Mass Effect 3: DAM* IT ALL!!

[Flailing Escapist]

snip

snip

Some are, some aren't. But that doesn't matter. You should not reveal really important, relevant plot points for the games in other forms of media. In Halo's example, they mostly just fill in backstory. Some do go into detail of the why's and all that(why the covenant are attacking, that sort of stuff), but both are brushed aside.

I just don't feel like Mass Effect's outside media(books, comics, whatever) should be allowed to fill in plot points, while Halo's(and other) game's media can't.

This is mainly just a personal gripe caused by my encounters on the internet, but damn is it maddening.

I can see where you're coming from. And people shouldn't use other media to explain games. (or the star wars universe, either) But I do think you should reconsider when its done by the writers of the game as well and Redemption, at any case was definately made to explain the parts in the game you didn't see.

But back to what I originally said, I was only using the Evolution comics to explain why (I think) the illusive man turns out to be quite a dick, nothing more.

 

[Flailing Escapist]

It's not any more of an RPG than an action game. Bioware are trying to combine both Action and RPG elements in Mass Effect. Which is why people like (and/or hate) it so much.
RPG = Role Playing Game
You are definately PLAYING a ROLE in the Mass Effect GAMES.
But as far as I'm concerned ME2 wasn't any less of a RPG than ME1 just because they added better gameplay mechanics.

No, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying ME1 is an better of an RPG than ME2. I'm just saying that ME2 dumped all the things that classified ME1 as an RPG in the first place. Removing the shitty inventory system and pointless leveling mechanics from the first improved the game significantly, but BioWare could have improved them instead of just deleting them. I'm just saying both of them aren't very good RPGs to start with. You are just playing either Paragon Shepard and Renegade Shepard (Nothing wrong with that) but the game doesn't want you actually roleplay (Mass Effect 2 actively punishes you for not going all paragon or all renegade), and the fact that some of the more ambiguous choices in the game are tied to this is ridiculous. Not to mention unlike with some of BioWares other games (Dragon Age, KOTOR) you are actually given more significant choices. I understand why this is, with the way Mass Effect plays and everything but as RPGs I just really don't like them.

On it's own merits, Mass Effect 2 was great, I enjoyed the characters and their respective quests enough (not the main plot though, that was awful) for me to look past the rather bland combat for it be one of my favorite games that came out last year but I just think the RPG aspect of the ME series is the last reason I'd want to play it.

Maybe I'm using the term RPG too loosely.
I have always seen RPGs are games that let you make decisions that effect the rest of the game. And ridiculous inventory screens and leveling up were just along for the ride.
I'm not sure what else to call it: "A good third person shooter with great dialogue and story interaction?"
Perhaps I'm wrong, or the term RPG is too broad, but if you can prove to me, that Mass Effect is definately not an RPG I will stop refering to it as such.

 

[AlternatePFG]

Maybe I'm using the term RPG too loosely.
I have always seen RPGs are games that let you make decisions that effect the rest of the game. And ridiculous inventory screens and leveling up were just along for the ride.
I'm not sure what else to call it: "A good third person shooter with great dialogue and story interaction?"
Perhaps I'm wrong, or the term RPG is too broad, but if you can prove to me, that Mass Effect is definately not an RPG I will stop refering to it as such.

No I'm not saying it's not an RPG, cause technically it still is and arguing over what defines an RPG is just a pointless affair, I'm just saying it does the whole RPG thing rather poorly as you choices really loosely affect the game and I just think in general the Paragon/Renegade system is much more restrictive than say the Light/Dark in KOTOR, or the alignment system in games like Baldur's Gate.

 

[drivel]

It's interesting that this thread came to the top today. I just started playing through ME2 on PC immediately after finishing ME1 on PC. I played both originally on X360, but I decided that it'd be cool to play through again on my preferred platform.

First of all ME1 was one of the buggiest games I've ever played on PC. Normally the PC version of a multiplatform game tends to be the most refined, since it comes out later, and can handle a higher level of graphic fidelity. But the crashes were frequent, and the textures on many objects were unbelievably poor.

