|
On March 31 2012 12:35 deth2munkies wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2012 09:33 Mindcrime wrote:On March 31 2012 08:08 deth2munkies wrote:On March 31 2012 06:50 Noocta wrote:On March 31 2012 06:13 Latham wrote:On March 31 2012 05:37 Medrea wrote:
Yeah I kinda wish enemies in ME3 had more secondary defenses. Being able to use powers on an enemy without having to strip them of defenses is kinda silly. I absolutely hated that part in ME2. EVERYTHING had shields/armor/barriers on higher difficulties. Was so bullshit. Everything with armor was a bit annoying. But so much without is kinda too easy. My Infi didn't give a damn, but for biotic it's either too easy or a pain in the ass. The problem was that with all the shields and stuff going around on harder difficulties, CC abilities like singularity became completely useless, only direct damage stuff that does good damage to a certain armor type was worth using. Invalidating half your skills is a terrible game design decision. I don't know about you, but when I breezed through insanity with an adept, I didn't just spam warp to the exclusion of all other powers. Of course not, but you had to grab at least Miranda/Garrus for every level that involved blue suns/geth/thingswithshields. I know I did. On your own you can do literally nothing to them without shooting them in the head for 2 years with an SMG. Similarly, you can't even use Singularity or Pull Field on Husks thanks to their like 2 armor points, you have to shoot all of them a couple times or warp them before you kill. The only reason Adept was so easy is because Reave was completely overpowered.
Reave is redundant when you have warp. Both powers are good against barriers and armor. Unlike warp, however, reave is affected by the power duration penalty on insanity. More importantly, it does not detonate and, as an adept, detonations are your bread and butter. Stasis is the better bonus power; there's no overlapping and it makes certain enemies, like krogan and ymirs, irrelevant.
As for weapons, I recommend getting to the disabled collector ship as quickly as possible so you can pick up a better weapon. AR is the obvious choice, though if you have the geth shotgun that works too.
Miranda and Garrus are both S class, but you don't need them at any point. I took Jack on every mission and mixed the second spot around and facerolled the game.
|
Anyone can use Reave, its a Samara loyalty power.
|
Miranda was without a doubt the best squadmate in ME2 for the reasons already mentioned, but I think Garrus was rather #3 than #2; Kasumi was a fucking beast if you just spammed Rapid Shadow Strike, you essentially gave her a target which she one-shotted and then had an 80% chance of doing so immediately again. Fuck multi-layer protection, she just killed everything regardless lol.
|
On March 31 2012 09:35 Praetorial wrote:It felt very artificial, all of the conversations with her went something like like this: Miranda: I hate being modified, my father is a control freak. Shepard: Nah be proud, *stalker glare* ...mmmmmm For the whole of the game. 
The fact that she kept talking about it made me hate her so much.
Yeah i get it, you had a bad childhood, your father is a bad guy and you're supposed to be perfect.
DONT FUCKING CARE.
Damn.
I always thought her Father was The Illusive Man tho, and we would get to see it at the end.
|
This is a bit off topic here but I am curious so 
I just read an article in one of swedens biggest newspapper regarding changing the end of ME3, just a couple of hours later I saw a video one gametrailers.com regardin the same issue. Apperently bioware is actually considerd to make an alternativ ending for the game now as a result of all this.
During all this my face is the embodiment of a question mark. Can someone explain to me what is so horribly wrong with ending of ME3? I played the game twice and I have seen both versions of the end. I mean bioware considers to make a new ending, like really?
Spoiler alert!
I mean I can come up with a couple of things if I try to find an errors. The fact that there is no end battle is a little bit wierd and over all I would have liked to play more on earth. Imagine fighting within the Palace of Westminster, would have been preeeetty awesome imo!
Also I think people might get annoyed by the fact that the ending is so absolute, the fact that the mass relays gets destroyed at the end prevents all kind of successors to the game. But then again I dont get how D3 is following up from the end of D2 LoD, so it might not be a problem :p
Anyway if you are one of those guys that rage on the end of ME3 plz enlighten me :D
|
On March 31 2012 20:47 4ZakeN87 wrote:This is a bit off topic here but I am curious so I just read an article in one of swedens biggest newspapper regarding changing the end of ME3, just a couple of hours later I saw a video one gametrailers.com regardin the same issue. Apperently bioware is actually considerd to make an alternativ ending for the game now as a result of all this. During all this my face is the embodiment of a question mark. Can someone explain to me what is so horribly wrong with ending of ME3? I played the game twice and I have seen both versions of the end. I mean bioware considers to make a new ending, like really? Spoiler alert! I mean I can come up with a couple of things if I try to find an errors. The fact that there is no end battle is a little bit wierd and over all I would have liked to play more on earth. Imagine fighting within the Palace of Westminster, would have been preeeetty awesome imo! Also I think people might get annoyed by the fact that the ending is so absolute, the fact that the mass relays gets destroyed at the end prevents all kind of successors to the game. But then again I dont get how D3 is following up from the end of D2 LoD, so it might not be a problem :p Anyway if you are one of those guys that rage on the end of ME3 plz enlighten me :D
+ Show Spoiler +It's not so much the lack of a final boss battle or the grim fate of the galaxy, but rather the lack of options; Mass Effect has always been about making important decisions, and Bioware claimed that in ME3, now more than ever, your decisions would litterally change the fate of the galaxy, but guess what? Regardless of what choices you've made throughout the entire trilogy, the three different options you get at the end are 99% identical, and they all suck, not so much because of the destruction of the Mass Relays, but because everything you did up to that point really didn't matter.
