|
Your donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » Games » General RPG » Thoughts on Mass Effect 3 after completing it

Default Thoughts on Mass Effect 3 after completing it

March 14th, 2012, 21:59
I've completed it twice now and I've seen no evidence of this "easter egg" ending that people are referring to. Does it have to be a replay with the same character? Maybe I can dig it up on youtube or something.

Anyway, replaying it was actually more fun than I expected, mainly because I knew roughly where I was about to get disappointed. Doesn't change the fact that there's a lot of holes and a lot of stuff that's never explained. Examples:

Spoiler

Anyway, it's still a fun game, though the multiplayer thing is a bit annoying. It is possible to solo multiplayer missions though, so you can take care of the readiness rating on your own, but it's very hard.

By the way, my 2nd character was a Renegade character. The choices do make a difference here and there, but they don't seem to affect the outcome.
Maylander is offline

Maylander

SasqWatch

#41

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Bergen
Posts: 5,655
Send a message via MSN to Maylander

Default 

March 14th, 2012, 23:43
Originally Posted by Maylander View Post
I've completed it twice now and I've seen no evidence of this "easter egg" ending that people are referring to. Does it have to be a replay with the same character? Maybe I can dig it up on youtube or something.

Anyway, replaying it was actually more fun than I expected, mainly because I knew roughly where I was about to get disappointed. Doesn't change the fact that there's a lot of holes and a lot of stuff that's never explained. Examples:

Spoiler

Anyway, it's still a fun game, though the multiplayer thing is a bit annoying. It is possible to solo multiplayer missions though, so you can take care of the readiness rating on your own, but it's very hard.

By the way, my 2nd character was a Renegade character. The choices do make a difference here and there, but they don't seem to affect the outcome.
Have you followed any of the indoctrination theories running rampant? There seem to be some pretty strong arguments for it and it goes a long way to explain many issues people seem to have. On the other hand, if true, was very risky of Bioware and maybe giving them more credit then they deserve.

Since you have played it twice now was curious.

Character is centrality, the impossibility of being displaced or overset. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
wolfgrimdark is offline

wolfgrimdark

wolfgrimdark's Avatar
Keeper of the Watch

#42

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: NH
Posts: 912

Default 

March 15th, 2012, 00:35
I've heard of it, but it seems a little far fetched, and not very BioWare-like. I honestly think the ending is exactly what is shown.

I also think they'll release a DLC that either explains things or somehow builds on it.
Maylander is offline

Maylander

SasqWatch

#43

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Bergen
Posts: 5,655
Send a message via MSN to Maylander

Default 

March 15th, 2012, 00:53
Originally Posted by mrowakus View Post
After all its main story arch that we are talking about.
No, we arenīt . I was talking about examples of what I consider to be competent storytelling in Mass Effect series.

Originally Posted by mrowakus View Post
I disagree, unless by capitalize you mean "show that the entire writing team (with the exception of the lad/lass who wrote Mordin) deserves immediate sacking". The story just doesn't make sense, is full of cliches, which are executed in the most mundane fashion.
You just seemed to agree with me that those two story arcs are good, what is this. It seems like you shifted the attention to the whole game here, whereas I was talking about those two arcs only. If thatīs not the case, I disagree, more below.

Originally Posted by mrowakus View Post
The choices in the previous games matter very little. Yeah, so you get a flavour dialogue, and a bonus/penalty to War Assets. So?
Again, this is in regards to genophage and geth/quarian arcs only.
First, no, the dialogue you get is not "flavour".
Itīs a story/character driven game and as such it assumes youīre invested into its story and characters. If youīre not, itīs a failure on a different front, but if you are, you get legitimate narrative consequences. Thereīs nothing flavour about having to kill Wrex, for example. Thereīs nothing flavour about wiping out geth, wiping out quarians or brokering peace between them.
As for the choices that factor into these arcs, I think thereīs enough of them for this kind of production.
How the genophage line plays out is influenced by Wrex alive/dead in ME1, Mordin alive/dead in ME2, Maelonīs sure saved/destroyed in ME2 and whether you choose to sabotage the cure in ME3 or not.
If the main quest worked similarly (aka council saved/alive or collector base kept/destroyed would have a lot more significant influence), personally I wouldnīt have much if any complaints in regards to ME3īs treatment of playerīs actions in the previous games. Well, besides the endings, if theyīd stayed the same.

