Mass Effect 3 Spoiler Thread

DSGamer wrote:

There was a huge gap between the impending doom they presented and the other stuff. When I was giving Edi tips on how to date Joker at the dance club it was hard not to have cognitive dissonance over the fact that this was happening concurrently with Earth being torn apart by Reapers.

It's not entirely dissimilar to the English dance halls in WWII where fighter and bomber crews would get plastered in between missions. There was down time. They used it.

kazooka wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

There was a huge gap between the impending doom they presented and the other stuff. When I was giving Edi tips on how to date Joker at the dance club it was hard not to have cognitive dissonance over the fact that this was happening concurrently with Earth being torn apart by Reapers.

It's not entirely dissimilar to the English dance halls in WWII where fighter and bomber crews would get plastered in between missions. There was down time. They used it.

That's not quite what I meant. What I meant is that I was given the impression in the opening scenes that Earth is toast like soon. Something must be done now.

Also, Shepard is literally the most important character in the galaxy. Solving centuries old animosities, rescuing a civilization from extinction. He doesn't have the same luxury of downtime as, say, the crew working on the crucible. It just feels off.

LarryC wrote:

The Miranda love interest storyline was not well closed. You almost had to have romanced Liara or Tali to have a good closure. It's a good thing Liara swings both ways.

QFT

LarryC wrote:

Canned animations are still canned animations. They were seriously off-putting in a number of scenes.

I thought the animations in general were weak in 3. I noticed several times when a character's gun would just clip through their chest. I mean, I know that motion capture is industry standard, but at least clean up a Krogan's animation so that his hands aren't going through his chest plate. It shows a clear lack of polish.

Grubber788 wrote:

Sorry, the correct answer is "Not enough Zaeed." ;)

Speaking of him, I just found out that he can actually die in his loyalty mission in ME2

JillSammich wrote:

I thought the animations in general were weak in 3. I noticed several times when a character's gun would just clip through their chest. I mean, I know that motion capture is industry standard, but at least clean up a Krogan's animation so that his hands aren't going through his chest plate. It shows a clear lack of polish.

FemShep's run animation while in civilian areas was awful. Like, a old-timey prospector running on footless stumps of legs.

kyrieee wrote:
Grubber788 wrote:

Sorry, the correct answer is "Not enough Zaeed." ;)

Speaking of him, I just found out that he can actually die in his loyalty mission in ME2

I did not know that. Shep's a dick!

Grubber788 wrote:

(I agree with most of your comments too. I would say the creepy male Shep makes for a good renegade.)

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/tQCjL.jpg)

kyrieee wrote:
Grubber788 wrote:

Sorry, the correct answer is "Not enough Zaeed." ;)

Speaking of him, I just found out that he can actually die in his loyalty mission in ME2

He died on the Citadel during ME3 for me, and I have no complaints about that. If I knew I could get him killed on his loyalty mission in ME2, I'd have done that.

billt721 wrote:
kyrieee wrote:
Grubber788 wrote:

Sorry, the correct answer is "Not enough Zaeed." ;)

Speaking of him, I just found out that he can actually die in his loyalty mission in ME2

He died on the Citadel during ME3 for me, and I have no complaints about that. If I knew I could get him killed on his loyalty mission in ME2, I'd have done that.

Agreed. My first play-through of ME2 he died during the final mission while escorting the survivors back to the Normandy. I felt that this was actually a much more noble death than he deserved.

LarryC wrote:

Detailed criticism...

You're so down on ME3 Larry give the game a break ;).

LarryC wrote:

Gun designs are boring. Could use some good design spice and color palettes not related to business attire.

I like them looking like 'realistic guns.' It helps with my immersion :). I also love the wear and scratches.I bet it took a ton of work to get them looking like that and they do it brilliantly. The sounds for the weapons was great this time.

Higgledy wrote:
LarryC wrote:

Gun designs are boring. Could use some good design spice and color palettes not related to business attire.

I like them looking like 'realistic guns.' It helps with my immersion :). I also love the wear and scratches.I bet it took a ton of work to get them looking like that and they do it brilliantly. The sounds for the weapons was great this time.