Second, because my original play-through of ME2 came after my original playthrough of ME1, I didn't notice it as much, but they really stripped out a lot of the RPG elements in ME2. I was really confused when I opened up the Squad screen for the first time in ME2 and only saw half as many skills to put points into. It's "streamlined," but I feel like I have a lot less control over how I develop my character's combat style. I really miss all the biotic powers I had access to as a Vanguard, and the larger variety of weapons in ME1 vs ME2. However, Charge is an awesome skill, which I missed in ME1, and the game is a helluva lot prettier. At least they didn't give PC Gamers the short end of the stick again. The textures are fantastic, and with all the settings cranked the game looks GOOOOOOOOOD.

I hope they don't strip out even more of the RPG elements for ME3. I fear a Squad screen that has 3 options:

Shootin'
Magickin'
Talkin'

Also, I'd like more guns than ME2, but fewer than ME1 and with more differences in individual characteristics. Give me more than Fire/Ice Ammo, and actually obviously visibly show the differences in weapons that have been modded in different ways.

Less is often more, but I want a little more than what I got in ME2.

Finally, with regard to the impact of decision making:
I honestly think BioWare did as much as they could to make your decisions in ME1 reverberate throughout ME2, without making the outcomes so different that they would have exponentially increased the amount of content they needed to create. The fact that characters, including squad-mates, can perma-die based on your decisions across a multi-game story arc is something that's never been done before. OP's assumptions about how your actions in ME2 will play into ME3 are pure speculation. No, your decisions in ME1 and ME2 probably won't affect the outcome of ME3 that result in an ending other than "Shepherd wins, the Collector's lose." But it will impact HOW that comes about, and who survives the conflict, including Shepherd.

And I'm sorry; that's pretty damn cool.

 

[Flailing Escapist]

Maybe I'm using the term RPG too loosely.
I have always seen RPGs are games that let you make decisions that effect the rest of the game. And ridiculous inventory screens and leveling up were just along for the ride.
I'm not sure what else to call it: "A good third person shooter with great dialogue and story interaction?"
Perhaps I'm wrong, or the term RPG is too broad, but if you can prove to me, that Mass Effect is definately not an RPG I will stop refering to it as such.

No I'm not saying it's not an RPG, cause technically it still is and arguing over what defines an RPG is just a pointless affair, I'm just saying it does the whole RPG thing rather poorly as you choices really loosely affect the game and I just think in general the Paragon/Renegade system is much more restrictive than say the Light/Dark in KOTOR, or the alignment system in games like Baldur's Gate.

And this is where I disagree.
I think it does a wonderful job of trying the choices you make with effecting the game and future games.

Spoiler: whereas(spoilers, of course)

You can choose if you want to:
a). Save the Rachni Queen or not.
b). You choose who dies on Virmire
c). Who dies in the Collector Base.
d). Who you lay.
e). If you saved the council or not.
In all, pretty big things

And there are thousands of other choices that effect the way you see and play the rest of the game(s). I think Bioware did it pretty well.
And as an avid KotOR fan all I can say, is that the only difference between the light/dark system in KotOR and the paragram/renegade system in Mass Effect is that in Mass Effect doing something renegade adds to your renegade scale, it doesn't take away from your paragram scale. And I think that makes Mass Effect that much better.

 

[drivel]

I don't like the idea of beating the reapers, purely because the story will be bullshit, it will only be believable if the reapers win, and that will be an ending you must aim for. Either some new weapon or obvious weakness, either way I don't like the way the story goes. Look at DAO it was believable, the enemy wasn't presented as a godlike army, who make us insignificant. If the reapers loose in ME3 (and they will) it would completely break immersion, go against character, and I would hate it. So the story is dead for me.

Fixed all the typos for you. =]

Have you considered a Matrix Revolutions-style ending where the Reapers aren't defeated but instead agree to either permanently or temporarily delay the extinction for some unforeseen reason?

