Mass Effect 3 Discussion Thread

[paspinall]

No I aint gonna comment on the 'plagarism' because practically ever story everywhere is ripped from others.

[Charax]

Bionic eyes and collective consciousness are staples of sci-fi, not examples of plagiarism. The inhibitor/reaper comparison is more persuasive, but "trap triggered by curious race based on development of space travel" is hardly unique. Hell, it's the plot of Prometheus.

[Terminatorphoenix]

I've said it before and I'll say it again; the only way that Bioware could redeem the ending in the DLC to me is with a six hour Reaper vs Thresher Maw fight, a free cake with 'We're sorry' written in Prothean in icing on the top and a complete cover album of Queen's Night at the Opera sung entirely by Mordin Solus.

[Lothlanathorian]

I've said it before and I'll say it again; the only way that Bioware could redeem the ending in the DLC to me is with a six hour Reaper vs Thresher Maw fight, a free cake with 'We're sorry' written in Prothean in icing on the top and a complete cover album of Queen's Night at the Opera sung entirely by Mordin Solus.

Start an internet petition. I will sign. If we get enough people backing it, Bioware has shown they will cave to the pressure. WE CAN DO THIS!

[eldargal]

You know, I love the endings but I'd sign the petition just for the Mordin Solus album.

[Charax]

Mordin Solus Sings Bohemian Rhapsody would be magnificent

[Eumerin]

If you didn't buy the game until after that DLC was available, then, when it had to update, that would have added the achievements to the list.

Doesn't matter when you bought the game. The DLC achievements have been added regardless.

Dunno when it was changed, but DLC achievements get added automatically nowadays on the X-Box. That wasn't always the case, but it is now. Every single game I own that's had DLC-related achievements has had the achievements added to the list regardless of whether or not I purchased the DLC.

As for the ME3 DLC, I really don't care. Everyone was told that it wasn't in the regular version of the game. The game's complete without the DLC, and not having it present doesn't appreciably take anything away from the plot of the game. If a game company wants to charge money to pay for the activation of a tiny switch that turns on product that came on the discs that shipped, then that's their business. If people want it, then they'll pay the extra for it. If they don't want it, then they won't. Just so long as it's not required product to finish the plot or to have the plot make sense, I really don't care.

[Lothlanathorian]

Dunno when it was changed, but DLC achievements get added automatically nowadays on the X-Box. That wasn't always the case, but it is now. Every single game I own that's had DLC-related achievements has had the achievements added to the list regardless of whether or not I purchased the DLC.

This is what I said, or, at least, what I meant to say if my choice of wording wasn't clear enough.

[Firebreath]

Funny one should mention Revelation Space, because I was thinking about that earlier.

Not because of plagiarism or something (because everything has been done before), but for the mildly bizarro reasoning for the Inhibitors to wipe out all space fairing civilizations.

See, in a few billion years two galaxies will collide, and this will wipe out them space fairing civilizations, so we wipe out these civilizations so they won't be wiped out. Or something.

Ha-bloody-ha.

[The Highlander]

Well I finally managed to finish the single player and having seen the ending I agree with many of the complaints that have been made about it. The cut-scene of the allied was brilliant, but I didn’t the final mission. I just didn’t feel epic enough (there should certainly have been some massive end boss) and given that Hammer force was meant to be comprised of the combined ground forces of the entire galaxy it should have done far more damage. Obviously it was going to be a tough fight, but I was expecting something like D-Day, only larger and more spectacular. Instead, everyone else didn’t seem to have made much of a difference at all. As for the ending itself I wasn’t that bothered by the three choices themselves (although they could have been better implemented), but was incredibly annoyed that they never said what happened to the rest of the galaxy. If there had been a fallout style video sowing what happened then that would be been brilliant, but instead EA spoiled everything.

On the other hand, having finally unlocked the Krogan characters for multiplayer I’m having a great time. Never mind worrying about ammo levels or cool down times, my solider just runs around meleeing everything in sight. It may not be the most efficient way to play, but it is lots of fun. Head butting a Brute to death is certainly more impressive than banging away with a rifle. My aim has become to spend as much of the round as possible in rage mode, a great grin stuck on my face. I can’t wait to unlock the Krogan Battlemaster, the bionic charge is going to be ace.

I AM KROGAN!!!!

[Torga_DW]

Mordin Solus Sings Bohemian Rhapsody would be magnificent

Well i can't give you that, but heres something in a similar vein: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlxozJh2JNo&feature=fvst

[Burnthem]

Just completed it myself, and very disappointed with the ending. I've researched the other endings too and in no way is it worth my while replaying it just to see them when they are on Youtube. Shame, real shame, they really dropped the ball with this one I think, it could have been phenomenal. The cutscenes at the beginning of the Earth missions were mind-blowing, but they just made the ending seem all the more an anticlimax.

[Firebreath]

I'm going with the "Indoctrination Theory" for now, but I still can't agree with the reasoning behind the Reapers harvesting organic life every 50,000 years. It's totally at odds with my experience with EDI and the Geth.
(edit:

It's all an illusion and you're getting lied to, I get that. Everything the Catalyst says is so obviously wrong; it this where Bioware are dropping a hint?