I liked how much the assault rifles reminded me of the guns from Galaxy Quest.

billt721 wrote:
kyrieee wrote:
Grubber788 wrote:

Sorry, the correct answer is "Not enough Zaeed." ;)

Speaking of him, I just found out that he can actually die in his loyalty mission in ME2

He died on the Citadel during ME3 for me, and I have no complaints about that. If I knew I could get him killed on his loyalty mission in ME2, I'd have done that.

He can do that?!

For all the praise I've said about ME3's interactive narrative (the use of time dilation to make you suffer longer while you hesitate to shoot Mordin in the back is just priceless), it's just NOT as good of a dating game as DA2.

To be fair, a lot of dating games have truncated love stories when you're not going after the intended heroine, but Miranda's storyline is just unsatisfying when it doesn't have to be. Let's not even talk about Jacob. I romanced that lying, insensitive SOB, I saved his sorry ass from a suicide mission, and he dumps me for some half-baked research floozy! The nerve.

I thought the animations in general were weak in 3. I noticed several times when a character's gun would just clip through their chest. I mean, I know that motion capture is industry standard, but at least clean up a Krogan's animation so that his hands aren't going through his chest plate. It shows a clear lack of polish.

That weakness is actually inherited from the character designs implemented in ME1. It's janky, but I don't think Bioware really expected ME to take off that much.

In truth, I would have preferred ME3 to have been ME2, and then make another game to put a proper cap on proceedings. Let another character have a suicide side mission and have her die in ME2.

Rykin wrote:
billt721 wrote:
kyrieee wrote:
Grubber788 wrote:

Sorry, the correct answer is "Not enough Zaeed." ;)

Speaking of him, I just found out that he can actually die in his loyalty mission in ME2

He died on the Citadel during ME3 for me, and I have no complaints about that. If I knew I could get him killed on his loyalty mission in ME2, I'd have done that.

Agreed. My first play-through of ME2 he died during the final mission while escorting the survivors back to the Normandy. I felt that this was actually a much more noble death than he deserved.

why? He's a great character. One of the few without daddy issues anyway. Also one of the few characters who can really stand up to Shepherd.

Grubber788 wrote:
Rykin wrote:
billt721 wrote:
kyrieee wrote:
Grubber788 wrote:

Sorry, the correct answer is "Not enough Zaeed." ;)

Speaking of him, I just found out that he can actually die in his loyalty mission in ME2

He died on the Citadel during ME3 for me, and I have no complaints about that. If I knew I could get him killed on his loyalty mission in ME2, I'd have done that.

Agreed. My first play-through of ME2 he died during the final mission while escorting the survivors back to the Normandy. I felt that this was actually a much more noble death than he deserved.

why? He's a great character. One of the few without daddy issues anyway. Also one of the few characters who can really stand up to Shepherd.

great character != noble character

Remember, Han shot first.

beeporama wrote:

Remember, Han shot first.

Nope. If this thread taught me anything, it's that artistic vision is sacred. Lucas's current artistic vision is that Greedo shot first.

ART!

SommerMatt wrote:
beeporama wrote:

Remember, Han shot first.

Nope. If this thread taught me anything, it's that artistic vision is sacred. Lucas's current artistic vision is that Greedo shot first.

ART!

I think that there is an objective critique of the Greedo shooting first artistic choice. This isn't the thread for it though, so I'll just leave it at that.

Nobody (to my knowledge) petitioned Lucas to remove the awful CG of Han's head jumping to the side. We just call that choice bad and watch the old films. (and wear dumb shirts that make us look like man-babies) If the artistic choice in ME3 was what we originally got, we should have just called it bad and moved on. That's what we do with other media...

I have a feeling that a lot of the things that are wrong with ME3 are the fault of EA, though. So things start to get a little dicey when you talk about artistic choice in this game.

Movie studios use "test screenings" all the time-- you can argue whether or not they have value, but adjusting a "product" to please consumers is nothing new.

We live in a digital era, where things can be changed and "patched" and added to with DLC. We're in a new normal.