Don't get me wrong, that movie sucked. I'm using it to point out that there are alternatives to the Reapers being defeated by killing them.

 

[Nimcha]

Wow, isn't this like the 5th topic on ME you've opened?

Your hate must really run deep >.<

 

[AlternatePFG]

And this is where I disagree.
I think it does a wonderful job of trying the choices you make with effecting the game and future games.

Spoiler: whereas(spoilers, of course)

You can choose if you want to:
a). Save the Rachni Queen or not.
b). You choose who dies on Virmire
c). Who dies in the Collector Base.
d). Who you lay.
e). If you saved the council or not.
In all, pretty big things

And there are thousands of other choices that effect the way you see and play the rest of the game(s). I think Bioware did it pretty well.
And as an avid KotOR fan all I can say, is that the only difference between the light/dark system in KotOR and the paragram/renegade system in Mass Effect is that in Mass Effect doing something renegade adds to your renegade scale, it doesn't take away from your paragram scale. And I think that makes Mass Effect that much better.

There was not a mention of the rachni queen in Mass Effect 2, and there was hardly a mention of who died in Mass Effect 1. Nor does the council have really anything relevant to do with Mass Effect 2 at all. All of this is going on assuming Mass Effect 3 will all have these choices have a major impact on the game, and I very much doubt that they can pull all that off, even with a huge budget.

And in KOTOR, at least your alignment didn't affect speech checks. Seriously, that was my main complaint, there was no point to speech checks in that game if it depends on your renegade/paragon points because that kills any roleplaying you could do. Also, I don't see how the Mass Effect scale is much better, the fact that it's two separate bars really doesn't change the mechanics at all, it just makes it more contrived. Speaking of choice, the endgame in KOTOR is completely different depending on whether or not you are good or evil, while in Mass Effect, it's exactly the same with some different dialogue if you choose paragon or renegade. Obviously, I don't expect the endgame to be very different with Mass Effect because that's just the layout of the series but it's an inherent flaw nonetheless.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Yet, with all of this...and with my own feelings on the series, the game, and Bioware/EA as well...
I pre-ordered Mass Effect 3. V_V

Who else feels this way? Anybody else torn over Mass Effect 3? Am I the only one who hates where the game is going, but cares too much about the cast to just let it go?

Ha! I was getting pretty annoyed with you before that bit. ^^ Well done.

My answer: not at all. I'll answer a couple of your questions.

Why does the Illusive Man want to kill you after you did his dirty work? Because YOU DID HIS DIRTY WORK. You know too much. The Illusive Man is (and has always been) an evil backstabbing asshole. He's even worse in the novels.

Why is the Alliance pissed off at you even if you didn't play Arrival? Well, cause you've been running around in a copy of their ship doing crazy stuff and working for terrorists.

Why is Liara awesome even without the Shadow Broker DLC? Read the comic book. Already taken care of. Also, you did get her some cool info in the regular game even without the DLC. Maybe she did LotSB on her own?

As far as the Bioware "gather allies" game premise... well, it worked Dragon Age: Origins.

Also, on that gathering allies thing, it looks to me like the decisions from ME1 and 2 are going to pay off in who's available. Killed the Rachnai Queen? No Rachnai for you. Sold Legion to Cerberus? No Geth for you. Burned the Krogan cure? No Krogan for you. That is long-term plot pay-off right there. What more were you hoping for?

So yeah, loving everything I've heard about ME3. Can't wait! ^^

 

[Flailing Escapist]

And this is where I disagree.
I think it does a wonderful job of trying the choices you make with effecting the game and future games.