Originally Posted by mrowakus View Post
Arcanum happened, Fallouts happened, Witcher happened - all of them have better executed C&C.
Neither was a trilogy with an import save functionality though.
Import a save where Geralt was into Shani into TW2 and see what happens.

Mass Effect series mostly suck at usual C&C (and itīs real pity ME3īs ending is so lazy, it was a great opportunity to rectify some of the C&C deficiency), but they do offer something akin to, I dunno, customized narrative bits across the games and thatīs a pretty unique feat in itself.
Wizardry 6-8 have a certain easter egg that involves certain set of actions in 6 resulting in acknowledgment in 8. All I got out of it was some experience I didnīt need and a "flavour" dialogue, but it was still a great moment.
ME series are the only games Iīve played that offer something similar, even though often the acknowledgment is just an e-mail or in-game news.
In ME3, I got 5 war assets out of Conrad Verner encounter (among other things thanks to asari writings Iīve collected in ME1) and that moment ruled with an iron fist, even though the asset boost was useless.
Even something as trivial as Jack remembering that Iīve used her as a biotic bubble gal during the suicide mission was pretty cool.

Originally Posted by mrowakus View Post
Yes, but there are many MACRO stuff that are wrong -
Since ME2, the writing/plotting has been of inconsistent quality and unfortunately most of the worst stuff happens to constitute the highest level elements, yeah.
However, I find most of the lower level stuff acceptable to good and thatīs what the majority of both games consists of. I also tend to consider those genophage and geth/quarians arcs to be very close to macro, because all the stuff related to these together contains probably more writing than the whole main plot.

Iīve already posted what I think about ME3īs ending. No disagreement here, the fact it doesnīt put war assets to concrete use brings down the whole ME3, the last 5-10 minutes bring down the whole franchise.
I canīt deny that I enjoyed most of ME3 up till that point though. Some plot holes, terrible beginning, lazy deus ex machina insertion, The Kid and some minor stuff aside, overall it was still a good piece of popcorn entertainment with fun combat in my book.

Originally Posted by mrowakus View Post
Can it be satisfying as a B-grade flick about killing rubber-headed alliens with lazor pistols? Sure! But nothing more.
Sometimes B-grade flicks shit all over Dostojevskij.
Oh, and my vanguard on insanity rarely needed any stinkinī "lazor pistols" .


Originally Posted by Grimlorn View Post
Maybe YOU should go read that paragraph again. The very first sentence talks about the main story getting worse in later titles.
Obviously a side note.
Originally Posted by Grimlorn View Post
Although, I would be interested in what plot holes you're referring to in the first game.
Thatīs kinda irrelevant, since my point was just that I havenīt found any bothersome plot holes in ME1.
Right now I may even not remember any plot holes made in ME1 at all!
Last edited by DeepO; March 15th, 2012 at 01:24.
DeepO is offline

DeepO

DeepO's Avatar
deep outside

#44

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Prague
Posts: 2,332

Default 

March 15th, 2012, 00:56
ME1 didn't have a lot of plot holes (mostly minor ones), but ME2 turned the whole thing into a Swiss cheese. I was hoping ME3 would finally give us the answers ME2 lacked, but that was not the case.

Here's an excellent analysis of why the main story of ME2 makes very little sense:
http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=7004

A few of the things pointed out here has been dealt with (such as how the Illusive Man managed to recruit Dr. Chakwas etc), but a lot of the holes remain.
Maylander is offline

Maylander

SasqWatch

#45

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Bergen
Posts: 5,655
Send a message via MSN to Maylander

Default 

March 15th, 2012, 02:25
Originally Posted by DeepO View Post
No, we arenīt . I was talking about examples of what I consider to be competent storytelling in Mass Effect series.


You just seemed to agree with me that those two story arcs are good, what is this. It seems like you shifted the attention to the whole game here, whereas I was talking about those two arcs only. If thatīs not the case, I disagree, more below.
Yes, I did.

Again, this is in regards to genophage and geth/quarian arcs only.
First, no, the dialogue you get is not "flavour".
Itīs a story/character driven game and as such it assumes youīre invested into its story and characters. If youīre not, itīs a failure on a different front, but if you are, you get legitimate narrative consequences.
Ok, narrative consequences. Good. What about gameplay consequences? You know, for example, different questlines?