I played the game, thought the ending sucked, and DID move on.

Other people took it further, petitioning for a fix. It was EA/BioWare's decision to do what they did... don't blame the "whiney" or "entitled" fans for that one. If they were sticking to their "artistic" vision, they wouldn't have changed the entire combat/inventory/etc. systems between games based on "fan feedback," either, but they did. Some felt this made the game better, so I see nothing wrong with adding or changing to the STORY in a way to "make it better" if they felt enough fans wanted/demanded it.

For me, personally, I can best compare the ending to ME3 to how I felt about the ending of SEINFELD. Seinfeld was my favorite show, and was written by a smart team of writers every week to achieve the funniest possible script. The series finale, as I have been told, we written solely by Larry David. I HATED the Seinfeld finale. If they'd have used the team writing process that had gotten them that far in the first place, I'm sure it would have been a much funnier piece of work. Same thing here. The awesome parts of ME3 were written by the team, edited, vetted, etc. The ending was the "vision" of a few people that used no feedback or input from the team that had gotten us there in the first place. And it suffered for it. IMHO.

At this point, ME is over. It was what it was. I loved it, for the most part, and was let-down by the ending. Still love the universe and *my* Shepard I created over the course of those three games. Just wish it would have ended on a higher note. It's the "what ifs?" that always get me.

EDIT: Forget it, it's not worth it. I just find people turned off by the idea of artistic vision being sacred while being so insanely invested in the conclusion to a pulpy sci-fi series to be suffering from some kind of cognitive dissonance.

JillSammich wrote:

Nobody (to my knowledge) petitioned Lucas to remove the awful CG of Han's head jumping to the side. We just call that choice bad and watch the old films. (and wear dumb shirts that make us look like man-babies)

I don't think belittling people's upset over changes to one of their favourite cultural icons by calling them man-babies really does your point much good. In fact it just makes me want to dismiss you and your narrow-minded manner of addressing it.

I think the "Han shot first" meme is a pretty good one.

I think no one petitioned the awful CG because no one assumes that if it was set back to how it was originally that it would be left in - they petitioned the unwanted change and not the result of the change. Seems logical to me.

Personally, I can't see the argument for having Greedo shoot first... OR for making the change. The first point is undermining the interaction between the character and those persuing him. The second is literally changing the type of character presented throughout the rest of the three films. The change detracts all tension that might be generated from the scene just as if they changed a chase scene where menacing men with guns are altered to be holding walkie talkies instead... oh, wait. This is just basic cinematography or storytelling we're talking here. Like altering the AI mechs in The Matrix to be cuddly toys or something... there could be an argument for making the change but what was there already worked in the context it was presented in.

As for ME3 - I never wanted them to change the ending. I wanted a good ending in the first place, one I felt made thematic (and just plain) sense rather than an out-of-the-blue machina deus ex machina, and also one that represented the war assets I'd spent the entire game amassing (only to discover that apparently they didn't matter anyway and that instead multiplayer did?!). I can understand why people wanted them to change the ending but in the end I think Bioware is weaker for not just admitting they wrote a poor ending and just moving on because even the "fixed" ending doesn't fix what's wrong with the story arc of the three games nor the lack of story or logic behind the undoing of your choices in that second game and through putting story-altering content into the DLC which had me completely confused for the first 30-60 minutes of the third game.

Spoiler:

And I don't even own any star wars stuff or a Han shot first T-shirt... Though it might be nice to have one for the ironic hipster image i'm thinking of pulling off this next year.

[edit]

kuddles wrote:

EDIT: Forget it, it's not worth it.

It's okay, apparently I've got you covered!

[edit 2] I think I misinterpreted the tone of Jill's post so I apologise - however I'm leaving all that up there because I think I'm actually saying stuff that's quite similar to him/her* but..... well, I do think people did and do complain in other media and don't and shouldn't just shut up when things are handled badly. The artist, should, IMO, and then strive to do better... but the audience should critique the hell out of it and not move on. Moving on means leaving it behind and forgetting about it. If you do that you'll end up seeing only crap and the bad artists/creators will never get punished for their rubbish and instead only rewarded!

