On June 12 2011 22:39 Probe1 wrote: Well, what do you want bioware to do? The options are A) Shepard with the help of a dues ex machina saves the day and defeats the reapers B) An impasse occurs where neither side is destroyed C) All civilization is wiped out.
C sucks for the player though it gives truth to what two games have built up, that Reapers are unstoppable. B People will be let down by an ending that wasn't an ending at all, despite it being plausible. A Don't forget to light the cigars AFTER the fat lady sings. You'll jinx the whole thing.
Either Reapers aren't as strong as described or their countless years of destroying better civilizations than this one continues with another culmination of the cycle. What would you rather have?
I can think of any series, particularly trilogies, that have had satisfying conclusions to these kind of dilemmas, so I'm just gonna resign myself to the likelihood that the Reapers motivation for eradicating all life will not be as cool as leaving it to imagination, and that the means of defeating the Reapers will probably feel contrived, and try enjoy the game anyway as I'm sure it'll be a great ride regardless.
What is really cool about this though is there'll likely be lots of different ways things can turn out, because of the way the series is designed. They may very well be an ending where the Reapers destroy Earth and go on to destroy all life.
Just illustrates how difficult and ambitious a task Bioware has taken on. Not only do they have to come up with a satisfying conclusion, they actual have to come up several and make the player feel that the choices made throughout all three games have mattered.
Knowing Bioware, choices made in the previous games won't have much of an impact on the story itself. The game will vary a bit here and there, but it will all be superficial.
Well I think you are missing somepoints here: They had a Reaper for study since you destroyed it in ME I and they had time to steal their technology. We do not know how many years passed since Me 2 so it is hard to know the strength of all parties involved. Furthermore: The Reapers took many YEARS to destroy the Protheans. If I am not wrong it was something along the lines of dozens or hundreds of years. The Reapers have so far not taken the Citadel which means they do NOT have control over the Relay System (which was their first objective), which was crucial to isolate the Protheans and overwhelm every part of their empire isolated from the others. So I think they are not nearly as tough as they seem. Without the control over the Relays they are still formidable but not all powerful! They said they are going for a WWII Style of war. Which seems to imply that you will need to defeat them multiple times in multiple Battles. Your job seems to be to pull everyone together. And the key is what you have done before: either humanity becomes the dominant leading force (perhaps with the Omega 4 base?) or you will forge something more like an alliance. The Relays and the races will be the core of that conflict. And you will be the leader I can so see that working out without a cheap super virus solution!
On July 27 2011 09:41 Doppelganger wrote: Well I think you are missing somepoints here: They had a Reaper for study since you destroyed it in ME I and they had time to steal their technology.
No, Sovereign crashed into pieces and nothing really worth it came out of it... otherwise they wouldn't say it was a geth ship.
We do not know how many years passed since Me 2 so it is hard to know the strength of all parties involved.
Should be months since ME3 should start on earth with Shepard on trial for the Batarian massacre (and the Repears were already in the galaxy at the end of ME2).
Furthermore: The Reapers took many YEARS to destroy the Protheans. If I am not wrong it was something along the lines of dozens or hundreds of years. The Reapers have so far not taken the Citadel which means they do NOT have control over the Relay System (which was their first objective), which was crucial to isolate the Protheans and overwhelm every part of their empire isolated from the others. So I think they are not nearly as tough as they seem. Without the control over the Relays they are still formidable but not all powerful!
Well, Sovereign owned a lot of ships by himself WHILE he was attached to the citadel trying to hack it plus giving powers to Saren... and he was alone.
There are THOUSANDS Repears coming.
Head on fight is not possible unless bioware decides to throw the lore out of the window.
I can so see that working out without a cheap super virus solution!
"No, Sovereign crashed into pieces and nothing really worth it came out of it... otherwise they wouldn't say it was a geth ship."
So why does that mean there is no salvage? It is a living machine. What are the Geth? living Machines. So I think it is not at all evidence that there was no salvage (besides the fact that tehere were gigantic parts left). And somewhere in ME II they even said that there was salvage which the three council races took for themselves. I think it was Anderson telling that, when you ask him about the wreckage as proof.
And again I want to stress the factor of time. Could easily be years between ME II and III. And I again want to say the reaper advance will be SLOW because they need not only to win spacefights but control all the Relays. It will be hard but in war one party always learns from the other. Perfect example is Tank design in WWII and like that the council races have learned from the wreckage and all the enemies of the reapers will too by fighting them even if they get their ass anded to them in the beginning.