Spoiler: whereas(spoilers, of course)

You can choose if you want to:
a). Save the Rachni Queen or not.
b). You choose who dies on Virmire
c). Who dies in the Collector Base.
d). Who you lay.
e). If you saved the council or not.
In all, pretty big things

And there are thousands of other choices that effect the way you see and play the rest of the game(s). I think Bioware did it pretty well.
And as an avid KotOR fan all I can say, is that the only difference between the light/dark system in KotOR and the paragram/renegade system in Mass Effect is that in Mass Effect doing something renegade adds to your renegade scale, it doesn't take away from your paragram scale. And I think that makes Mass Effect that much better.

There was not a mention of the rachni queen in Mass Effect 2, and there was hardly a mention of who died in Mass Effect 1. Nor does the council have really anything relevant to do with Mass Effect 2 at all. All of this is going on assuming Mass Effect 3 will all have these choices have a major impact on the game, and I very much doubt that they can pull all that off, even with a huge budget.

And in KOTOR, at least your alignment didn't affect speech checks. Seriously, that was my main complaint, there was no point to speech checks in that game if it depends on your renegade/paragon points because that kills any roleplaying you could do. Also, I don't see how the Mass Effect scale is much better, the fact that it's two separate bars really doesn't change the mechanics at all, it just makes it more contrived. Speaking of choice, the endgame in KOTOR is completely different depending on whether or not you are good or evil, while in Mass Effect, it's exactly the same with some different dialogue if you choose paragon or renegade. Obviously, I don't expect the endgame to be very different with Mass Effect because that's just the layout of the series but it's an inherent flaw nonetheless.

Again, I disagree. I have the utmost faith that Bioware has the power to pull of an amazing ending this this trilogy. I think they've been planning a lot of this stuff out from the beginning.

The only time I noticed that Mass Effect was screwing me on speech checks was the Miranda/Jack arguement. All other times the game is just slapping you because you didn't stick to one side or the other enough.

And I think it's too early to call out the ending of Mass Effect 3 yet. And as for KotOR: thats what KotOR was about, being good or evil, of course it's going to effect the endgame.
Mass Effect is about saving the galaxy and how you do. Not why.

 

[xvbones]

Know what I'm playing now? Alice: Madness Returns.

....

The premise [of Mass Effect] is ripped-off

erm...

You know that 'Alice' game you're playing?

It's premise? Not exactly unique.

 

[Ian Caronia]

Know what I'm playing now? Alice: Madness Returns.

....

The premise [of Mass Effect] is ripped-off

erm...

You know that 'Alice' game you're playing?

It's premise? Not exactly unique.

Hah Well there's no actual proof (anyone can find for me) that the idea of "Alice's family dies after the events of the first two novels and goes half insane, then tries to regain her true sanity while traversing the now twisted landscape of a warped Wonderland." So, I can't agree with you there.

However: the theme, which is pretty much "Alice in Wonderland, but dark, gothic(?), and horrifying", is not original. That's self-evident. I mean, most reimaginings do the same thing. It's why I always say that the whole "nothing's original" statement only truly applies to themes. When you get more detailed than that, you've found two stories far too much alike, and someone is ripping the other off.
_Unless they use the excuse "paying homage" which (though originally fair) has as of late been grossly overused as a cop-out.

 

[xvbones]

Know what I'm playing now? Alice: Madness Returns.

....

The premise [of Mass Effect] is ripped-off

erm...

You know that 'Alice' game you're playing?

It's premise? Not exactly unique.

Hah Well there's no actual proof (anyone can find for me) that the idea of "Alice's family dies after the events of the first two novels and goes half insane, then tries to regain her true sanity while traversing the now twisted landscape of a warped Wonderland." So, I can't agree with you there.

What, you mean like "American McGee's Alice?"

The game "Madness Returns" is a sequel of?

Also, leave us be honest, here, "protagonist is lost in fantasy" is a very, very old literary trope.

You haven't found any examples of "protagonist is lost in fantasy"? None whatsoever?

Really?

Have you been looking?

However: the theme, which is pretty much "Alice in Wonderland, but dark, gothic(?), and horrifying", is not original. That's self-evident. I mean, most reimaginings do the same thing. It's why I always say that the whole "nothing's original" statement only truly applies to themes. When you get more detailed than that, you've found two stories far too much alike, and someone is ripping the other off.