I'm looking at you everyone who went to see Star Wars 2 and 3 in the cinema!

*Also I hate it when people make a mistake and then try and be two-faced and hide it on forums

SommerMatt wrote:
beeporama wrote:

Remember, Han shot first.

Nope. If this thread taught me anything, it's that artistic vision is sacred. Lucas's current artistic vision is that Greedo shot first.

ART!

:)

Is there a state in the Union where I can marry this comment?

Duoae wrote:

I don't think belittling people's upset over changes to one of their favourite cultural icons by calling them man-babies really does your point much good. In fact it just makes me want to dismiss you and your narrow-minded manner of addressing it.

I think the "Han shot first" meme is a pretty good one.

I think you misunderstood what I meant... I was poking a little bit of fun. I think it's a pretty good meme as well. I'm not being narrow-minded at all and I'm pretty sure we actually agree on the whole issue. The internet seems to take all of my sarcasm and eat it so that people just think I'm being mean. If you notice, I included myself in there as well.

Duoae wrote:

Personally, I can't see the argument for having Greedo shoot first... OR for making the change. The first point is undermining the interaction between the character and those persuing him. The second is literally changing the type of character presented throughout the rest of the three films. The change detracts all tension that might be generated from the scene just as if they changed a chase scene where menacing men with guns are altered to be holding walkie talkies instead... oh, wait. This is just basic cinematography or storytelling we're talking here. Like altering the AI mechs in The Matrix to be cuddly toys or something... there could be an argument for making the change but what was there already worked in the context it was presented in.

yup... totally agree. Not sure who you're arguing with.

Duoae wrote:

As for ME3 - I never wanted them to change the ending. I wanted a good ending in the first place, one I felt made thematic (and just plain) sense rather than an out-of-the-blue machina deus ex machina, and also one that represented the war assets I'd spent the entire game amassing (only to discover that apparently they didn't matter anyway and that instead multiplayer did?!). I can understand why people wanted them to change the ending but in the end I think Bioware is weaker for not just admitting they wrote a poor ending and just moving on because even the "fixed" ending doesn't fix what's wrong with the story arc of the three games nor the lack of story or logic behind the undoing of your choices in that second game and through putting story-altering content into the DLC which had me completely confused for the first 30-60 minutes of the third game.

I also agree with this... I'm not sure what we're arguing about here.

I really didn't have a problem with the ending when I first played it. Looking back at it, I think the whole ghost child thing was ridiculous, and limiting the end choice to just 3 button presses was anticlimactic to say the least. In the end, the ending was bad. I'm not saying it wasn't. People have a right to bitch about a bad ending. We do it all the time. We gripe about things being bad.

What I'm saying is that I create content. If people don't like the things I create, fine. I'll try better to create something they like more next time. It's not the same as when I create something and people don't like it so I go back and try and fix it so that they do. That's compromising what I had in mind when creating the thing.

Having said all that, I'm not entirely sure what we got with ME3 had anything to do with artistic choice or any type of vision. I think EA had a bigger hand in the game in terms of what would be released in DLC and what they could include in the game than they should have. I look at the emphasis on multiplayer (WTF) and I look at the day 1 DLC, and I hear things about Leviathan... It becomes clear that Bioware didn't have full creative license over what they were making.

Also, as a creator of content myself, I tend to take offense when people demand something be changed. There is a way to go about critiquing something and the internet is terrible at that.

Also I'll just leave this smiley here to let you guys know that I'm not being butthurt about anything... Not trying to start an internet war over video games. That's just dumb.

Yeah, like I said In my edit above. I realised I was being a gun-jumping asshole but left it there for posthumorous viewings.

Sorry, again!

I think you misunderstood what I meant... I was poking a little bit of fun.

I can tell you, I would not have called that. No smiley, and referring to shirts as dumb before being saying they are worn by babies, really came off as you thought those people were losers or something. That's what are for!

Duoae wrote:

Yeah, like I said In my edit above. I realised I was being a gun-jumping asshole but left it there for posthumorous viewings.

Sorry, again!