In these bullet points, and stated by the EA representitive presenting the game, there would be a multiplayer mode available as DLC around a month after the game is shipped
The rail shooting part seems kind of pointless as there's no skill necessary to shoot something that covers the entire screen, and there's no discernible damage dealt which removes the urgency from that part of the game.
On the other hand, I don't mind so much if Mass Effect takes a page from Halo and becomes a more free-form shooter. ME2's combat was honestly too limiting in its repetition of pop-a-mole shooting.
With how bad they ruined DragonAge 2, I didn't have much hope for this game, even though I thoroughly enjoyed the first two. The more info we see... its pretty obvious they are trying to ruin the game lol.
On August 30 2011 06:18 KOFgokuon wrote: this looks.......not exciting
Hard to tell from such a short snippet, but yeah, the gameplay doesn't look revolutionary or really that inspiring, but the ME series was never really about that (despite their best efforts in ME2). The story, the universe, the details, the characters is what makes ME good. As long as they kept to their strengths, I don't really mind shortcomings in the gameplay. Also, they have friggin Clint Mansell composing the score! How can you not be excited for that.
On August 30 2011 06:18 KOFgokuon wrote: this looks.......not exciting
Hard to tell from such a short snippet, but yeah, the gameplay doesn't look revolutionary or really that inspiring, but the ME series was never really about that (despite their best efforts in ME2). The story, the universe, the details, the characters is what makes ME good. As long as they kept to their strengths, I don't really mind shortcomings in the gameplay. Also, they have friggin Clint Mansell composing the score! How can you not be excited for that.
Always loved mass effect but as with all single player titles i wait untill they are considerably cheaper before buying them, but learning that Clint Mansell is doing doing the musical score has just made this a first day purchase.
On August 30 2011 06:30 Newbistic wrote: The rail shooting part seems kind of pointless as there's no skill necessary to shoot something that covers the entire screen, and there's no discernible damage dealt which removes the urgency from that part of the game.
On the other hand, I don't mind so much if Mass Effect takes a page from Halo and becomes a more free-form shooter. ME2's combat was honestly too limiting in its repetition of pop-a-mole shooting.
well look at the last boss of ME2 lol that fucker was the whole screen and really it was just a grind of using powers over and over again and hoping you didn't run out of ammo
that was sooo average. i like talking to my crew and people on the colonies way more than i like shooting. honestly i would buy mass effect: asteroid x45 where all you do is form relationships with the civilians and go mine and work and drive around the asteroid.
that was sooo average. i like talking to my crew and people on the colonies way more than i like shooting. honestly i would buy mass effect: asteroid x45 where all you do is form relationships with the civilians and go mine and work and drive around the asteroid.
Hahahaha I certainly wouldn't mind playing that. Watching the ME3 video actually made me miss ME1 a lot though. Despite all the flak it got for having a very untraditional and clunky shooter mechanics, it added a lot of depth in terms of how to distribute your skill points. I enjoyed ME2 for what it was, but I just couldn't shake off the feeling that I was playing a watered-down version of what ME1 was, and what ME2 could've been. Maybe it's impossible for RPG & FPS/TPS elements to truly find equilibrium in a hybrid, and you have to sacrifice one side to cater to the audience of your choice. That's probably why Bioware's shifting their gameplay priority to TPS to attract a wider crowd. I have little problem with that, and it's good that more and more people are discovering this seris as a result. However, the RPG fanboy inside of me is still weeping from what was lost and what could've been.
Still, I have complete confidence that ME3 will be a solid game to close out the series. Might not be a Final Fantasy 7, Unreal Tournament, or a Deus Ex (original) but it'll still be good.
I didn't really like ME1, and I've grown to dislike the series even more since then. It annoys me that western RPG games like this are driving out JRPGs like the Tales series as well as other new original titles that "don't fit western markets," so they aren't localized. This looks just like another gears of war to me, not an epic RPG.
Wow so much hate. Am I the only one who is pumped by this trailer? I want to see where the story goes and what my choices cause. I guess I am stoked for this like i was with DA2. Bought that when it came out day 1 and wasn't disappointed yet that got loads of hate. Maybe my tastes differ from everyone else i guess. Oh well. Sad i have to wait until march for this though.
Mass Effect 1 and 2 were superb and I'm pretty sure that ME3 is gonna be great as well. I admit the trailers weren't that great because they really only show the same combat and some cut scenes but from what I have read from professional reviews it's still going to be epic.
Take it for what it is. It's a story driven Action-RPG and it is great at that. The world they created from scratch, the characters and the atmosphere are unmatched and the combat is very entertaining at the least.
Btw how did they trick you into buying ME2 and ME1? Those games were great.
EPT
