after reading the bombardment of negative things for over a month now, as I'm finally getting deeper into the game it's obvious this was rushed out the door.


Edit: And on a more positive note, here's another hilarious ME3 video using chopped-up dialogue:

Gamer Poop: Mass Effect 3 (#2) - YouTube

lol Enjoy!

[tarvis]

While the majority of people contributing to the thread have already completed the game, specific plot elements of Mass Effect 3 should really be placed inside spoiler tags.

[jsteinhauer]

Originally Posted by tarvis

While the majority of people contributing to the thread have already completed the game, specific plot elements of Mass Effect 3 should really be placed inside spoiler tags.

Yeah. We were not allowed to post ME1 spoilers in the ME2 thread months after PS3 release.

[Beefbowl]

Originally Posted by Terjyn

It's not strictly fair. But neither is what we have now.

And while my suggestion may screw someone over sometimes, the current way screws over everybody.

And, FWIW, in my experience I've seen as many failures because of those guys "running interference" as I have successes because of it*. Shaving off 40 seconds from the hack means that much less time to be overrun.

*Sometimes one of those guys goes down, and the people who are trying to hack get overrun trying to save them.

*EDIT* To make it more fair make the credit zone twice the size of the hack zone or something. There are ways to minimize the problem.

I think its fine the way it is now. The game shouldn't be about credits or exp points. You'll probably nothing you wanted out of those packs anyways. :P


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?bjw1e4

[kristoffer]

i just finished the game. I chose the

[Show spoiler]blue control ending. I really didn't think it was that bad. Also I didn't realize that I had 3 and not 2 choices in front of me.

So the Reapers destroy all advanced species every 50.000 years so that they won't destroy themself?! So in a way they are like "Galactic nazis" with ethic cleansing or controlled Darwian evolution in effect...

But again the ending was ok but not fantastic.

I agree with some of this.

Mass Effect 3 Ending and Why We Hate It! - YouTube

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by charnier

I finished playing SP last night, and I have to say that it's a damn shame that all everyone will remember it for is the ending. There's simply too much good stuff to ignore -

[Show spoiler]the cutscenes with Liara, particularly the time capsule and the final encounter, Anderson and Garrus (I loved the shooting contest on the citadel). Then Mordin's Paragon death on Tuchanka "Someone else might have gotten it wrong". If anything, this game is all about death, loss and sacrifice, and it really rubs it in your face (more effectively than other war games I've played), making the ending all the more hard to bear

.

Having said that, I'm not 100% sure Bioware is right to come up with a new DC and I know that I'm in the minority here, but there is one advantage the current ending had - it is open to interpretation

[Show spoiler]Some argue the Indoctrination theory, but I think the scene where Joker crash lands the Normandy on another planet can be seen another way - it's Shepard's last dying wish that his crew survive - you've got to have hope. To me, it's the only thing that makes any sense, as you have two squadmates in London with you suddenly magically reappear on the Normandy, which is going to need a serious plot contrivance if it was not a dream and did happen that way.

But in any case, one can fit theories around the current ending. What worries me more is that BW will come up with clarifications that fudge the ending even more.

I disagree.

The ending is NOT the only thing wrong with this game. Its just that the ending is so bad it makes people overlook the other flaws in the game.

Other problems:

Linearity, you pretty much have to play the game in one direction. In ME1, you could do anything in ALMOST any order and in ME2 you could recruit and do loyalty missions in almost any order with a few mandatory missions here and there. That freedom WAS VERY much missed.

Too many cop-outs, Bioware should have been bold and actually locked out parts of the game based on decisions you made in the previous games. The plot with the Rachni was a joke and a slap in the face. The part with the geth in which Legion didn't survive ended up being the same thing with or without Legion. To get around the argument that it would be unfair to lock players out who didn't complete previous games make it such that NG+ allowed you to cgange previous game decisions so you COULD see that content.

ME2 characters were given the shaft and we should have had the option to have them as squadmates. EVen temporarily.


The journal system: UGH

Lack of side missions.