Thereīs nothing flavour about having to kill Wrex, for example. Thereīs nothing flavour about wiping out geth, wiping out quarians or brokering peace between them.
There is. In case of Wrex you get Wreav who has exactly the same lines read by a different voiceactor. In case of the Geth and Quarians you still end up doing the same thing and end up with the same thing. The flavour text may be different, but gameplay consequences hold little water - you just get more/less war assets.

As for the choices that factor into these arcs, I think thereīs enough of them for this kind of production.
How the genophage line plays out is influenced by Wrex alive/dead in ME1, Mordin alive/dead in ME2, Maelonīs sure saved/destroyed in ME2 and whether you choose to sabotage the cure in ME3 or not.
If the main quest worked similarly (aka council saved/alive or collector base kept/destroyed would have a lot more significant influence), personally I wouldnīt have much if any complaints in regards to ME3īs treatment of playerīs actions in the previous games. Well, besides the endings, if theyīd stayed the same.

Neither was a trilogy with an import save functionality though.
Import a save where Geralt was into Shani into TW2 and see what happens.
True about TW2, but I don't care about flavour consequences, nor about importing saves from diffferent games. To me it's a gimmick that is doomed to fail, which offers cheap excuses as to why the game cannot branch out and have many different real endings and questlines. ME3 did nothing to change that.

Mass Effect series mostly suck at usual C&C (and itīs real pity ME3īs ending is so lazy, it was a great opportunity to rectify some of the C&C deficiency), but they do offer something akin to, I dunno, customized narrative bits across the games and thatīs a pretty unique feat in itself.
Fair enough, but I can't help but feel disappointed by this narrative - for two reasons. 1). The story is very weak. The moment you stop looking at small things, like single characters, divorced from context, and start perceiving the larger picture you realise how much of a patchwork it is. Thus, no matter how I look at it, I can't say the story was good or even decent. The best comliment I have - it had its moments. 2). The story is badly implemented into the framework of the gameplay which restricts player's freedom and reduces his input to meaningless wishfull thinking.

Wizardry 6-8 have a certain easter egg that involves certain set of actions in 6 resulting in acknowledgment in 8. All I got out of it was some experience I didnīt need and a "flavour" dialogue, but it was still a great moment.
Good. But then again, Wizardry series aren't exactly praised for the amazing story, which is the case if ME series.

ME series are the only games Iīve played that offer something similar, even though often the acknowledgment is just an e-mail or in-game news.
In ME3, I got 5 war assets out of Conrad Verner encounter (among other things thanks to asari writings Iīve collected in ME1) and that moment ruled with an iron fist, even though the asset boost was useless.
Great, but as you said - it was an easter egg, and you can't make a plot out of those.

Even something as trivial as Jack remembering that Iīve used her as a biotic bubble gal during the suicide mission was pretty cool.
I agree, that's quite cool.

Since ME2, the writing/plotting has been of inconsistent quality and unfortunately most of the worst stuff happens to constitute the highest level elements, yeah.
Unfortunately, that's the case.

However, I find most of the lower level stuff acceptable to good and thatīs what the majority of both games consists of. I also tend to consider those genophage and geth/quarians arcs to be very close to macro, because all the stuff related to these together contains probably more writing than the whole main plot.
Fair enough. To be honest with you I liked the micro stuff as well. However, I do thing they do nothing to excuse poor implementation of the rest. In fact, I find it mindboggling how this micro quality stuff could appear together with MACRO nonsense. I could excuse it if it were the other way round. As it is…

I canīt deny that I enjoyed most of ME3 up till that point though. Some plot holes, terrible beginning, lazy deus ex machina insertion, The Kid and some minor stuff aside, overall it was still a good piece of popcorn entertainment with fun combat in my book.
Yes, I enjoyed the game for that pulpy, dirty quality as well, with vastly improved gameplay. I have this soft spot for space marines going pew-pew with guns - and I can't help it. However, it is popular belief that the story in this piece is actualy good - which, due to various misgivings you yourself pointed out, is not the case. Furthermore, I ultimately consider ME influence as harmful to RPG genre as it really shallowed it down, giving up interactivity in favour of "cinematic experience". That's why I kind of go ballistic when Biodrones are drooling over it. The sheer presence of the audience that would award developers for botched job by buying "alternative ending DLC" prevents quality products from coming about. I would be fine if most people recognized the series for what it were.