What you mean to say is you recognize that Alice is exactly as derivative as most other games you have ever played, but the difference is that you, yourself, enjoy it enough not to mind the derivation.

Yes, that is how many of us ME fans view the Mass Effect series. It's a standard space opera, but it's well written and has great characters. We understand that the games are not trying to break new ground, they are only trying to tell a solid version of an old story.

If you want to look for wildly unique, original games, you'll need to get a lot more Suda 51. And even his games are derivative in gameplay, even if their plots are fairly unique.

And often incomprehensible.

_Unless they use the excuse "paying homage" which (though originally fair) has as of late been grossly overused as a cop-out.

Sort of like how Alice "pays homage" to the Lewis Carroll original stories, but basically has absolutely fuckall to do with any of them?

 

[Ian Caronia]

Ha! I was getting pretty annoyed with you before that bit. ^^ Well done.

Bara No Hime! Every time there's a Mass Effect thread I often find you standing on the other side of the mirror to me. XD
...Meaning you're the total opposite but also able to be sensible about your feelings and have good reasons to back up your opinions.

My answer: not at all. I'll answer a couple of your questions.

Why does the Illusive Man want to kill you after you did his dirty work? Because YOU DID HIS DIRTY WORK. You know too much. The Illusive Man is (and has always been) an evil backstabbing asshole. He's even worse in the novels.

I can understand that, but that takes away from the ambiguous nature of T.I.M that was originally intended (from what I gather by reading the opinions of those more brushed up on TIM/Cerberus facts than me).
_But that aside, no matter how logical the turn is (and since he clearly states Shep is the only man for the job, hence why he brought him back to life, attacking your sole hero who can save you from death is not logical no matter how villainous you are...unless you're a loon like the Joker), it also shows a blatant disregard for your ability to make decisions.
No, I don't know what's really going to happen from giving over the base to TIM at the end of ME2, but I do know that you had the option to play as a faithful Cerberus affiliate in ME2. You could practically lick TIM's boots! And yet, no matter what, he'll turn on you.
That irks me to no end.

Why is the Alliance pissed off at you even if you didn't play Arrival? Well, cause you've been running around in a copy of their ship doing crazy stuff and working for terrorists.

Bara No Hime, I'm not being sarcastic when I say I really wish you had a hand in the script writing for Mass Effect. It's been established by now that no matter what, the cannon of the series is that Shep will have done the DLC missions. Whether you DL or not, he [insert spoiler for Arrival DLC]. No matter what he met Kasumi and helped Liara.

If the opposing factions did have alternating reasons to go against you depending on your decisions I wouldn't be so angry. Honest! But it's right there in the summary for ME3. Black and White: The game starts out with *SPOILER*[sub]Shepard on trial on Earth for killing those Batarians in the Arrival DLC, and then WHAM the invasion begins[/sub]*SPOILER*

Again, no matter what I decide, that happens. My Shepard would not have done that. He would've used the [insert spoiler] to his advantage by immediately calling the Council, or Anderson, and showing them/him first hand what was going on so they could prepare.
Because, no matter what, in ME3 no one is prepared for the invasion. So what Shep did to buy time in the Arrival seems to have been meaningless.

As far as the Bioware "gather allies" game premise... well, it worked Dragon Age: Origins.

That's a personal gripe with me, though. It could be good or bad depending on how you see it, so you're totally right.

Also, on that gathering allies thing, it looks to me like the decisions from ME1 and 2 are going to pay off in who's available. Killed the Rachnai Queen? No Rachnai for you. Sold Legion to Cerberus? No Geth for you. Burned the Krogan cure? No Krogan for you. That is long-term plot pay-off right there. What more were you hoping for?