Not enough HUB worlds. I was really hoping they would bring back the Citadel from the first game, but no. Omega would have been nice.

ALL of that tells me one thing: Game was rushed.


In short Mass Effect 3 is still a great game when compared to other games in other series, but for what ME3 could have been it falls short.

[kristoffer]

Well I have to agree. I missed my crew from ME2. Also i missed sidemissions, more conversations with NPCs on the Citadel. More places to explore.

Also I got a little tired of killing Ceberus soldiers. I loved fighting so many different races in ME2.

[Show spoiler]Having said that. The cure for the Genophage and the Quarian or Geth resolution was pretty amazing!

[charnier]

Originally Posted by MerrickG

ALL of that tells me one thing: Game was rushed.

I do agree with this - although I don't have serious problems with the endings, you can tell that there was a seriously rushed feel

[Show spoiler] - all that separates them are colour coded explosions and maybe a minor deviation with the synthesis ending when Joker and EDI step out. The three choices were good in principle, but there needed to be more distinctions in the consequences - for instance, did the relays need to be destroyed/damaged in all three? Perhaps a case could be made for destroying them in Destroy and as a failsafe in Control, but in Synthesis, it's totally pointless as the Reapers no longer have a reason to destroy, certainly by Starchild's rationale. Plus, in destroy - although the relays were gone, you could have had some temporary victory lap with the people on earth and in space - they were alive, certainly for the moment; instead we get the same video(?) footage of troops moving on the ground. Even though there are possibilities with the current endings, they were definitely done on the cheap and it shows.

As to the other things, personally I preferred ME3 gameplay-wise to 2, but for me 1 is still best, even though it was buggy as hell. I'm not sure what it it is about 2, but I was disappointed with it - the freedom to choose to roam was certainly there, but the consequences of your choices did not seem pronounced as they did in the other two games. I'm not sure that I was even totally convinced by the premise

[Show spoiler]Shepard dying at the beginning, only to be brought back by and working for Cerberus.

As well as a couple of irritating chracters, all that I can remember from that game is the

[Show spoiler]raid on the collector base and that mission where you dock on a spaceship and the husks keep charging you in droves.

In short Mass Effect 3 is still a great game when compared to other games in other series, but for what ME3 could have been it falls short.

This.
Even though I understand the hatred and that it tarnishes the trilogy, no way does this deserve 2,2.5 and 3 stars on Amazon.

[QuasidodoJr]

The game wasn't just rushed, it wasn't given the same budget. I guarantee you they also limited the number of squad members you could have in this one to save money on paying the voice actors to read more lines. EA sunk a WHOLE LOT of money into SW:TOR and I don't think that venture's turning out as well as they had hoped.

Which, from what I can gather, forced BioWare's other games to take a budget hit (Dragon Age 2 staying pretty much entirely inside Kirkwall and recycling a lot of the same textures and also having a rushed, cop-out ending / Mass Effect 3 going linear, cutting the amount of squadmates in half from the last game, rushed, unimaginative ending.)

[Terjyn]

Originally Posted by Beefbowl

I think its fine the way it is now. The game shouldn't be about credits or exp points. You'll probably nothing you wanted out of those packs anyways. :P

You mean the packs I won't get because other people are trying to pad their score by taking away my credits?

When I'm playing with friends it isn't about XP or credits.

When I'm playing with Randoms, it is 100% about credits. That's why I hate that these idiots are taking them away from me, in a way that I can do nothing about.

[Snicket]

Originally Posted by Terjyn

When I'm playing with Randoms, it is 100% about credits. That's why I hate that these idiots are taking them away from me, in a way that I can do nothing about.

I agree with you there. It's all about the monies.

I still think they need to penalize players who drop mid game.

