So Dragon Age 3.... No Pressure?

Recommended Videos

Fappy

\[T]/
Jan 4, 2010
12,010
0
41
Country
United States
SajuukKhar said:
voltair27 said:
Unfortunately, yes. I'm trying to get it changed.
Dude why? your name is fing awesome.
I agree. If my name were Vivec I would go to football games with half my body painted blue every time.
 

D Moness

Left the building
Sep 16, 2010
1,146
0
0
voltair27 said:
SajuukKhar said:
voltair27 said:
Can somebody explain to me why the Reapers have their harvest again?

This is what I got: We are a synthetic race that wipes out all organic species to prevent organic species from creating synthetic life which will then wipe them out.
Well your wrong on several accounts
-The Reapers are not synthetics, they are syntho-organic hybrids.

-The Reapers do not wipe out all organic life in the galaxy, just the space-faring species, which is probably an extremely small amount of the over-all galactic population, given that all the races in Mass Effect come from, and have explored, less then 1% of the total number of stars in the galaxy.

-They kill off the space-fareing species because the race that built them believed synthetics would kill everything, and keep it dead forever, The Reapers on the other hand kill off relatively little, and keep life going.


Now I could explain in like 6 paragraphs as to why the Reapers cant just kill off the other robots, or constantly police the galaxy, because the game gives reasons for all of those, but this isn't the thread for that.
Close enough, I still thought that it was absolutely retarded.
Also they do not kill of advanced civilization, they harvest them. They add them to their own (kind of like the borg in the star trek universe). So in a sense by harvesting them and adding them to their collective the civilization is not lost forever.
 

D Moness

Left the building
Sep 16, 2010
1,146
0
0
fi6eka said:
SajuukKhar said:
And all of those plotholes are.... exceedingly explainable using common sense.
Then could you please explain why didn't we just destroy the Citadel?I mean, if the Star Child is controling the Reapers and the Star Child is in fact the Citadel, why didn't we simply nuke the shit out of it,instead of having to put up with a shity excuse for a deus ex machina that doesn't make sence.Seriously, Shephard could've just called admiral Hackbar and told him to blow this joint.

Also could you please explain to me what was Mass effect 1 all about, cause' if the Citadel was a giant Mass relay and the Reaper overlord rolled into one,Why the fuck was Sovereign in the game in the first place.The SC could have just opened the Citadel an allow the reapers acess to the galaxy.It could have done it in ME1 in ME2 and in ME3, but it didn't.WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY?
The second we learn about the star child the reapers are already in our universe. Destroying it would do nothing to stop the reapers from invading further. Like they have done for many many cycles.

The star child only "views" what happens. It started the reaper cycle ages ago with harvesting the original civilization that created the AI/reapers. The fact that Shepards needs to make the decision by doing a certain act just tells us it can not change things by himself (I also think the star child mentioned that in the convo).
 

Richardplex

New member
Jun 22, 2011
1,731
0
0
Fappy said:
SajuukKhar said:
Fappy said:
True, though I think Bioware's mastered the art of interpreting bitching at this point. A certain level of bitching is perfectly within their acceptable level of positive/negative feedback. If only 60% of them complain its a win. :p
I think 60% is a tad unreasonable given how BSN is, I would put it up to 80%.
I recently went on there to see how EC was being received and found a huge thread of people complaining about how there should have been an option to
save Thane.

I facepalmed.
...I think you just gave me a migraine. Thanks for that.
 

SajuukKhar

New member
Sep 26, 2010
3,434
0
0
fi6eka said:
Then could you please explain why didn't we just destroy the Citadel?I mean, if the Star Child is controling the Reapers and the Star Child is in fact the Citadel, why didn't we simply nuke the shit out of it,instead of having to put up with a shity excuse for a deus ex machina that doesn't make sence.Seriously, Shephard could've just called admiral Hackbar and told him to blow this joint.

Also could you please explain to me what was Mass effect 1 all about, cause' if the Citadel was a giant Mass relay and the Reaper overlord rolled into one,Why the fuck was Sovereign in the game in the first place.The SC could have just opened the Citadel an allow the reapers acess to the galaxy.It could have done it in ME1 in ME2 and in ME3, but it didn't.WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY?
They make it abundantly clear in ME3 that while Shepard is in the Citadel at the end he cant contact anyone. Also, while the Star Child controls the plan the Reaper's use, they can still function without him. Killing him wouldn't just cause all The Reapers to stop.
.
.
Most likely because the Star child doesn't have the ability to open the relay himself. I doubt a race smart enough to build a race of machines that won against all galactic civilization for over 1 billion years would be stupid enough to not factor in the probability that the Star child might go rouge.

