Mass Effect 3

Unfortunately it has everything to do with what I was talking about. Of course your EMS score decides which ending you can get, I never disagreed with that. But none of the choices you make are shown in the ending. As I've been saying to you all that your decisions change is that you have a slightly bigger number than you would otherwise. Zam perfectly incapsulated my point, so good show Zam. 👆

Originally posted by BackFire
It's a statistic based very largely on the interpersonal choices and decisions made by you throughout the game. Whether the

Spoiler:
geth are saved, whether you recruit all of the ME2 squadmembers to help you or let them all die, whether conrad verner is even in your games, whether the krogan are liberated or forever cursed.

It all matters, and all those choices are what largely influence the EMS. You are purposefully misrepresenting it. It is directly based on every single choice you make throughout the entire series.

And yet its still a stastistic, and one thats not even very good at what you say its purpose is, since the thresholds for the different endings are invisible and you can pretty much invalidate it by just playing multiplayer, and in fact you need to play multiplayer. Ask anyone about the EMS and they'll tell you that its extremely impersonal, which is exactly what statistics are.

Originally posted by BackFire
That's not what I said. That's not what the previous discussion was about. Stop trying to create red herrings. Respond to what I said.

The fact that 'most people didn't do it', which even if true which I doubt, is completely irrelevent. Its a gameplay feature thats in the game, therefore its available for me to criticise.

Originally posted by BackFire
Only if you Max out through multiplayer, which again, most did not do prior to beating the game.

Proof?

Originally posted by BackFire
Bioware said that you should take what you hear from that cast with a grain of salt.

Source please.

Originally posted by BackFire
1. The point was for dramatic effect.

Oh, so you mean the consequences of my choice were completely pointless? Gee, I can't see why thats a bad thing.

Originally posted by BackFire
2.

Spoiler:
Why do you assume that they will starve? FTL drives can allow them to fly very far without the Mass Relays, even out of the Sol System. This was mentioned in the QA someone did with Patrick Weeves at PAX a few weeks ago.
"-Will long-distance superluminal travel still be possible post-Ending? (will Tali or Wrex or Garrus see their homeworlds again? Will everyone starve?)

Galactic civilization will rebuild. The mass relays were not necessary for interstellar flight. Remember, what does it say in the Codex about the speed of ships? That's right, 12 lightyears per (day? hour? minute?). And that's only the cruising speed, not the maximum speed.

People have never needed to research basic FTL improvements before because they have mass relays. With the relays gone, new technology will increase that speed. Additionally, the element zero cores of the dead/controlled Reapers can be used to improve FTL drives. Starflight will continue using conventional FTL."

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/11154234/1

First off, that QA was informal, was paraphrased and has already been called out as inaccurate by Bioware. I've seen where it was originally posted, as well as the backlash from Bioware, so I would know.

Secondly

Spoiler:
yes, according to the Codex, 'With a mass effect drive, roughly a dozen light-years can be traversed in the course of a day's cruise.' But the galaxy is 100,000 lightyears across, do the math. Considering the lack of fuel and the fact that ships need to release their mass effect charge into a planets atmosphere every few hours, as it stands FTL is woefully insufficient in getting anyone out of the Sol system.

Originally posted by BackFire
3. See Above, they are not

Spoiler:
stuck in the Sol System

.

Don't hide behind an inaccurate 'interview'. How do they get around the fuel situation?

Originally posted by BackFire
4.

Spoiler:
Simply because the war fleet is in the Sol System doesn't mean the entire civilization is. They didn't bring their entire populace to fight the reapers, most would have stayed behind on their homeworld.

Spoiler:
By the end of the game the Turians, Batarians, Humans, Elcore, Volus and Asari have no homeworld, so most of them would be in that fight or on the Citadel. Yes there will be survivors, but their species will be decimated. I never said that all galactic life dies (except for if the Relays all blow up), but the setting after ME3 is completely ****ing trashed. Why would I want to speculate about a civilisation thats in utter ruins where everyones cut off from each other? Being a fan doesn't mean that I'm a masocist.

Originally posted by BackFire
Seeing as the ultimate goal of the reapers

Spoiler:
are to keep all life from being destroyed it makes no sense to assume that when they initiate the implosion of the Mass Relays that it will cause all life to be destroyed in the same manner as if an Astroid hit each one of them. It is simply illogical to think that. This is also mentioned in the QA I posted above.

Spoiler:
The Reapers didn't build the Conduit or plan on blowing the Relays.

Originally posted by BackFire

Spoiler:
The shockwave only harmed the normandy because it was in the process of going through the Mass Relay and was hit by the pulse that was being used to destroy each Mass Relay. It was not from the resulting explosion.

