A Mass Effect 3 thread with some good news.

[kasperbbs]

Sounds good, i always play as the good guy, but sometimes i just want to kick some asshole through the window, this makes it easier.

 

[Flamezdudes]

Well, some more good news. The launch trailer has just been released... And it is amazing!

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

That's cool, to bad they can't retroactively add that to ME1 and ME2.

Especially because high charm/renegade is the only way to get the non-depressing outcomes in both games. I'd argue that Mr Weekes is talking tales;

We intended many of those Charms to be fun Easter eggs, but many players felt like they had to play pure Paragon to avoid being penalized by the loss of a dialog option.

Then why couldn't I stop Miranda and Jack or Legion and Tali from fighting otherwise?!? Why couldn't I save Wrex any other way!? (actually, if memory serves, there was another way...)

If you get his family heirloom as part of his loyalty mission, or if you don't recruit Garrus.

 

[boag]

Well, some more good news. The launch trailer has just been released... And it is amazing!

Yes indeed it is, I liked it very much, the experience will certainly be a thrill.

 

[kuyo]

So having both Miranda and Jack remain loyal was an "easter egg?" Then again, Miranda was just straight up wrong there.

 

[Windcaler]

Its a move in the right direction but the problem is you still cant play as a neutral character. You're always forced to do a Paragon or Renegade choices in the end

I have to wonder how they thought the dialog choices could be considered easter eggs. I mean in ME2 when Legion and Tali get into it and you want both races there to fight the Reapers later on how could you consider the charmed option of getting both to cool down (potentially also getting both races on your side) an easter egg when the other choice is to side with one (and potentially loose a race in the great conflict).

 

[boag]

Do I get to use biotic powers that work even on enemies with defensive layers, without having to edit Coalesced.ini again?

not unless you are using, Stasis, Biotic Charge, Nova.

Warp seems to have been changed into Reave, and combining any 2 biotic with lingering effects will cause a biotic explosion.

 

[Zydrate]

They should have done this already.

One of Yahtzee's more proper criticisms (As opposed to "Nintendo likes money, QTE's are bad, etc) regarding Mass Effect 2 was that the system was less "What would I do in this situation" and more "Which option will give me the most Dickhead points?"

ME2 pulled the biggest dick move on two of the loyalty missions where you have to talk your people down of flipping out on each other, but you require a shitton of points one way or another, and I feel my "own" Shephard was lost.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Em I'm not really sure if this is a 100% good thing but we'll see how it works out in the game.

 

[boag]

They should have done this already.

One of Yahtzee's more proper criticisms (As opposed to "Nintendo likes money, QTE's are bad, etc) regarding Mass Effect 2 was that the system was less "What would I do in this situation" and more "Which option will give me the most Dickhead points?"

ME2 pulled the biggest dick move on two of the loyalty missions where you have to talk your people down of flipping out on each other, but you require a shitton of points one way or another, and I feel my "own" Shephard was lost.

I see this concern present itself again and again, isnt actually letting you choose with who to side a choice in an of itself?

Is the problem that you have to continuously have a reputation for said choices to have the most advantageous outcome or that you cannot choose the advantageous outcome without developing a reputation?

 

[godofallu]

Won't work. I'm rebeating the series right now and I find I am a middle ground sort fo guy. That is to say I generally pick the neutral option.

So I won't be getting paragon or renegade points very often, which means I still wont be unlocking the new paths.

 

[Zydrate]

They should have done this already.

One of Yahtzee's more proper criticisms (As opposed to "Nintendo likes money, QTE's are bad, etc) regarding Mass Effect 2 was that the system was less "What would I do in this situation" and more "Which option will give me the most Dickhead points?"

ME2 pulled the biggest dick move on two of the loyalty missions where you have to talk your people down of flipping out on each other, but you require a shitton of points one way or another, and I feel my "own" Shephard was lost.

I see this concern present itself again and again, isnt actually letting you choose with who to side a choice in an of itself?