Ah no worries. As I said, sometimes the internet chews up my sarcasm and spits it back out as if I'm serious...

*And it's a him. My username is a reference to amazing(ly bad) voice acting in the original Resident Evil.

Just finished Omega DLC. Thoughts:

Spoiler:

I loved the design of the female Turian, Nyreen, but I felt they dropped the ball on what personality to give her. Yet another military type character? Uggh...lame. When I first met her, when she has her hood on, she gave me a Kasumi vibe, perhaps because of the hoodie, but seriously, she would've been much more interesting if she wasn't some sort of military leader, and instead, a rogue type character. I don't know, something else. Everyone in the game behaves with so much honor and duty, it would've been refreshing to see someone with a different take.

Also, they could've really used this opportunity to give Aria some growth. I didn't see it. Yeah, she claims in the end she'll bury and honor the dead, but I never felt she went through anything major. Even if it was a downfall deeper into her violent nature, but nothing. She actually lets Petrovsky live! WTH?!!

Love story here between Aria and Nyreen. Interesting take, but lacked resolution. I didn't need rainbows and ponies, but I didn't see much of anything between the two. Could've been worked much better. Her death was really downplayed also. Perhaps it didn't resonate with me because I was let down by her personality, or lack thereof, but I didn't feel it. And I also felt that Aria didn't feel it either. Yeah, she storms the place enraged, but afterwards, once the fighting is over, I don't know. Her speech directed at Omega sounded like all she wanted was Omega back, which she did, but nothing she lived through to get it back, made an impact on her. Didn't feel like she cared much that Nyreen died.

They just didn't give her much to do I think. If you read about her in the Codex, about the Cabals (Turian Biotics), they sound so interesting. A some sort of fuse between Ardhat Yakshi and Justicars, forced out of their people to ensure they live on. They play on how rare Turian Biotics are, and they end up making Nyreen just a lo-level rebel group leader? Christ, even Zaeed was more interesting.

Finally, at first, I was eating it up nicely, but then, as it kept going, I felt a real disconnect with the main story. It really feels like a DLC, and they didn't do much to blur the lines.

All in all, fun, sure, but really disappointing, considering how they have previously created amazing characters and storylines. (Mordin, Wrex and the Genophage, or Tali, Legion, and the Geth-Quarian conflict, to name a few)

I am going to do a second playthrough on insanity as a Vanguard. I loved the Vanguard in multiplayer. Anyways, I'm downloading the extended cut DLC. Of the paid DLC, what should I get? Are Omega and Leviathan worth it? I heard that Leviathan was pretty cool. After this, I probably won't play the game again.

That's a good indicator though. If you're never gonna play this game again, I suggest you go all out. That's what I did, although I might return.

Honestly, for me, Leviathan is worth it, although, depending on your thoughts about the ending, it might piss you off even further. They create great lore and it really adds more to the reapers. To the starchild? nothing. Zilch, although many people claim it does. I disagree, but whatever. Not the point. Point is, Leviathan yes, Omega, up to you. In my opinion they really had a great opportunity to not only expand on who Aria is, but also introduce us to a new, interesting character. In my eyes, they don't. Aria is Aria is Aria, and Nyreen, the Turian female, is as bland and expected as characters can get. It's nice to return to Omega, although you won't be familiar with 95% of the place, and the action is good, but more of the same really.

Also, romance Garrus. The extended cut adds a last goodbye scene before you go up the beam to the Citadel, and it's really cool. Either Garrus if Fem (True) Shep, or Tali if Broshep.

My 2 cents.

I ended up buying Omega and Leviathan. Since it's a second playthrough, I want a little extra content even if it isn't great. Thanks for the advice here and through Steam chat.

Sure thing man! Glad you ended up getting both. It really needs to be experienced first hand. I don't know about the rest, but I'm definitely curious as to how your playthrough goes, so be sure to let me know!

Is this a transferred character from 1 and 2? just 2? new one? Is your Wrex alive? Kaiden or Ashley died? How'd the suicide mission on 2 go? Who'd you romance previously?

I love this universe. So.Damn.Much.