Not allowing the Star Child to open the relay himself, in the case the SC goes rouge, makes it to where he can't send a false start on the invasion, thus prevent The Reapers from arriving before they need to, and arriving before a time when galactic civilization is enough for them to harvest to keep themselves going.

Making the Keepers, and The Reaper ships, needed to open the relay makes a system of checks and balances that makes it to where an invasion can only occur when it is needed.
 

Fappy

\[T]/
Jan 4, 2010
12,010
0
41
Country
United States
SajuukKhar said:
fi6eka said:
Then could you please explain why didn't we just destroy the Citadel?I mean, if the Star Child is controling the Reapers and the Star Child is in fact the Citadel, why didn't we simply nuke the shit out of it,instead of having to put up with a shity excuse for a deus ex machina that doesn't make sence.Seriously, Shephard could've just called admiral Hackbar and told him to blow this joint.

Also could you please explain to me what was Mass effect 1 all about, cause' if the Citadel was a giant Mass relay and the Reaper overlord rolled into one,Why the fuck was Sovereign in the game in the first place.The SC could have just opened the Citadel an allow the reapers acess to the galaxy.It could have done it in ME1 in ME2 and in ME3, but it didn't.WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY?
They make it abundantly clear in ME3 that while Shepard is in the Citadel at the end he cant contact anyone.
Doesn't he talk to Hackett right after Anderson dies?
 

SajuukKhar

New member
Sep 26, 2010
3,434
0
0
Fappy said:
Doesn't he talk to Hackett right after Anderson dies?
Maybe, even so, he doesn't know that the star child = the citadel at that point, and the same principle can be applied for the star child's room. Also he had to open the citadel's arms, them being closed probably blocked signals.

And still, blowing up the Citadel, and the SC, wont stop the Reapers, and when your uber-weapon needs the citadel to work, it gives it even less reason to blow it up.
 

Delsana

New member
Aug 16, 2011
866
0
0
SajuukKhar said:
Delsana said:
You just ignored the plot hole...

THEY DONT USE ANY OF THEIR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY THEY USED UP UNTIL THAT POINT... no shields, no nothing. They just make noises and shoot lasers... they do none of the other things said other than harvesting and most of their harvested things disappear from ME2...

You can try and explain them away, but you can't actually if you look at all 170+, plus.. you can't if you actually want to see what's wrong with that game. Plus... you can't explain a way a plot hole... no point in history have plot holes been "explained away", you need to use the lore and facts to understand it.. or you hand wave it.. or it is retconned. Those are the only things that have ever been done regarding plot holes.
Becuase explaining that a over 1 billion year old race would have varying architecture, weapons, etc. etc., based on how many races they had absorbed at that point is "ignoring" the plot hole.

this is why I cant take such strong anti-bioware people seriously, they ignore all common logic and demand to have their hand held for even the most basic , common sense, things.

Delsana said:
Why does it matter?
Actually it was noted that the alliance fleet has them, and derivative based weapons, and thanix missiles were also said to used during the battle for earth.
Sorry man, but I haven't ignored anything, though you've portrayed yourself as ignoring everything... Even as you comment on it.

First, the thanix missile makes no sense, it was a plothole. They didn't even work like one. You don't make a missile that shoots a laser, you shoot the laser. Also that missile can't work like one if it isn't a mass accelerator.

They say a lot of things, but none of it happens. Those are plotholes.

And no, a superior force does not randomly decide to not use their most powerful capabilities especially as they suffer damage.

One particular plot error was done for dramatic effect but failed... And that was how it took a massive amount of basic accelerator shots from a huge fleet equipped with Thanix and more.. to take on the Rannoch Reaper.

Look at the real ss
 

Tradjus

New member
Apr 25, 2011
273
0
0
I'm predicting the next Dragon Age will be set two thousand years in the future, and be called Dragon Age: THE SHOOTENING. It will have you playing as Hawke the 274th, descendant of the legendary hero of forgotten times before the invention of firearms. The classes available will be "GUN SHOOTER" and "..."