Is the problem that you have to continuously have a reputation for said choices to have the most advantageous outcome or that you cannot choose the advantageous outcome without developing a reputation?

Sure it's a choice, just a limited one.

Say I have a mostly benign Shephard, but one with a practical mind. Therefore on occasion she may ask for an extra percentage of credits or genocide a small sect of the Geth just so they don't take the chance of potential free will to shoot at me again later.

As a result of taking a couple of those "bad options", I now can't convince Miranda to calm the fuck down after a disagreement with Jack, and now she's going to die in the ending because I've run out of choices to bump my chosen "paragon" level.

See the problem?

 

[boag]

They should have done this already.

One of Yahtzee's more proper criticisms (As opposed to "Nintendo likes money, QTE's are bad, etc) regarding Mass Effect 2 was that the system was less "What would I do in this situation" and more "Which option will give me the most Dickhead points?"

ME2 pulled the biggest dick move on two of the loyalty missions where you have to talk your people down of flipping out on each other, but you require a shitton of points one way or another, and I feel my "own" Shephard was lost.

I see this concern present itself again and again, isnt actually letting you choose with who to side a choice in an of itself?

Is the problem that you have to continuously have a reputation for said choices to have the most advantageous outcome or that you cannot choose the advantageous outcome without developing a reputation?

Sure it's a choice, just a limited one.

Say I have a mostly benign Shephard, but one with a practical mind. Therefore on occasion she may ask for an extra percentage of credits or genocide a small sect of the Geth just so they don't take the chance of potential free will to shoot at me again later.

As a result of taking a couple of those "bad options", I now can't convince Miranda to calm the fuck down after a disagreement with Jack, and now she's going to die in the ending because I've run out of choices to bump my chosen "paragon" level.

See the problem?

I dont really see the problem, I know that you might have wanted to choose a more balanced approach to your character, but in the end Paragon or Renegade Reputation are part of a choice.

Im having trouble explaining this clearly.

Lets take your Example, it was a cognitive choice that you would play a mid range character, and therefore your character would reflect this by sometimes having a hard time deciding one path or the other, because he can shift between the two.

In this case the consequence is that he cannot make the Statement that backs em both down.

Was that clear? Im really having a hard time putting my thoughts into clear cut words for some reason.

 

[The_Blue_Rider]

WHAT NO?! This is terrible news. They've just streamlined the game moreso for the masses... so now you can just play 1 playthrough and reload a save to see how each dialogue plays out differently rather than picking something and living with your consequences later on in the game when you are for example unable to stop you-know-who dying in ME1.

No this is better than the old system simply because you arent deadlocked into being either Paragon or Renegade from the beginning. It wasnt so much of a problem in 1 since dialogue was determined by Charm/Intimidate points, but in 2, unless you exclusively picked Renegade or Paragon options, you would have a really annoying time trying to solve problems with words instead of bullets.

I am 90% sure that he is being sarcastic to make fun of that part of Biowares fanbase who complain about everything.

OT: It's about damn time they did this, it worked great in Dragon age since even without a meter to tell me if I am good or bad I could still feel evil if I did evil things. Like that one section in Redcliff. I felt so evil afterwards.

Its just getting really hard to tell if someones being serious about their dislike for Mass Effect 3

 

[Zydrate]

They should have done this already.

One of Yahtzee's more proper criticisms (As opposed to "Nintendo likes money, QTE's are bad, etc) regarding Mass Effect 2 was that the system was less "What would I do in this situation" and more "Which option will give me the most Dickhead points?"

ME2 pulled the biggest dick move on two of the loyalty missions where you have to talk your people down of flipping out on each other, but you require a shitton of points one way or another, and I feel my "own" Shephard was lost.

I see this concern present itself again and again, isnt actually letting you choose with who to side a choice in an of itself?

Is the problem that you have to continuously have a reputation for said choices to have the most advantageous outcome or that you cannot choose the advantageous outcome without developing a reputation?

Sure it's a choice, just a limited one.

