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.
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.
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.
Proof?
Source please.
Oh, so you mean the consequences of my choice were completely pointless? Gee, I can't see why thats a bad thing.
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 - highlight to read]: 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.
Don't hide behind an inaccurate 'interview'. How do they get around the fuel situation?
[SPOILER - highlight to read]: 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 - highlight to read]: The Reapers didn't build the Conduit or plan on blowing the Relays.
[SPOILER - highlight to read]: 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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 - highlight to read]: 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.
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 - highlight to read]: whether everyone is inherently stranded in the Sol System
[SPOILER - highlight to read]: 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.
You've not proven that it's inaccurate. Why do you assume that there is no fuel available on Earth?
[SPOILER - highlight to read]: 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.
[SPOILER - highlight to read]: 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.
[SPOILER - highlight to read]: Yes, and the Normandy was caught in that energy pulse that was going from one mass relay to the next.
__________________
Last edited by BackFire on Apr 21st, 2012 at 10:20 PM
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 - highlight to read]: curing the Genophage. Tali's trial, Maelans research, Rewriting the Geth, etc, these were all major decisions, unless your definition of that phrase is different to mine. ME2 was all about your squad, so the decisions you made were mostly to do with them whereas ME3 was all about the galaxy, so your decisions were to do with them. In fact there are probably less major decisions in ME3 tbh....
Well, it ignores the possibilities that [SPOILER - highlight to read]: 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. Those kind of matter and it completely ignores them.
I meant decisions/consequences [SPOILER - highlight to read]: 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.
__________________
Last edited by BackFire on Apr 23rd, 2012 at 12:08 AM
[SPOILER - highlight to read]: 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.
[SPOILER - highlight to read]: 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 - highlight to read]: 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. Just an interesting thought, I felt.
'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!"
KMC Community Forums
Apr 21st, 2012 11:22 AM