Sometimes B-grade flicks shit all over Dostojevskij.
Maybe in the sense that it's more entertaining. I can't help and point out, however, that while watching B-flicks you don't really emotionally attached to any character… which in my case was true about the entire ME 1 cast and most of chars from ME2 and 3 (Legion… shall be forevar remembered ).

Oh, and my vanguard on insanity rarely needed any stinkinī "lazor pistols" .
Do not underestimate the power of a handy Carnifex or Paladin Mk. V, or even Phalanx. Those are monsters, not guns. My Adept on Insanity can vouch for that.

Obviously a side note.

Thatīs kinda irrelevant, since my point was just that I havenīt found any bothersome plot holes in ME1.
Right now I may even not remember any plot holes made in ME1 at all!
That was too early for any plotholes to become apparent, though the sheer existence of ME1 creates those in later installments. Nevertheless, many of the ideas were pulpy at best. Off the top of my head: the whole idea of Spectres being above the law for no apparent reason, or that the entire council believed some random recording retireved by a Quarian (so, a member of hardly respected species) from some random Geth, which could have been easily doctored, and not the words of their most trusted agent (Saren).
mrowakus is offline

mrowakus

mrowakus's Avatar
Watcher

#46

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 88

Default 

March 15th, 2012, 02:56
Originally Posted by Maylander View Post
ME1 didn't have a lot of plot holes (mostly minor ones), but ME2 turned the whole thing into a Swiss cheese. I was hoping ME3 would finally give us the answers ME2 lacked, but that was not the case.

Here's an excellent analysis of why the main story of ME2 makes very little sense:
http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=7004

A few of the things pointed out here has been dealt with (such as how the Illusive Man managed to recruit Dr. Chakwas etc), but a lot of the holes remain.
A very good article. I generally agree with everything that was there. However, it's a great shame the author overlooked one important thing about ME2 plotholes - the "Loyalty" missions. First the game creates in you a sense of urgency (We must save the colonies!) and then has you solving personal issues of your crew that have nothing to do with any part of the main quest. Furthermore, the game actually penalizes you for acting smart and hasting to rescue the colonists (sorry Jacob, your father is but one man, and we really don't have the time to search for people that might be dead for years. At this moment the Collectors may be abducting whole colony!). The worst part is how it actually penalizes you - for some reason your characters die - but not due to them being disloyal to you, but them magically becoming incompetent.

That's why I like Legion so much - his loyalty quest was not banal, and important in the light of events of ME1. Stopping Reaper-Geth alliance sure can take priority over some random colony.
mrowakus is offline

mrowakus

mrowakus's Avatar
Watcher

#47

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 88

Default 

March 15th, 2012, 05:48
Originally Posted by mrowakus View Post
Ok, narrative consequences. Good. What about gameplay consequences? You know, for example, different questlines?
Different questlines would be great, sure. Iīm ok just with the narrative consequences in these cases though.
Remember, I mentioned these two arcs as examples of good storytelling, gameplay consequences arenīt all that relevant in this context imo.

Originally Posted by mrowakus View Post
There is. In case of Wrex you get Wreav who has exactly the same lines read by a different voiceactor.
Wrex was alive in my game, so I canīt attest to it, but judging by few youtube videos, his lines are mostly different, just the scenes are mostly the same.
If you cured the genophage and had Wrex in your game, check out this version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kL2FIUi57Jw
(Shepardīs "careful diplomacy" face at around 6:40 is precisely the kind of cheese I enjoy in the series, also, note that in this version itīs Shepard who says "someone else mightīve gotten it wrong")
Thatīs a pretty different conclusion (narratively), Iīd say.
Doing this with Wreav has no further repercussions, but if you sabotage the cure with Wrex, later you get this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrAncE0WUIg
Only narrative (and likely some minuses in assets), but still pretty cool imo.
Aaand if Mordin died in your ME2, you get to witness this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dr9k2ywHWL4§

Originally Posted by mrowakus View Post
In case of the Geth and Quarians you still end up doing the same thing and end up with the same thing. The flavour text may be different, but gameplay consequences hold little water - you just get more/less war assets.
Well, if you wipe out quarians, you loose a squad member .
As a climax of an arc started back in ME1, personally Iīve found brokering peace between the two really satisfying (and Legion referring to "himself" as "I" instead of "we" at the end was the cherry on the top) and it wasnīt something achievable in entirely straighforward fashion. Afaik, without an imported save itīs impossible and even on import you may be SOL (even if you completed quests related to this, but not in certain fashion), and you still need pretty high reputation.