We'll wait and find out.)

...

I'm doing an Insanity run with an Engineer, and apart from the occasional ragequit it's coming along rather well.

...

Another edit to prevent double posting: although a fresh ME3 character makes for an "empty" experience (I mean, half the cast is missing), it opens up some interesting dialogue and cutscenes in places.
So, I'm actually glad I decided to do this for my Insanity run. There's that certain "deepness" to it which makes me think Bioware does actually know what they're doing, and it makes me wonder what else I am missing.

[Firebreath]

I completed the Insanity run with my Engineer, after something which must have been the most frustrating final boss fight ever (Marauder Shields and his three Husk puppets).

Not something I am likely to repeat; like I said, the default Shepard gets some interesting cutscenes and dialogues, but everything else just doesn't work out the way I would like.
And Insanity seems easier in ME3 than it did in ME1 and 2. Plenty frustrating in parts, just not as satisfying when I finally did make it. Don't really know why, maybe it's just the endless waves.

Now doing a final run to try and get some of those missing Achievements with my import from ME1 and 2. The game itself remains brilliant, despite being more cluncky gameplay-wise, compared to ME2.

[Firebreath]

Sorry for the triple post; it seems that everybody has stopped playing this game already. Not me, but if nobody cares anymore, I can see why.

I had a good chuckle watching this (contains profanity, so shield thyne ears), and this (tasteful and understated).

[ctsteel]

I finished ME3 yesterday (after playing through ME1 and 2 over the years, all on 360). I do now understand the comments I'd seen in passing about unhappiness/frustration with the ending - my ultra-paragon Shepard who united all the races, settled centuries-old disputes and assembled all the war assets with near 100% galactic readiness (my military strength was just shy of 7000), was not able to save everything the way I wanted him to, and have a happy ending for himself. I've invested a lot of emotional energy into the story and characters across all three games (as has my wife who enjoyed watching me play the game to see the story unfold and talk to me about my choices), and so it was the culmination of a lot of time and investment, so it did become a let down in the final execution of the outcome.

After some thinking at the ending choice part, I decided to

Control the Reapers, as it seemed the only way I could both save the synthetics (geth and EDI) that I had worked hard to give individuality to, and I couldn't choose Synergy since this would be forcing a new form on every race in the galaxy which is against my/Shepard's ways. So I had to choose control (which I'd argued against the Illusive Man over), and sacrifice myself. Which kind of suited my Shepard I suppose but I'm bummed that I couldn't find another way, I couldn't reason with the catalyst as to how its solution can be changed.

I feel the ending is mostly in line with how the story flowed, except that

They don't really explain the various plot issues that have already been talked about (characters on Normandy etc) - I wondered if perhaps the relays took time to overload and blow up and so the fleets/Normandy were able to heed the warning and get out? I was particularly bummed that my option to control the Reapers and save EDI/Geth didn't seem to matter - at the end of the Normandy crash Joker gets out without EDI, leading me to view the Synergy ending online and see that she walks out - so my personal sacrifice to protect her amongst others was in vain? Since not all the characters get out I can't be sure but it seems that way

So I am now waiting for the extended DLC to come out, when I will replay final part of the final mission again and will see how it affects the outcome.

Also, re the catalyst

People seem to be getting angry that the boy from the start was the catalyst all along; however this is incorrect. The boy was real, and died. Shepard had nightmares and grief over not saving him, so the image of the boy was strong in his mind. When the catalyst interrogated Shepard's consciousness (via similar lines to indoctrination without actually indoctrinating him, plus he is part synthetic now) it was able to see this boy's image and then took it on for use in interaction with Shepard since it knew he would respond to it. Similar to the aliens at the end of Contact.
I have no proof of this beyond my own analysis but this makes perfect sense compared to nerd rage over the catalyst somehow being a physical boy on Earth from the beginning.

In terms of War Assets and Crucible arrival

I was expecting my upgrades and extra research to matter in terms of whether the Crucible would be able to fight its way through the Reapers and activate, similar to the upgrades in ME2 which keep the Normandy crew alive, and I was expecting there to be different cutscenes where the extra energy protection, javelin missiles etc would all have some tangible benefit. But no, in the end it was just a small buff to the asset value, so kinda useless in a way. A bit disappointing but I do acknowledge this is my own expectations building up that let me down. I had the same feeling re the Normandy upgrades in this game, where you can put in cyclonic shielding etc by talking to the engineers - no change except a few asset points

[Eumerin]

Also, re the catalyst

People seem to be getting angry that the boy from the start was the catalyst all along; however this is incorrect. The boy was real, and died. Shepard had nightmares and grief over not saving him, so the image of the boy was strong in his mind. When the catalyst interrogated Shepard's consciousness (via similar lines to indoctrination without actually indoctrinating him, plus he is part synthetic now) it was able to see this boy's image and then took it on for use in interaction with Shepard since it knew he would respond to it. Similar to the aliens at the end of Contact.
I have no proof of this beyond my own analysis but this makes perfect sense compared to nerd rage over the catalyst somehow being a physical boy on Earth from the beginning.