[ariakon]

I hope the extended DLC has even more allusions to the Garden. I need more funky-looking cardboard leaves filling the screen.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by charnier

I do agree with this - although I don't have serious problems with the endings, you can tell that there was a seriously rushed feel

[Show spoiler] - all that separates them are colour coded explosions and maybe a minor deviation with the synthesis ending when Joker and EDI step out. The three choices were good in principle, but there needed to be more distinctions in the consequences - for instance, did the relays need to be destroyed/damaged in all three? Perhaps a case could be made for destroying them in Destroy and as a failsafe in Control, but in Synthesis, it's totally pointless as the Reapers no longer have a reason to destroy, certainly by Starchild's rationale. Plus, in destroy - although the relays were gone, you could have had some temporary victory lap with the people on earth and in space - they were alive, certainly for the moment; instead we get the same video(?) footage of troops moving on the ground. Even though there are possibilities with the current endings, they were definitely done on the cheap and it shows.

As to the other things, personally I preferred ME3 gameplay-wise to 2, but for me 1 is still best, even though it was buggy as hell. I'm not sure what it it is about 2, but I was disappointed with it - the freedom to choose to roam was certainly there, but the consequences of your choices did not seem pronounced as they did in the other two games. I'm not sure that I was even totally convinced by the premise

[Show spoiler]Shepard dying at the beginning, only to be brought back by and working for Cerberus.

As well as a couple of irritating chracters, all that I can remember from that game is the

[Show spoiler]raid on the collector base and that mission where you dock on a spaceship and the husks keep charging you in droves.

Its not just the endings that come across as rushed. Everything else that I mentioned also gives off the same vibe.

ME2 was the epitome of making choices. All of your choices essentially affected who lived and who died on the suicide mission. Thats pretty big if you ask me.

[Monkey]

Originally Posted by kristoffer

Well I have to agree. I missed my crew from ME2. Also i missed sidemissions, more conversations with NPCs on the Citadel. More places to explore.

Also I got a little tired of killing Ceberus soldiers. I loved fighting so many different races in ME2.

[Show spoiler]Having said that. The cure for the Genophage and the Quarian or Geth resolution was pretty amazing!

That too, I wanted more variety in enemies as well. We had some but not enough IMO.

[Trailbreaker77]

Originally Posted by kristoffer

i just finished the game. I chose the

[Show spoiler]blue control ending. I really didn't think it was that bad. Also I didn't realize that I had 3 and not 2 choices in front of me.

So the Reapers destroy all advanced species every 50.000 years so that they won't destroy themself?! So in a way they are like "Galactic nazis" with ethic cleansing or controlled Darwian evolution in effect...

But again the ending was ok but not fantastic.

I agree with some of this.
Mass Effect 3 Ending and Why We Hate It! - YouTube

Yes! Awesome video I agree 100%!

Originally Posted by MerrickG

I disagree.

The ending is NOT the only thing wrong with this game. Its just that the ending is so bad it makes people overlook the other flaws in the game.

Other problems:

Linearity, you pretty much have to play the game in one direction. In ME1, you could do anything in ALMOST any order and in ME2 you could recruit and do loyalty missions in almost any order with a few mandatory missions here and there. That freedom WAS VERY much missed.

Too many cop-outs, Bioware should have been bold and actually locked out parts of the game based on decisions you made in the previous games. The plot with the Rachni was a joke and a slap in the face. The part with the geth in which Legion didn't survive ended up being the same thing with or without Legion. To get around the argument that it would be unfair to lock players out who didn't complete previous games make it such that NG+ allowed you to cgange previous game decisions so you COULD see that content.

ME2 characters were given the shaft and we should have had the option to have them as squadmates. EVen temporarily.


The journal system: UGH

Lack of side missions.

Not enough HUB worlds. I was really hoping they would bring back the Citadel from the first game, but no. Omega would have been nice.

ALL of that tells me one thing: Game was rushed.


In short Mass Effect 3 is still a great game when compared to other games in other series, but for what ME3 could have been it falls short.

YES and YES thank you this is exactly how I feel. ME2 was so much better than this rushed half of game we got.

[jsteinhauer]

Originally Posted by QuasidodoJr

The game wasn't just rushed, it wasn't given the same budget.

I don't know, if this claim is true or not, and I don't doubt you, but whether it was or not, part of the budget had to be diverted to the multiplayer game, which would have the same effect on the single player game.