As for the gameplay consequences, for me thatīs a separate matter and has mostly to do with the shitty ending and war assets not working/being put to use in granular manner.
But personally Iīm fine with the narrative conclusions of the above arcs, so that at least counts for something.

Originally Posted by mrowakus View Post
True about TW2, but I don't care about flavour consequences, nor about importing saves from diffferent games. To me it's a gimmick that is doomed to fail, which offers cheap excuses as to why the game cannot branch out and have many different real endings and questlines. ME3 did nothing to change that.
Yeah, I just happen to like the gimmick .
Itīs something unique and thereīs quite a lot of other games if I want to scratch the C&C-heavy itch anyway.

Originally Posted by mrowakus View Post
Fair enough. To be honest with you I liked the micro stuff as well. However, I do thing they do nothing to excuse poor implementation of the rest. In fact, I find it mindboggling how this micro quality stuff could appear together with MACRO nonsense. I could excuse it if it were the other way round. As it is…
The micro may do nothing to excuse poor implementation of the rest, but, well, it does a lot to excuse my enjoyment . I just donīt think about the MACRO much, or just laugh at it. Itīs quite easy to leave it at periphery, considering the amount of other content. For example in the case of ME2īs core thread, I may not like the collector plot line, but I do enjoy the collector-y locations for their atmosphere and some combat scenarios, plus I find the suicide mission itself to be a cool event, human reaper aside.

Originally Posted by mrowakus View Post
Maybe in the sense that it's more entertaining.
I meant it more in the "itch" sense.
When Iīm in the mood for some "popcorn" entertainment, "popcorn" entertainment beats THE ART, hands down .
I consider Mass Effect series a good "popcorn" entertainment.
Some of the worst bits in ME3 are obviously attempts at transcending the category.

Originally Posted by mrowakus View Post
Do not underestimate the power of a handy Carnifex or Paladin Mk. V, or even Phalanx. Those are monsters, not guns. My Adept on Insanity can vouch for that.
I suspect they generally did a good job at diversifying weapons.
Suspect, because my pinballing vanguard didnīt really have enough time to appreciate
it .

Originally Posted by mrowakus View Post
That was too early for any plotholes to become apparent, though the sheer existence of ME1 creates those in later installments.
Iīve always thought ME1īs story felt very self-contained, complete and likely hard to follow consistently in sequels, so kinda agreed.
On its own though, I think itīs tight.

Sorry I didnīt respond to everything, but that wouldīve likely turned the post into clusterfuck and I agree, at least to some extent, with the other stuff anyway.
Last edited by DeepO; March 15th, 2012 at 06:10.
DeepO is offline

DeepO

DeepO's Avatar
deep outside

#48

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Prague
Posts: 2,332

Default 

March 15th, 2012, 08:51
Originally Posted by joxer View Post
I'll agree with anyone who says that the ending is poor because:
1. Why "the god" is a human child and not asari, prothean, whatever else child
2. Why the illusive man represents blue choice and anderson red choice if it's logical to be vice versa
3. Why all your choices in the game have so little impact in the end and whatever you do, mass relays are doomed
4. Why Catalyst's solution assumes organics always want to destroy non-organics - when you (ok, me) saved geth from extinction (so Tali jumped from a cliff) and one of my crewmembers is AI - not only that, but you can't tell this to Catalyst to prove him wrong
5. What the hell was Normandy trying to do in the "subspace stream" while mass relays were being destroyed - shouldn't that ship be on earth fighting?
6. Why London in yet another game has to be a place where "Hellgate" appears? Why not Johanesbuurg or some other not-so-popular capital?
7. Why Krogan Battlemaster wants to buy Australia when recently you may get Greece for cheap on ebay (check the politically non-correct humor thread on this forum)?
8. Why the whole ending feels like a result of a false perception, indoctrination in fact, but if was an indoctrination how come it's not explained and also what's the point of adding some anonymous "storytelling" Stargazer after credits?
9. etc, etc, about the endings design I could number even more bad made stuff
Rhetorical questions.

3- Because Bioware got their Dragon Age lesson (as should any Dragon Age player), that the developpment of divergent universes is simply not sustainable?
If you started to play ME3 thinking you would matter in the end making, I suggest you take once again the pain of playing DA 1 and 2

4- Because it had witnessed countless cycles?