Part of the Indoctrinated theory (which I am not a proponent of)

focuses on the idea that in fact the boy was never real. They point out that no one else ever seems to notice or respond to the kid during the prologue of the game (which is true - Anderson never sees or hears the boy, and the people at the evac shuttle don't help him aboard), and that the kid was the visible indicator that Shepard had finally reached the point where his exposure to Reaper technology made him susceptible to Reaper influence. If you don't agree with the Indoctrination theory, then obviously the kid is real. There's no other real explanation for him. Those who think that the boy was real fully understand why the boy's image was used by the Catalyst. But that doesn't make the whole thing any less silly.

[Firebreath]

Going with the Indoctrination Theory (which I think is very good, but I admit there are some serious issues with it):

Destroy is the only choice to overcome Indoctrination; Saren went for Synergy and failed, TIM went for Control and failed.
Mind you, if the Indoctrination Theory is real, nothing that happened in the final scenes was real, so Anderson and TIM will be still alive, and the Crucible didn't fire, because nobody was there to fire it, right?
Which basically leaves me with no ending AT ALL. Goddamn, what a cluster****.

Apart from that, I'm sure people will agree there are other issues with the game itself.

I mean, what is up with the entirely static (and therefore useless) quest and missions list? There's no way to track your progress. This used to be an RPG, now it's "Gears of Effect".
Why do we have "Diana Allers" when we should have had Emily Wong (saw this mentioned in a YT vid and it makes sense) on the Normandy?
The Team roster is way too small compared to the previous 2 games. Different appearances give either weapon damage or shields or whatever, but no costumizable armor for your crew (was already a shortcoming in ME2).
People say the combat is more refined, but I disagree completely. If anything, all tactics you needed to employ in ME2 are out the window, and combat feels simplistic.
Also, conveniently placed, single-use heavy weapons where you'd need them, but nowhere else. On Insanity, I needed all 3 Geth Spitfires for the 3 Geth Primes prior to the "Hammer of Dawn" sequence on Rannoch.
No console hacking or PDA decrypting minigames; these added some flavour to ME2 at least.

...

While I still think it's a very good game, it has more flaws than ME1 and ME2 combined, which makes it the worst in the series. I will not be playing through this 10 times like I did with ME1 and ME2.

[eldargal]

Well:

I agree on the quest log, that wasn't particularly good.
We have Diana Allers bcause she is a war reporter and Emily Wong is an investigative reporter who:

Dies in the initial attack on earth via twitter in the lead up to March 6th. So Diana Allers > corpse

I preferred it, ME2s roster was too big and impersonal in my view.
I also disagree, I found the combat in ME3 to be roughly the same tactical depth as ME2 but things like cover, movement and melee were vastly superior and much more smooth to execute.
Don't really care about this at all.
I enjoyed the hacking min-game but loathed decryption, I would have preferred perhaps an option to have the mini-games if you wante but I really don't think they were much of a loss.

I probably won't be sinking 500 hours into ME3 as I did Me1-2 either, simply because it is the end. I seldom read the end books in novels as much as I do the earlier ones either. Personally my quality ranking is ME 1 > ME3 > ME2, very narrowly.

My view on the Indoctrination theory is that

the actual symptoms start quite late. The dreams are a sign of PTSD not indoctrination, and the growing indoctrination towards the end of the game links into them as a way of attacking Shepards resolve. The actual indoctrination hallucination starts around the time of the attack on the portal, the Destroy choice is Shepard overcoming that. So Bioware is telling the truth when they say they wont be changing the ending, but we will be getting more ending.

I'm still quite content with the ending so I don't really mind one way or the other.

[Firebreath]

We have Diana Allers bcause she is a war reporter and Emily Wong is an investigative reporter who:

Dies in the initial attack on earth via twitter in the lead up to March 6th. So Diana Allers > corpse

Oh wow. That's... pretty terrible.

I preferred it, ME2s roster was too big and impersonal in my view.

Maybe it could have been a bit less, I give you that. This one was too small for a large portion of the game. But whatever.

Don't really care about this at all.

You sure? (because, you know, I care a lot)

Personally my quality ranking is ME 1 > ME3 > ME2, very narrowly.

Meh, I can't really put a ranking on it.

ME1 had the story and the initial surprise, but shortcomings in the inventory and the repetitive "dungeons". And the handling of the Mako wasn't all that.
ME2 refined the gameplay but lost a lot of RPG and went Gears of Effect. The Hammerhead and it's associated content was a testcase if they should do a vehicle at all. Guess they didn't.
ME3 didn't do much for the gameplay, went full Gears of Effect, but was dark and intense all the way through. And the much anticipated conclusion after all. Not sure about the conclusion, though.

My view on the Indoctrination theory is that

the actual symptoms start quite late. The dreams are a sign of PTSD not indoctrination, and the growing indoctrination towards the end of the game links into them as a way of attacking Shepards resolve. The actual indoctrination hallucination starts around the time of the attack on the portal, the Destroy choice is Shepard overcoming that. So Bioware is telling the truth when they say they wont be changing the ending, but we will be getting more ending.

I can dig that.