Say I have a mostly benign Shephard, but one with a practical mind. Therefore on occasion she may ask for an extra percentage of credits or genocide a small sect of the Geth just so they don't take the chance of potential free will to shoot at me again later.

As a result of taking a couple of those "bad options", I now can't convince Miranda to calm the fuck down after a disagreement with Jack, and now she's going to die in the ending because I've run out of choices to bump my chosen "paragon" level.

See the problem?

I dont really see the problem, I know that you might have wanted to choose a more balanced approach to your character, but in the end Paragon or Renegade Reputation are part of a choice.

Im having trouble explaining this clearly.

Lets take your Example, it was a cognitive choice that you would play a mid range character, and therefore your character would reflect this by sometimes having a hard time deciding one path or the other, because he can shift between the two.

In this case the consequence is that he cannot make the Statement that backs em both down.

Was that clear? Im really having a hard time putting my thoughts into clear cut words for some reason.

A bit more clear yes.
But I don't feel my people should die because I'm more practical than "Dog-petting" and "SHEPHARD SMASH".

 

[BaronIveagh]

I'm being serious about my dislike for it. The endings are horrible, it forces you to have Origin, and like DA2 it goes out of it's way to make previous choices meaningless in the long run.

 

[RuralGamer]

That's cool, to bad they can't retroactively add that to ME1 and ME2.

Especially because high charm/renegade is the only way to get the non-depressing outcomes in both games. I'd argue that Mr Weekes is talking tales;

We intended many of those Charms to be fun Easter eggs, but many players felt like they had to play pure Paragon to avoid being penalized by the loss of a dialog option.

Then why couldn't I stop Miranda and Jack or Legion and Tali from fighting otherwise?!? Why couldn't I save Wrex any other way!? (actually, if memory serves, there was another way...)

If you get his family heirloom as part of his loyalty mission, or if you don't recruit Garrus.

If you don't recruit Garrus? How does that work? To be honest, I've never not recruited one of them before.

 

[Zydrate]

If you don't recruit Garrus? How does that work? To be honest, I've never not recruited one of them before.

I read somewhere that Garrus is one of those skippable ones, but I'm not sure how it works.
I take him up anyway because he's awesome.

 

[boag]

They should have done this already.

One of Yahtzee's more proper criticisms (As opposed to "Nintendo likes money, QTE's are bad, etc) regarding Mass Effect 2 was that the system was less "What would I do in this situation" and more "Which option will give me the most Dickhead points?"

ME2 pulled the biggest dick move on two of the loyalty missions where you have to talk your people down of flipping out on each other, but you require a shitton of points one way or another, and I feel my "own" Shephard was lost.

I see this concern present itself again and again, isnt actually letting you choose with who to side a choice in an of itself?

Is the problem that you have to continuously have a reputation for said choices to have the most advantageous outcome or that you cannot choose the advantageous outcome without developing a reputation?

Sure it's a choice, just a limited one.

Say I have a mostly benign Shephard, but one with a practical mind. Therefore on occasion she may ask for an extra percentage of credits or genocide a small sect of the Geth just so they don't take the chance of potential free will to shoot at me again later.

As a result of taking a couple of those "bad options", I now can't convince Miranda to calm the fuck down after a disagreement with Jack, and now she's going to die in the ending because I've run out of choices to bump my chosen "paragon" level.

See the problem?

I dont really see the problem, I know that you might have wanted to choose a more balanced approach to your character, but in the end Paragon or Renegade Reputation are part of a choice.

Im having trouble explaining this clearly.

Lets take your Example, it was a cognitive choice that you would play a mid range character, and therefore your character would reflect this by sometimes having a hard time deciding one path or the other, because he can shift between the two.

In this case the consequence is that he cannot make the Statement that backs em both down.

Was that clear? Im really having a hard time putting my thoughts into clear cut words for some reason.

A bit more clear yes.
But I don't feel my people should die because I'm more practical than "Dog-petting" and "SHEPHARD SMASH".

Well, well thats the consequence of being a filthy Neutral