|
On March 31 2012 20:51 HaXXspetten wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2012 20:47 4ZakeN87 wrote:This is a bit off topic here but I am curious so I just read an article in one of swedens biggest newspapper regarding changing the end of ME3, just a couple of hours later I saw a video one gametrailers.com regardin the same issue. Apperently bioware is actually considerd to make an alternativ ending for the game now as a result of all this. During all this my face is the embodiment of a question mark. Can someone explain to me what is so horribly wrong with ending of ME3? I played the game twice and I have seen both versions of the end. I mean bioware considers to make a new ending, like really? Spoiler alert! I mean I can come up with a couple of things if I try to find an errors. The fact that there is no end battle is a little bit wierd and over all I would have liked to play more on earth. Imagine fighting within the Palace of Westminster, would have been preeeetty awesome imo! Also I think people might get annoyed by the fact that the ending is so absolute, the fact that the mass relays gets destroyed at the end prevents all kind of successors to the game. But then again I dont get how D3 is following up from the end of D2 LoD, so it might not be a problem :p Anyway if you are one of those guys that rage on the end of ME3 plz enlighten me :D + Show Spoiler +It's not so much the lack of a final boss battle or the grim fate of the galaxy, but rather the lack of options; Mass Effect has always been about making important decisions, and Bioware claimed that in ME3, now more than ever, your decisions would litterally change the fate of the galaxy, but guess what? Regardless of what choices you've made throughout the entire trilogy, the three different options you get at the end are 99% identical, and they all suck, not so much because of the destruction of the Mass Relays, but because everything you did up to that point really didn't matter.
Wasnt it the same in me2 though? Except for the loyalty mission which changed if the specific character survived or not, the end was just a conversation which resulted in 3 different outcomes. You leave the reaper to the illusive man, you destroy the base, or the third which i forgot. Nothing else mattered.
|
Lalalaland34492 Posts
Whether or not your entire squad lived or died mattered on your previous choices. Pretty sure that's a biggie.
:D
|
ME2 definately had a more flexible ending, but regardless: it's not really comparable, because then there was an entire game to follow it, so it wasn't really an "ending" if you think about it.
|
But i wouldnt call that a decision. Except for the samara/morinth situation, they are all just optional no brainer missions. And if there was no follow up game, the human reaper being the final boss, would it have mattered whether any of those survived or would you say no matter what you did in the game, the outcome is always the same?
+ Show Spoiler +Whereas in me3 you have to decide if you want to cure the krogan or rather have salarian support. If you want the geth to survive or the quarians (or both) etc etc. In the end it doesnt matter, yes, but its still better than me2
|
On March 31 2012 21:27 Warri wrote:But i wouldnt call that a decision. Except for the samara/morinth situation, they are all just optional no brainer missions. And if there was no follow up game, the human reaper being the final boss, would it have mattered whether any of those survived or would you say no matter what you did in the game, the outcome is always the same? + Show Spoiler +Whereas in me3 you have to decide if you want to cure the krogan or rather have salarian support. If you want the geth to survive or the quarians (or both) etc etc. In the end it doesnt matter, yes, but its still better than me2
That's just it: there was a follow-up game, so it's a totally different scenario => it's not really comparable.
|
On March 31 2012 21:33 HaXXspetten wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2012 21:27 Warri wrote:But i wouldnt call that a decision. Except for the samara/morinth situation, they are all just optional no brainer missions. And if there was no follow up game, the human reaper being the final boss, would it have mattered whether any of those survived or would you say no matter what you did in the game, the outcome is always the same? + Show Spoiler +Whereas in me3 you have to decide if you want to cure the krogan or rather have salarian support. If you want the geth to survive or the quarians (or both) etc etc. In the end it doesnt matter, yes, but its still better than me2 That's just it: there was a follow-up game, so it's a totally different scenario => it's not really comparable.
Also we weren't told to expect anything more than deciding the lives and deaths of Shepard and crew with our decisions in ME2, so it was fine when it turned out to be just that.
But BioWare really gave us huge huge expectations that what we did would make a huge difference, not just to which video played at the end.
But besides that, the ending was quite decent the first time, at least, not the worst scifi story ending by a long shot.
Also, bandwagons are fun! Especially with cupcakes!
|
Lalalaland34492 Posts
Yeah if Bioware had told us before release that we would basically be choosing our favourite colour I'm sure we'd all have been perfectly happy with it.
|
Besides the fact that your choices/EMS/etc don't matter, I think the biggest issue is that you have no idea what happens to the rest of the universe. They promised a closure, an ending that would answer all the questions, but it only creates more. It didn't have to be everyone living happily ever after, but for a series that focused so much on the interaction between crew members or the diferent races, something had to be shown, even if it was everyone dieing.