Spoiler:
The pulse was merely the same energy that destroys the Reapers. The Starchild says that 'releasing the energy of the Crucible will destroy the reapers but it will also destrpy the Mass Relays. The Relays don't just self-destruct, its the energy that destroys them and makes them blow.

You don't have to max out multiplayer to get the best ending. It's just easier to get it if you do.

You don't need to max it out but you do need to play it. I was very irritated when I learned this personally.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Unfortunately it has everything to do with what I was talking about. Of course your EMS score decides which ending you can get, I never disagreed with that. But none of the choices you make are shown in the ending. As I've been saying to you all that your decisions change is that you have a slightly bigger number than you would otherwise. Zam perfectly incapsulated my point, so good show Zam. 👆

You said from the very start, in response to my argument that the EMS score alters the ending, that it does not. I then pointed out how exactly it alters the ending, and you still said it doesn't affect the ending. You can pretend that you were talking about something else, but the quotes and points are there for all to see. All one has to do is read them. You implied that changing the ending cinematic does not change the ending.

Originally posted by Nephthys
And yet its still a stastistic, and one thats not even very good at what you say its purpose is, since the thresholds for the different endings are invisible and you can pretty much invalidate it by just playing multiplayer, and in fact you [b]need to play multiplayer. Ask anyone about the EMS and they'll tell you that its extremely impersonal, which is exactly what statistics are.[/B]

Being invested in the statistic itself is not the point, but being invested in the choices and the consequences that shape said statistic is the point. To say that the choices you make that directly affect the EMS, which then directly affects the ending, don't count because you didn't like the way that they implemented the EMS counter isn't very relevant. The choices still matter and they still alter the ending through the EMS system.

Originally posted by Nephthys
The fact that 'most people didn't do it', which even if true which I doubt, is completely irrelevent. Its a gameplay feature thats in the game, therefore its available for me to criticise.

You're free to dislike the fact that you are required to play a bit of multiplayer in order to get the very best ending, I'd agree with that criticism. But you are posting it, pretending that it's a valid response to a completely different point - a red herring.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Proof?

Did you max out multiplayer before beating the game? Do you know people who did? I know of no one who did. They played a bit of multiplayer prior to beating the game, and then mostly concentrated on the MP after the fact.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Oh, so you mean the consequences of my choice were completely pointless? Gee, I can't see why thats a bad thing.

Not pointless. Increasing the dramatic effect of the plot and making something happen to enhance one of the continuing themes of the games is not pointless, it's how one creates a riveting story.

Spoiler:
The idea being expressed by decision to destroy the Mass Relays is obviously a matter of interpretation. What I took away from it was that it was an attempt at conveying the idea that one should appreciate the connections and friendships that one has at any given time, because they could lose those connections and the friendships at anytime. One should not take any of these such things for granted. It could also be a comment on our reliance on technology to personally connect with people, and wanting the player to wonder what the world would be like if our current ways of connecting with people were ripped away.

Originally posted by Nephthys
First off, that QA was informal, was paraphrased and has already been called out as inaccurate by Bioware. I've seen where it was originally posted, as well as the backlash from Bioware, so I would know.

I don't believe it was called out as innacurate. Patrick Weekes released responses from twitter clarifying certain things, but he never said that the whole of the interview was flawed. Particularly the part that is in question now about

Spoiler:
whether everyone is inherently stranded in the Sol System

Originally posted by Nephthys
Secondly

Spoiler:
yes, according to the Codex, 'With a mass effect drive, roughly a dozen light-years can be traversed in the course of a day's cruise.' But the galaxy is 100,000 lightyears across, do the math. Considering the lack of fuel and the fact that ships need to release their mass effect charge into a planets atmosphere every few hours, as it stands FTL is woefully insufficient in getting anyone out of the Sol system.

Spoiler:
Getting out of the Sol System =/= flying across the entire galaxy. Aside from that fact, it's also mentioned that with Reaper tech now littering the entire galaxy, FTL could be vastly improved using the new technology available.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Don't hide behind an inaccurate 'interview'. How do they get around the fuel situation?

You've not proven that it's inaccurate. Why do you assume that there is no fuel available on Earth?

Originally posted by Nephthys

Spoiler:
By the end of the game the Turians, Batarians, Humans, Elcore, Volus and Asari have no homeworld, so most of them would be in that fight or on the Citadel. Yes there will be survivors, but their species will be decimated. I never said that all galactic life dies (except for if the Relays all blow up), but the setting after ME3 is completely ****ing trashed. Why would I want to speculate about a civilisation thats in utter ruins where everyones cut off from each other? Being a fan doesn't mean that I'm a masocist.