Etc…
ChienAboyeur is offline

ChienAboyeur

SasqWatch

#49

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,215

Default 

March 15th, 2012, 08:55
Originally Posted by mrowakus View Post
First the game creates in you a sense of urgency (We must save the colonies!) and then has you solving personal issues of your crew that have nothing to do with any part of the main quest. Furthermore, the game actually penalizes you for acting smart and hasting to rescue the colonists (sorry Jacob, your father is but one man, and we really don't have the time to search for people that might be dead for years.
No. The game creates nothing. The narrative creates.
ME2 has the narrative of a suicide mission while the game mechanics support a walk in the park mission.

Acting smart is taking things at face value, acknowledging that the game mechanics do not convey a suicide mission urge and act accordingly.
ChienAboyeur is offline

ChienAboyeur

SasqWatch

#50

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,215

Default 

March 15th, 2012, 09:11
Originally Posted by Maylander View Post
Here's an excellent analysis of why the main story of ME2 makes very little sense:
http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=7004

A few of the things pointed out here has been dealt with (such as how the Illusive Man managed to recruit Dr. Chakwas etc), but a lot of the holes remain.
Sentimentalism.

It was established firmly in ME1 that…

Is it serious?

By now, it should be acquired that being fed with inaccurate information at start is part of the narrative technique. Video games appeal to kid dimension, kids usually think they are the center of the universe, that everything that happens is by them.

Video games using that trick were selected by the video games players communauty who received well the call for exceptionalism.

And discovering bits of information that no one else knows as you progress through the game boots exceptionalism by 9.

Reading the article shows very few plot holes and all in all, a poorly thought article.

I would favour the emergence of mature gaming where the player is just but one bit of the gaming universe with major things evolving without the player's inputs but I also acknowledge that the players communauty made the choice of exceptionalism and I cant blame game developpers for adopting solutions that give what the gaming communauty wants.
ChienAboyeur is offline

ChienAboyeur

SasqWatch

#51

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,215

Default 

March 15th, 2012, 09:14
Cant tell I was disappointing by ME3 because it is what I expected it to be.

Played it because I played one and two.
ChienAboyeur is offline

ChienAboyeur

SasqWatch

#52

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,215

Default 

March 15th, 2012, 19:04
@Chien
You're just grasping at straws here. The plot holes are blatantly obvious to anyone who's played through ME1-3 more than a few times. I have. Missing information or wrong perception would be a narrative technique if it was confronted later on. It's not. No explanations are given.

Spoiler – Examples

Anyway, regarding DA1 and 2:
Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur View Post
If you started to play ME3 thinking you would matter in the end making, I suggest you take once again the pain of playing DA 1 and 2
Huh? DA1 and 2 are vastly different when it comes to endings. DA2 is exactly like ME3, yes. You can't affect a thing. DA1 is very different, however, where you can affect the outcome of pretty much every faction you ever get involved with. Your choices matter, and that is reflected when watching the ending. Sure, beating the darkspawn happens every time, but that's where the similarities end.

People are not whining because it wasn't a happy fluffy bunny with flowers ending. They're whining because they didn't get an ending similar to DA1 where the ends were tied up - we got to know exactly what happened to the dwarves, the elves, the mages and so on. In ME3 we get no information at all. The ending makes no sense.
Maylander is offline

Maylander

SasqWatch

#53

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Bergen
Posts: 5,655
Send a message via MSN to Maylander

Default 

March 15th, 2012, 22:23
It does not correspond with what I wrote.

So I rephrase: the information fed in ME1 is misleading on purpose. This is the narrative technique. You, the player, who wishes to feel exceptional, are going to be the one who discovers the real substance of Cerberus (and the rest).

The article considers that the information given in ME1 is one hundred reliable. It is firmly established etc

On the contrary, the information fed here is approximate on purpose.

Only you the player is going to find out what is going on really.

Spoiler


The Dragon Age lesson was that one indeed. When an episode ends with divergent outcomes, the cost of producing the follow up explode as you have to developp several games instead of one.

If an episode brings two divergent conclusions, the next episode has to provide with two fundamentally different versions. If it follows, the next episode had to provide four different versions etc

Not manageable. Not possible to sustain.

Dragon age lesson. Apparently, certain players did not get it.
ChienAboyeur is offline

ChienAboyeur

SasqWatch

#54

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,215

Default 

March 16th, 2012, 10:52
Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur View Post
It does not correspond with what I wrote.