I was always much more interested in the Geth/Quarian interaction, the Krogan storyline, etc. than in the Reapers main storyline, they were just much more well done. Ending without knowing wether the other races will be able to leave the Sol system, wether everyone will starve to death, where your teammates ended up and how they reached there was just frustating. They imply that things like curing the Genophage and making peace between Quarians and Geth are just so huge, but in the end it hardly matters.
This would be a perfect series for a "15 years later" ending, showing how your choices impacted the rest of the universe and how the other races are handling themselfs without Commander Shepard to save their asses.
In ME2 it didn't matter, it left things hanging because there would be another game.
|
Is it just me, or does Insanity actually get easier the later in the game you get? I just finished my second playthrough ME3 as Infiltrator on Insanity, and I found the latter half of the game much easier than I anticipated. I mean, sure, I died a few times against the three Geth Primes, Kai Leng, and defending the second Thanix missile truck, but overall, I never really felt it was _that_ difficult. The only enemy which came close to being as difficult as I thought it would be were Banshees, who soaked a lot of damage before dying.
I used a bit of an unorthodox Infiltrator style with a Javelin sniper rifle and Graal Spike Thrower/M-11 Wraith shotgun loadout because, lets face it, SMGs are awful in ME3. I chose Energy Drain as my bonus power. Garrus was a staple squad-mate because of his ability against all protection types with Overload, Concussive Shot, and Armor Piercing Ammo, and 95% of the time he'd have the Particle Rifle equipped. My second squad-mate depended on what I was facing. Against Cerberus, I'd mostly use Javik for double Particle Rifle damage, Dark Channel, and some CC support. Against the Geth, Tali was an obvious pick for double Sabotage + double Energy Drain, along with Garrus' Overload and my own Disruptor Ammo. Against Reaper force, I mixed it up a bit, sometimes Javik, sometimes Liara against heavy Husk missions. I used James on Sanctum purely for that bit at the end with the Brutes and Banshee. And I used Tali on the Earth missions for the distraction Drones, Energy Drain, and frontload Shotgun damage. Liara really could be a liability, though - her incredibly low hitpoints don't figure well against enemies that can 2-shot her.
Once I evolved a few skills to max level, the game was surprisingly easy. Comboing Overload and Energy Drain, and then a Javelin headshot, or sowing chaos with Cloak + heavy melee and Shotgun was very fun. Kai Leng was the hardest part by far, I think. Since the grenades that Assault Troopers threw killed me in one hit, them throwing those at me was a pain in the ass because of the very limited space to take cover in that room. If I did it again, I'd take Liara or Javik for that point, but I had Garrus and the obligatory EDI and so didn't have much CC.
|
|
|
The article gets bonus points for referring to Shepard as "she".
Playing as a Renegade FemShep with glowing eyes and scars is so badass.
|
On March 31 2012 23:11 azarat wrote:
Is it just me, or does Insanity actually get easier the later in the game you get?
My first playthrough was as Vanguard. It was fairly difficult at times, high risk high reward style. Had a few rough battles that I really had to plan out before I could beat them.
Now I am on my 2nd playthrough playing Warp/Throw/Overload Sentinel, with Liara and EDI for more power comboing, and just roflstomping everything. Stasis/Throw is so incredibly good, mostly because they cannot roll out of any of it. Throw cooldown is so low you can follow up with a Warp on a new target, then Stasis on a 3rd followed by a Throw on each target. You basically enter every fight with 3-5 enemies dead already.
I think the latter part of the game gets easier once you are more used to throwing combos around and figuring out the start of each fight. Also maxing out your abilities helps ofc.
|
On April 01 2012 03:17 Mastermyth wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2012 23:11 azarat wrote:
Is it just me, or does Insanity actually get easier the later in the game you get? My first playthrough was as Vanguard. It was fairly difficult at times, high risk high reward style. Had a few rough battles that I really had to plan out before I could beat them.
I play as Vanguard on hardcore, it seems totally op later on with maxed out charge. With 200 % cast speed I can charge them so often, and get completely new shields every few seconds.
On Tuchanka I thought 3 brutes at the same time in melee, they simply could not kill me. Geth Prime in melee is np either.
Charge spam is pretty boring though. :/
Overall the game seems MUCH easier than ME2.
|
My biggest problem with the game was that it was too easy. I played on Insanity and like I mentioned before, the hardest part in the game for me was the last Marauder that tried to stop you getting to the citadel in the end.
I think part of the reason was because of how strong your squadmates were. 1 grenade would 1 hit me, but those guys could tank like 3 without breaking a sweat. Also (not a bad thing) the AI was considerably better than in ME2. Anyone remember in ME2 when squadmates were knocked out of cover they refused to automatically go back? Instead they would just stand looking dumb and die instantly.
Also I played an Inflintrator which more or less had a ''get out of jail card'' when it came to sticky situations. Oh and reviving teammates doesn't take Medi-Gel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