The story will be an epic fantasy narrative that will be entirely buried beneath billions of shell casings as you alone blast your way through trillions of Evil Darkspawn to reach the final boss, the evil Archdemon, and destroy it from orbit with a tactical nuclear missile launching satellite!

This will all take place over a four hour campaign, but don't worry, there will be unending fun in the Multiplayer section of the game, which will have TWO EXCITING MODES, Deathmatch, and Capture the Flag! Don't forget your online keys everyone! ;D
 

SajuukKhar

New member
Sep 26, 2010
3,434
0
0
Delsana said:
Actually the missile makes a lot of sense.

"The Thanix's core is a liquid alloy of iron, uranium, and tungsten suspended in an electromagnetic field powered by element zero. The molten metal, accelerated to a significant fraction of the speed of light, solidifies into a projectile as it is fired, hitting targets with enough force to pierce any known shield or armor. "

Technically, as long as you have a superheated core of those elements suspected in a element zero shield, you could package it as a missile, and thus have a Thanix missile. It wouldn't do as much damage as the beam version, because it isn't going as fast, but with a fast enough missile it could still do some considerable damage.

Secondly I dont think you know what a plothole is, saying something and then not showing it isn't a plothole. It just means they didn't show it.

Thirdly I never said anyone randomly did anything, I really wonder were you are pulling this stuff from.

Fourthly the Rannoch Reaper taking so many hits from Thanix canons, which we cant actually prove they were using Thanix canons, or that all the ships used them, really isn't a polthole either. We really only ever see the Thanix canon uses against a collector ship in Mass Effect 2, The Reapers would presumably be resistant to their own weapons. Unless you think The Reapers are so dumb as to not build their own ship/bodies to be resistant to their own weapons.
.
.
So there isn't a plothole in regards to the Thanix missle, as there is nothing preventing one form being made.

And there isn't plothole like in regards to the Rannoch Reaper taking so many hits because we cant actually prove those are Thanix canons, and it would be terribly dumb of The Reapers not be resistant to their own weapons.
 

voltair27

New member
Apr 9, 2012
113
0
0
One of the other things i'd like to bring up is Mass Effect's actual genre. Mass Effect is actually a science fantasy RPG not science fiction.
 

Snowblindblitz

New member
Apr 30, 2011
236
0
0
I would love the game to go back to the more tactical feeling of DA:O, but with the character interaction of 2. I prefer a lot of DA:O, but I enjoyed the character interaction more in the sequel.

Protagonist needs to go back to being a bit more blank. I love the origin idea, I'd much rather that get expanded fully. I want being a human noble to have more impacts, I want to reclaim my home from Howe, rather then the story mentioning it, what happened to my brother, etc. Dump the whole continuing saves into the next game thing.

It made sense in the ME series, but not everything has to have it. You can touch on the events of other games and leave it ambiguous enough, i.e., I know what happened there, and that's good enough for me.
 

Xyliss

New member
Mar 21, 2010
347
0
0
imahobbit4062 said:
Well, as someone who enjoyed Dragon Age II and didn't ***** about the ME3 ending. I'm sure I'll be happy with what they give us.
Yea same here, I didn't think they were awful (not the best in the world but certainly not awful)
 

mad825

New member
Mar 28, 2010
3,379
0
0
voltair27 said:
One of the other things i'd like to bring up is Mass Effect's actual genre. Mass Effect is actually a science fantasy RPG not science fiction.
Are you talking about the story or gaming mechanics? In terms of gameplay it is an RPG action TPS game.
 

Faladorian

New member
May 3, 2010
635
0
0
I absolutely loved Origins, but did not like DA2 at all. Not one bit. It was very boring and very rushed.

Now, I used to love BioWare. I played Mass Effect 1 and 2 and loved them.


But I don't care if DA3 is development gold on a DVD made out of Zeus' own flesh, if EA is publishing the game they are not getting a single penny from me.


It's a shame to have to starve one of my favorite developers to get rid of the most evil publisher around, but it's certainly worth it.
 

voltair27

New member
Apr 9, 2012
113
0
0
mad825 said:
voltair27 said:
One of the other things i'd like to bring up is Mass Effect's actual genre. Mass Effect is actually a science fantasy RPG not science fiction.
Are you talking about the story or gaming mechanics? In terms of gameplay it is an RPG action TPS game.
The world it is set in. Fantasy overpowers science in this case.