Well for my decisions to pay off in other areas outside of characters, because the way I see it, having races as allies or not is the same as having party members as allies or not. Also: That's the part of me that wants ME3 so friggin bad. heh

So yeah, loving everything I've heard about ME3. Can't wait! ^^

I can. I don't like it.
*looks at Tali*
...Well, I like it a little.
*looks at Cerberus*
No. I hate it! HATE IT!
*looks at Garrus and Thane and Anderson and Tali again and-*
AAAAAAUGH!!

Anyway, I of course mean no disrespect to anyone who isn't torn over ME3. It's also funny that, for every point we disagree on with Mass Effect, both you and I, as well as mostly everyone else who's played ME1&2, can always agree that we keep coming back for the characters. Hope your FemShep shacks up with Tali, who better be on the team the whole game or SO HELP ME GOD-

 

[Phlakes]

I'd like to direct this at basically everyone, not just OP:

You don't know what the game is like.

The second some info is released on a game, people start bitching about how the series is ruined. THE GAME ISN'T EVEN CLOSE TO BEING RELEASED. So maybe you should take a chillaxative and wait until you actually know something useful.

The same thing happened when the last big batch of Skyrim info was released (maybe a month ago). People took all the statements out of context and started bitching about how Bethesda was ruining everything.

Why the fuck is the Illusive Man after me no matter what I did in ME2?

There's probably a good explanation for that. Maybe if you waited until the game is actually out, you would know.

It's like you assume the information we have right now is all we're ever getting.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Hah Well there's no actual proof (anyone can find for me) that the idea of "Alice's family dies after the events of the first two novels and goes half insane, then tries to regain her true sanity while traversing the now twisted landscape of a warped Wonderland." So, I can't agree with you there.

However: the theme, which is pretty much "Alice in Wonderland, but dark, gothic(?), and horrifying", is not original. That's self-evident. I mean, most reimaginings do the same thing. It's why I always say that the whole "nothing's original" statement only truly applies to themes. When you get more detailed than that, you've found two stories far too much alike, and someone is ripping the other off.
_Unless they use the excuse "paying homage" which (though originally fair) has as of late been grossly overused as a cop-out.

Also, I'm pretty sure at least 75% of the "gothic version of Alice in Wonderland" things out there were heavily borrowing from the game this was a sequel to in the first place

I'm personally withholding judgment on Mass Effect 3 until I know more about it. I had a lot of fun with Mass Effect 2 and it was somewhat innovative with the episodic aspect, but for lack of a better term the game feels very formulaic. Bioware has a very specific and predictable way the write dialogue trees, characters, plots, and so on. That's not the way I felt playing (for instance) Planescape: Torment, Witcher/Witcher 2, Deus Ex, or Devil Survivor.

OTOH, it's certainly a lot of fun to play - teleporting around with a shotgun doesn't get old haha. Also, Mass Effect is by far Bioware's best IP. As long as they give me some good set-pieces and tone down the gigglesquee (or quarantine it to Tali) I'll take a look at it. The sci-fi shooter/RPG hybrid I'm really interested in, though, is Deus Ex 3

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Anyway, I of course mean no disrespect to anyone who isn't torn over ME3. It's also funny that, for every point we disagree on with Mass Effect, both you and I, as well as mostly everyone else who's played ME1&2, can always agree that we keep coming back for the characters. Hope your FemShep shacks up with Tali, who better be on the team the whole game or SO HELP ME GOD-

^^ Yes, that would be very nice. ^^

Oh, and on the Illusive Man, there was a theory that was bandied about where they could get him to hate you either way.

Paragon: you blew it up
Renegade: you didn't blow it up - Illusive Man indoctrinated by what you didn't blow up.

Actually, I'm betting that the Illusive Man has been indoctrinated either way. I think he's going to be ME3's Saren. "Humanity will Survive by Submitting!" It certainly explains why Cerberus is bloody everywhere in ME3.

 

[Nfritzappa]

Cool story bro.

No seriously I've seen over 100 topics exactly the same as this, and they always just end up in arguing about what mass effect should be.
If you don't like it anymore, don't buy it, and move onto another game. Its not that hard.