Spoiler:
Being trashed for the time being. That doesn't mean they are completely doomed. All it would do it require them to all work together in order to survive and to recreate. People often complain that the ending is counter intuitive to the running theme of team work and coming together that is woven throughout the games, but this ending only enhances the importance of that theme. It is now absolutely required for galactic life to come together and work together if they are to survive. And I don't think that is a bad thing.

I won't argue that the battle with the reapers takes an enormous toll on the galaxy and creates some dire situations, but fighting the worst war in the history of the lifeforms involved should have some dire ramifications.

Originally posted by Nephthys

Spoiler:
The Reapers didn't build the Conduit or plan on blowing the Relays.

Spoiler:
The Catalyst knew that it would happen though. And since he is the driving force behind the reapers motivations, it makes little sense to assume that he would be just fine with destroying all life in the galaxy after having a plan in place for untold millennia that was distinctly meant to keep life from becoming extinct.

Originally posted by Nephthys

Spoiler:
The pulse was merely the same energy that destroys the Reapers. The Starchild says that 'releasing the energy of the Crucible will destroy the reapers but it will also destrpy the Mass Relays. The Relays don't just self-destruct, its the energy that destroys them and makes them blow.

Spoiler:
Yes, and the Normandy was caught in that energy pulse that was going from one mass relay to the next.

I'll reply l8er.

I found this neat comparision:

Mass Effect 2 Ending

Mass Effect 3 Ending

Wah wah waaaah!

(Spoilers, obviously)

It's funny and all, though obviously dishonest and ignoring many of the variables at the end of ME3. Normally I'd feel silly pointing that out, as looking at it should be enough to know that it's point is meant to be humorous though hyperbolic simplification, but unfortunately with this game people seem embrace such things as fact.

Looking at it though, it makes me realize something. And that is how ME2 more or less saved all their major decision variables and consequences for the very end. Throughout most of the game the decisions you make have relatively small consequences until the end. Where as with ME3, the opposite route was taken. They spread out the major consequences for all your decisions throughout the game, instead of cramming them all together for the ending.

I wonder if people would have had reacted differently to the ending of ME3 had they done it more like ME2, and had no major consequences shown at any point during the game except the ending. It would have made the ending feel much more potent and profound, but it also would have lessened the power of the rest of the game. I wonder what people would actually prefer.

Well actually it isn't that dishonest at all, so IDK what you're talking about.

Disagreed. There were plenty of major choices in ME2 (pretty much one for each Loyalty mission), its just that obviously nothing on the scale of

Spoiler:
curing the Genophage.

Well, it ignores the possibilities that

Spoiler:
the squad you take with you to assault the citadel can die during the assault, and the variable of whether or not shepard lives/dies or earth is saved or completely destroyed.

I meant decisions/consequences

Spoiler:
that would/could cause the death of a squadmate or something along those lines. Those are all at the end of ME2, where as such things are sprinkled throughout ME3.

Spoiler:
I'll give you the Shepard Lives ending, but the others are just tied to your EMS, so its not a seperate choice really. Also I thought they cut out the clip of your squad dying.

Thats a pretty narrow definition imo.

Spoiler:
Your squad can still die. I tried it for myself in my fail game I played where Shepard pretty much ****ed up as badly as I could possibly have him **** up. Upon awakening from Harbinger's laser blast you see your squadmates lying there motionless in pools of blood.

It may be narrow, but those are the decisions that most people remember most, hence why they tend to feel the most important.

What I mean is, like take for example

Spoiler:
the rannoch mission in ME3. If you save the Geth Tali pretty much immediately kills herself. Where as in ME2 instead of her killing herself immediately, they would have perhaps made it so she is killed during the final mission. It just makes me wonder how much different the reaction to the ending would be had they done things like that, as opposed to seeing Tali die immediately.

The Pink Ending.

'He had a smug look on his face, "I constructed a machine that allowed me to travel through time back to the year 2011. I then had Cerberus troopers infiltrate and commandeer control of a small company called Electronic Arts. Then I dressed several husks in casual business attire and secretly implanted them on Bioware's writing team, thereby ensuring human dominance and a godawful ending to this long wonderful series!"

LOL.

BEST. ENDING. EVER haermm

YouTube video

Holy shit, I never noticed before but.... Benezia and Liara are the only Asari in the games to have eyebrows.

What the **** is up with that?

Wow, I never noticed that. No wonder Liara is the hottest Asari.

I'm guessing one of Liara's grandparents is a human as humans are the only species in the galaxy that have eyebrows IIRC.

Originally posted by Nemesis X
I'm guessing one of Liara's grandparents is a human as humans are the only species in the galaxy that have eyebrows IIRC.

Liara is older then humanity's first contact with aliens

Freak accident then. IDK.

Liara was 106(I think) in ME1. When did humanity make first contact?

About 30 years prior to ME1