So I rephrase: the information fed in ME1 is misleading on purpose. This is the narrative technique. You, the player, who wishes to feel exceptional, are going to be the one who discovers the real substance of Cerberus (and the rest).

The article considers that the information given in ME1 is one hundred reliable. It is firmly established etc

On the contrary, the information fed here is approximate on purpose.

Only you the player is going to find out what is going on really.
Like I said: This would be a narrative technique if we were ever confronted with the plot holes and explained why it's not a plot hole. That's simply not the case in Mass Effect. I'll explain more in the spoiler tag.

Spoiler

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur View Post
The Dragon Age lesson was that one indeed. When an episode ends with divergent outcomes, the cost of producing the follow up explode as you have to developp several games instead of one.

If an episode brings two divergent conclusions, the next episode has to provide with two fundamentally different versions. If it follows, the next episode had to provide four different versions etc

Not manageable. Not possible to sustain.

Dragon age lesson. Apparently, certain players did not get it.
Mass Effect 3 is supposed to be the definite ending though.
Maylander is offline

Maylander

SasqWatch

#55

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Bergen
Posts: 5,655
Send a message via MSN to Maylander

Default 

March 17th, 2012, 19:28
I doubt they are not going to milk the Mass Effect universe through DLCs and the rest.

A number of players talk about a new arc for a new hero.

For the rest, it is the same. Information in ME1 and ME2 is not reliable. It is you, the player who wants to play an exceptional character, who is going to discover everything to its right dimensions.

Spoiler
ChienAboyeur is offline

ChienAboyeur

SasqWatch

#56

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,215

Default 

March 18th, 2012, 21:52
Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur View Post
For the rest, it is the same. Information in ME1 and ME2 is not reliable. It is you, the player who wants to play an exceptional character, who is going to discover everything to its right dimensions.
Again, it's not a narrative technique unless we're given clues or explanations. The plot twist in KotOR is an excellent example of BioWare doing it right - they give clues throughout the game, and then BAM - drop the twist like a bomb, with references to the previous clues. It was fantastic. There is no such thing in ME, so it's safe to assume the stuff in ME is simply a plot hole.

I'll reply to the spoiler stuff in the spoiler box.

Spoiler
Maylander is offline

Maylander

SasqWatch

#57

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Bergen
Posts: 5,655
Send a message via MSN to Maylander

Default 

March 18th, 2012, 21:56
By the way, I've completed it a third time now, this time starting with a new character. It's a bit interesting, as you basically start a game where all the "wrong" choices have been made, meaning you get to see how it all turns out without playing ME2 like an idiot.

The differences are generally much bigger between a fresh game and an imported game, than it is between Renegade/Paragon.

Small warning though: On higher difficulties, it's actually quite hard to start as a level 1 character. I died quite a lot because of the complete lack of abilities.
Maylander is offline

Maylander

SasqWatch

#58

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Bergen
Posts: 5,655
Send a message via MSN to Maylander

Default 

March 18th, 2012, 22:18
Originally Posted by Maylander View Post
Small warning though: On higher difficulties, it's actually quite hard to start as a level 1 character. I died quite a lot because of the complete lack of abilities.
That's another reason why I am not in a hurry to play ME3. When my backup drive crashed it took with it my saves ME2 included.
zahratustra is offline

zahratustra

SasqWatch

#59

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,480

Default 

March 18th, 2012, 23:20
Originally Posted by Maylander View Post
Again, it's not a narrative technique unless we're given clues or explanations. The plot twist in KotOR is an excellent example of BioWare doing it right - they give clues throughout the game, and then BAM - drop the twist like a bomb, with references to the previous clues. It was fantastic. There is no such thing in ME, so it's safe to assume the stuff in ME is simply a plot hole.
No plot twist. There is no twist. It is just investigation job. You investigate on a secret organization and you discover its real dimension.

Clues? You are given more than clues. You see the real dimension by yourself.

I'll reply to the spoiler stuff in the spoiler box.

Spoiler


For some reason, you did not like the narrative trick. It is quite useless though to distort what happened.

You keep asking basing your plot holes demand on information fed in ME1 and ME2 when this information was misleading on purposing.
Spoiler
ChienAboyeur is offline

ChienAboyeur

SasqWatch

#60

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,215
RPGWatch Forums » Games » General RPG » Thoughts on Mass Effect 3 after completing it
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 23:22.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch