My wife treated me to a copy of this game up a couple of weeks ago, and my God, how amazing is it?! I'm utterly hooked! I've played ME1 and 2 as well, though this is leagues above the rest!
The FMV's are incredible, and I really felt for my character following the
Spoiler:
destruction of Thessia
, you could really feel his pain, along with Liara's.
I've gone for a Sentinel build on this play through, and will likely run an Infiltrator build on the next.
So, come one! Come all! Regail me with your ME stories!
You are going to attract a lot of hate for enjoying it so much ha. But I agree with it being good fun. I did stop my play through and start again when I made the wrong call and
Spoiler:
Miranda died. Seriously, nooooo
And picking between the two women made me feel so bad. I love them both haha
I actually did not mind the ending. Although I see why it generated so much hate. I really like that the writers did not change anything when they put out the extended ending.
As to the game itself. I love it. I have so many hours invested in the whole Mass effect series I loved every minute and 3 had a gak ton of throwbacks that made me laugh and cry. Still wish I could have Wrex as a squadmate but as a whole the game and the series was amazing and I will most likely play it well into the future (although 1 has not aged so well)
It's one of the few games that I like the multi-player. Loved the game. Hated the ending though. As an author I would have been in big trouble if I had written that ending. The extended ending was much better. The rest of the game and series though were wonderfully written. Perhaps one of my all time favorite series.
But what I really didn't appreciate about it was that none of your choices actually mattered.
Spoiler:
Oh, you killed the Thorian in part one? Well, there's another one just like it. Legion died? Oh, he's back as a hologram or whatever. Etc, etc.
Aye extended ending went a little way towards repairing the shocking conclusion, in the sense on how badly it was scripted. Regardless of the ending the game is still amazing, a great finish to the series all in all and the multiplayer is probably the best I've ever played.
Hoping for good things regarding Mass Effect 4, and also loving the call to continue the universe as is, even if it means a wtf style tie up to make it work. I don't care what they do, I'm just happy for it to follow on from where this one left off.
The game was good and I liked the "green" ending for the most part. Overall I liked ME2 better because it was still building the the stories up. Once I completed an arc in ME3 I hated to see it end. Great series though!
Just got it recently for the Multiplayer, and enjoyed MP so much that it inspired me to actually start and complete a ME2 Renegade Infiltrator playthrough so I could import a character (used ME2: Genesis to set the ME1 plot).
When I imported my ME2 Infiltrator to ME3, I initially chose to switch over to the Adept and was having fun with combing Warp, Singularity & Double Throw for massive chain biotic detonations. But I got fed with the severe weight capacity limitation forcing me to stick to SMGs and Pistols for good cooldowns, and I wanted to use some Assault Rifles.
So now I've re-rolled as a Sentinel and OMFG IS THIS CLASS AWESOME! Definitely my favourite class in the trilogy. I've maxed out my Tech Armour for upgraded Omni Shields (the orange hologram armour is sweeeet), and boosted my Health & Shield stat so I'm running a sort of Medium Tank with HP and Shields ~1100. Not the highest possible - I have James at ~ 1500, but 1100 is durable enough.
I maxed out Throw for Double Throw, fast cooldowns and bigger biotic detonations. Initially I was using Liara's Singularity to prime groups of enemies, then using Shepards Double Throw to set off a big chain of explosions.
But now I'm playing through the Omega DLC with Aria T ' loak and found that the Flare power is even better. It sets off a powerful, large AoE explosion, and when combined with Warp, it makes for a MASSIVE explosion. Seriously, everytime I use Flare to detonate Warp it has so much force that the target's body is flung out of the entire level. When I hit a Mech with a Warp/Flare combo, it disappears. Sending people into orbit is fun.
For weapons, I'm using the Turian Phaeston Assault Rifle. This gun is amazing. With Stability and Ammo Mag upgrades, it becomes a high capacity, rapid firing and accurate light machine gun with a 75 round clip. I can just pump bullets constantly, and alternate with Warp and Throw and detonating Liara's Singularity and wipe out big clusters of enemies very quickly.
Story wise, I'm playing Renegade, with a mix of Paragon choices too (roughly 75% / 25% ).
I've also unlocked the Turian Sentinel for MP, and decided its my favourite class so far. I'm running it like a Terminator - the Phaeston Assault Rifle with Stability and Ammo Mag upgrades, Tech Armour focused on shielding and maxed out HP and Shield stats.
The only disappointment so far has been the content gating. I pushed ahead too far in the main quest, and went from Earth - Mars - Citadel - Palaven - Sur' Kesh - Tuchanka very quickly doing very few side missions in between. Afterwards, when I tried to return to the Citadel to do some side missions, I'd triggered the Cerberus invasion, which meant almost all the Missions on the Citadel were incomplete and permenantly lost to me (including the Omega DLC Missions). I had no prior saves, so lost the missions altogether which really pissed me off and I had to start a second Sentinel playthrough (the playthrough I described above). A warning that it was the last chance to complete the missions would have been nice.
Also, it got to the point where I was having to swap between Disc 1 & 2 after literally every damn mission.
motyak wrote: I usually just went for ammo/damage, and relied on my Infiltrator skills/hiding like a little girl to keep me safe from harm. It worked pretty well.
I found the Infiltrator a lot of fun in ME2. Instead of focusing on Sniper Rifles, I played a fast paced Run & Gun Infiltrator that used SMG's and Assault Rifles and make frequent use of the cloak to flank enemies, charge them head on and unleashing a hail of bullets point blank or to lose aggro and give my shields a chance to recharge. Mainly used the Locust SMG (from the Kasumi DLC), and the Mattock Heavy Assault Rifle (very deadly when used with cloak to allow you to line up shots unmolested) or the Avenger Assault Rifle.
motyak wrote: Yeah I make liberal use of the Mattock and cloak, which is why I go for so much extra ammo because that thing doesn't get much to start with.
And the Mattock was in ME2? I need to replay that, I don't know how I missed it. Or I've probably just forgotten.
motyak wrote: Yeah I make liberal use of the Mattock and cloak, which is why I go for so much extra ammo because that thing doesn't get much to start with.
And the Mattock was in ME2? I need to replay that, I don't know how I missed it. Or I've probably just forgotten.
Myself and a lot of my friends all agree that Mass Effect 3 is 99% amazing. It was just that ending that really screwed an otherwise amazing series. I just gotta give big credit to the writers for making...
Spoiler:
Mordin & Thane's deaths tear inducing despite both characters being one foot in the grave already from old age/terminal illness respectively.
Almost always played as the Infiltrator with sniper rifles and getting the cloak in ME2 is awesome fun. I thought it was funny when I got the achievement in ME3 for killing x amount of the shield guys by headshotting them through the eye slot. Reminded me of Happy Gilmore's first hole in one, I was just doing that because it was easier.
I just recently finished another insanity playthrough as Vanguard, bloody hard but a nice challenge. That class is great for quickly killing stragglers that think its smart to move off by themself.
Madcat87 wrote: Myself and a lot of my friends all agree that Mass Effect 3 is 99% amazing. It was just that ending that really screwed an otherwise amazing series. I just gotta give big credit to the writers for making...
Spoiler:
Mordin & Thane's deaths tear inducing despite both characters being one foot in the grave already from old age/terminal illness respectively.
Almost always played as the Infiltrator with sniper rifles and getting the cloak in ME2 is awesome fun. I thought it was funny when I got the achievement in ME3 for killing x amount of the shield guys by headshotting them through the eye slot. Reminded me of Happy Gilmore's first hole in one, I was just doing that because it was easier.
I just recently finished another insanity playthrough as Vanguard, bloody hard but a nice challenge. That class is great for quickly killing stragglers that think its smart to move off by themself.
I played as vanguard too (not on insanity though. I played for the story). Tempest (with the upgrade to make it lighter), scimitar, and shockwave spam is how I played.
Also:
Spoiler:
Yeah, they were tear inducing, but it also gave them closure and sent them out with a bang. I won't talk about Mordin's death for major spoilers but a terminally ill Drell managed to spend some of his final actions fighting off an assassin.
Ouphh, ME3. Lots of fond memories about that game, and the rest of the series.
Personally, I thought the original ending was amazing and I disagree wholeheartedly with the criticism leveled against it. I even prefer it to the DLC Remake specifically because it left more things open to interpretation, and because rather than requiring everything to be clear-cut I had fun filling the blank spots with my headcanon ->
Lynata's headcanon wrote:For my playthrough (only did one so far), Shep chose Destroy - in her mind, it was the only way to make sure the Reapers would never be a threat again. Control might have enabled her to achieve the same result, yet there was that lingering suspicion that the merger could end up with her being altered by the Reapers instead of assuming complete control. In the meantime, Joker dodged Reaper fighters to move the Normandy closer to the extraction point, where the few survivors of the ground forces awaited pickup by shuttle. Given their fighting spirit and aggression, I don't think any of the krogans made it. Same as Vega, Ash or Javik, although I'll admit that I'm merely adding them to the bodycount because deaths make it feel more realistic, these three are the sacrificing types, and I don't care about them too much. I'd think Vega died providing covering fire for a squad of retreating Alliance Marines; that would fit him well. Cortez didn't survive the Hammer drop-off in my game, it was only later that I learned he can actually survive depending on an earlier dialogue option.
As the Crucible fired its beam, Normandy was already back in the air and approaching the Relay, together with a portion of those ships that had survived so far. In an eery replay of the Alliance's first retreat only months earlier, a portion of the fleet stayed behind to keep the Reapers busy and allow the others to escape. The turians in particular proved their honour once more as they insisted that their forces would provide the bulk of the sacrifice, whereas the Quarian Flotilla reluctantly pulled back first, intending to save as many of its civilian ships as possible. The Destiny Ascension remained at Earth as well, with Matriarch Lidanya adding the awesome power of its impressive main gun to the turian dreadnoughts. The Citadel flagship's kinetic barriers began to buckle under the onslaught, but just before the Normandy made the jump, it managed to cripple another Reaper by blasting through its vulnerable weapons port just as the enemy ship prepared to fire on the SR-2.
The Crucible's blast hit the Normandy in mid-transit, crippling half its electronic control systems and frying its AI. With all servers and backup blades being hit simultaneously, EDI simply ceased to exist. Thrown out of the Relay slipstream and stranded in a star system with no knowledge of their exact position, Joker confirmed the existence of a habitable planetoid in their vicinity. As FTL jumps without VI support were deemed too risky and the ship was already in a bad enough shape, it was decided to land on the planet and use it as a base until repairs could be completed. Controlling the ship's descent without a flight computer was a nigh-impossible feat, but Joker managed to pull it off and set down the SR-2 mostly unharmed. As shown in my game's cinematic, Joker, Garrus and Liara leave the ship, but other survivors like Traynor would follow them soon as well. The group begins to set up a basecamp at the foot of the ship and, realizing that they are cut off from the rest of the galaxy in terms of communication, prepare for a longer stay.
Over the course of the next couple hundred years (which is when the post-credits Stargazer scene takes place), this small community becomes an independent colony, first turning into a village, then a city-state, with remote outposts set up for resource gathering slowly growing into larger communes as well. Liara, having been pregnant from "embracing eternity" with Shepard, gave birth to twins, who in turn became the origin of a small asari subset of the otherwise human-dominated population. Guided by the wisdom of Matron-turned-Matriarch Liara, the people adopt the asari model of e-democracy and manage to largely avoid internal conflict. Even as the colonists grow apart and found further settlements, they remain united in their spirit. The mother of Shepard's kids manages to live for another few hundred years before dying in her sleep, a content smile on her lips.
Unfortunately, with Garrus and Tali being the only members of their respective species on this world, there are no turians and quarians around, although they have spent their final days as a pair of lovers. Both of them continue to be revered for their part in the legend of the Shepard.
After many generations of hardship and rebuilding, the scientists of this colony have come close to a breakthrough in drive technology that will finally present an evolution of traditional FTL engines, enabling travel to faraway worlds outside the local sector, whose barren planetoids are already being visited by small mining vessels searching for deposits of element zero. The colony's ultimate plan is the construction of a spaceship as large as the legendary Normandy, whose ancient wreck remains preserved in a temple. Estimated construction time is 20 years. On the local extranet, human and asari philosophers publicly debate the prospect of re-establishing contact with their distant genetical relatives, with historians and sociologists suggesting their theories of what may have become of them, or the possible difficulties renewed diplomatic contact might pose. A number of conservatives oppose the project, argueing that nobody knows what they might find out there and that it could put every human and asari on this world at risk.
This is where a new generation of adventurers and heroes steps up.
Of course, whether one likes the original ending or not is very much a matter of personal preferences, though I am under the impression that most gamers who complained wanted a traditional "Disney ending" with everyone surviving and living happily ever after blah blah. I can only say that I am relieved that BioWare's writing went into such a refreshingly different direction. Actually reminds me a bit of Game of Thrones, in retrospect.
Anyways ... I also had a ton of fun with ME3's multiplayer, clocking about 120 hours on it, most of them on what I call a proper Asari Commando (Adept with assault rifle) and a Human Infiltrator. And whilst I'm typing this, I actually feel an itch to give it another go. It's surprising how fun and captivating such a simple game can be, just because its parts including the visual design tie together in nigh-perfection.
It even inspired me to write a bit on a small Mass Effect conversion for the Dragon Age pen&paper RPG.
Can't wait to see where BioWare will take us in Mass Effect 4. I am also happy that it's not going to be about Shep, because him/her story is quite simply finished and I'd like to experience another perspective on the setting. The Mass Effect galaxy is filled to the brim with heroes and villains, and whilst none of them may be as big as Shep, they are certainly big enough to have amazing stories to tell. Personally, I'm hoping for the option to play as non-humans this time around, though!
motyak wrote:That'd explain it, I haven't got any of them yet.
Ohh. Be sure to get them - at least some of them. For ME2, Shadowbroker is quite simply a must-have, though Stolen Memory is a nice change of pace as well. For ME3, don't miss out on the Citadel DLC. All ze feels!
... call me stuck in a bygone age, but I was missing both the Mako APC as well as various RPG elements such as the more detailed inventory and ammo system (which some complained was "clunky") or that you were actually able to manually holster/draw your gun(!).
That being said, this was already removed in ME2. Some call it streamlining, I call it dumbing down.
For what it's worth, the cinematic feeling/experience (which certainly was improved in the sequels, thanks to the advanced engine) more than made up for it. But I agree it could have been better, even if "better" seems to be very, very subjective.
Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote: I always made sure I found the eye targetter headpiece asap when ever playing with my characters, not a huge fan of helmets.
I did this as well!
I tended to play as infiltrator anyway, so the bonus to headshot damage was useful regardless.
I wish I could appreciate it. I pre-ordered it, like I did ME2. And when it turned out that the Devs were wrong when they promised that you could access all the story content without playing any multiplayer, I informed Amazon that they had sold me a game that was not as advertised and got a refund.
I appreciate EA making a game that stuck to it's guns...but not for making a Mass Effect game that betrayed the core foundations of the series, and their customers. I enjoyed what I did play of it. I didn't find it to be as good as ME1 or 2, either story or play wise, and I'm a little sad that ME3 turned out to be such a disappointment.
kingbobb wrote: I wish I could appreciate it. I pre-ordered it, like I did ME2. And when it turned out that the Devs were wrong when they promised that you could access all the story content without playing any multiplayer, I informed Amazon that they had sold me a game that was not as advertised and got a refund.
I appreciate EA making a game that stuck to it's guns...but not for making a Mass Effect game that betrayed the core foundations of the series, and their customers. I enjoyed what I did play of it. I didn't find it to be as good as ME1 or 2, either story or play wise, and I'm a little sad that ME3 turned out to be such a disappointment.
What?
You could get all the story content without touching the multiplayer. All the MP did was make it so that your "Readiness rating" would go up--which the single player game would do as well.
Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:I always made sure I found the eye targetter headpiece asap when ever playing with my characters, not a huge fan of helmets.
Phht. Helmets.
I went the Space Marine route. Didn't even go for the targeter. Otherwise, full N7 armour.
kingbobb wrote:betrayed the core foundations of the series
To me, this sounds more like a mistaken interpretation of what these core foundations are, or perhaps just unsuitable expectations.
kingbobb wrote: I wish I could appreciate it. I pre-ordered it, like I did ME2. And when it turned out that the Devs were wrong when they promised that you could access all the story content without playing any multiplayer, I informed Amazon that they had sold me a game that was not as advertised and got a refund.
I appreciate EA making a game that stuck to it's guns...but not for making a Mass Effect game that betrayed the core foundations of the series, and their customers. I enjoyed what I did play of it. I didn't find it to be as good as ME1 or 2, either story or play wise, and I'm a little sad that ME3 turned out to be such a disappointment.
What?
You could get all the story content without touching the multiplayer. All the MP did was make it so that your "Readiness rating" would go up--which the single player game would do as well.
The devs promised pre-release that all endings...meaning all story content...were possible to achieve without playing a stitch of multiplayer. Within two weeks of release, players proved that it was impossible to attain a readiness rating high enough to access all ending content using only solo play. Devs continued to insist otherwise, even when the numbers were proven repeatedly that the solo-only player at release could not unlock all possible story endings.
Bioware did release an update some weeks later that reduced the Readiness threshold so that solo-only play could unlock all possible endings. By that time, I was tired of the lies and denial that Bioware and EA had issued.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
kingbobb wrote:betrayed the core foundations of the series
To me, this sounds more like a mistaken interpretation of what these core foundations are, or perhaps just unsuitable expectations.
To each their own. To me, the series was about teamwork and self-determination. About actions and choices determining the outcome. The devs touted how the game would be different for everyone, and that all our choices would matter.
Spoilers for those not having played through coming:
In the end, the game comes down to choosing a color, and getting an ending that for the most part, is the same regardless of which one you choose. The ending is different for exactly three different people, and reflected very few of the many choices a player would make over the course of three games. It was later revealed the ending was developed solely by the lead producers of the game, without the participation or review of the story writers, and leaves many long-time fans feeling like the game was ended because of budgetary and scheduling constraints rather then developing an ending that was appropriate to the series and the main story told across 60+ hours of gameplay. I'm happy that many people are able to enjoy the game for what it is, but I'm not one of them.
And if I have unrealistic expectations, it's because I have over 100+ hours of gameplay creating those expectations, and pre-release Dev. statements leading me to believe that they were trying to meet those expectations.
kingbobb wrote: I wish I could appreciate it. I pre-ordered it, like I did ME2. And when it turned out that the Devs were wrong when they promised that you could access all the story content without playing any multiplayer, I informed Amazon that they had sold me a game that was not as advertised and got a refund.
I appreciate EA making a game that stuck to it's guns...but not for making a Mass Effect game that betrayed the core foundations of the series, and their customers. I enjoyed what I did play of it. I didn't find it to be as good as ME1 or 2, either story or play wise, and I'm a little sad that ME3 turned out to be such a disappointment.
What?
You could get all the story content without touching the multiplayer. All the MP did was make it so that your "Readiness rating" would go up--which the single player game would do as well.
The devs promised pre-release that all endings...meaning all story content...were possible to achieve without playing a stitch of multiplayer. Within two weeks of release, players proved that it was impossible to attain a readiness rating high enough to access all ending content using only solo play. Devs continued to insist otherwise, even when the numbers were proven repeatedly that the solo-only player at release could not unlock all possible story endings.
Bioware did release an update some weeks later that reduced the Readiness threshold so that solo-only play could unlock all possible endings. By that time, I was tired of the lies and denial that Bioware and EA had issued.
Right, they released an update because of a bug that was not present on the developer's side. That's why the devs were "continuing to insist otherwise". There were certain things from ME1+2 that when interacting with parts from ME3 would have affected your Readiness rating negatively instead of positively, like they were supposed to.
Kanluwen wrote: Right, they released an update because of a bug that was not present on the developer's side. That's why the devs were "continuing to insist otherwise". There were certain things from ME1+2 that when interacting with parts from ME3 would have affected your Readiness rating negatively instead of positively, like they were supposed to.
From what I recall, players started new games without importing anything from ME or ME2, and still were unable to get a high enough readiness rating.
And if the bug was not present on the developer's side, does that mean it was the player's fault? Isn't it the developer's job to make sure their game is working the way they, the developer, intend it to work?
Accident or not, it sure looked like someone at EA had decided that the controversial multi-player component needed a boost, and decided to lower the readiness rating as a way to "encourage" using the multi-player platform. ME3 became a massive PR problem, and burned enough players that EA lost many customers not just from this franchise, but from their titles in general.
Funnily enough I have started talking to bioware and ea to begin preliminary steps to see if I am able to licence the Ip for a miniatures game, this is very early and in all reality they may so no, but I'm willing to take the risk and try.
Now, one might complain that most of the details in that chart depend on the Military Rating the character has accrued over their gametime, however it still is way more than just three different endings, and Military Rating is nothing but a simplification for the hundreds of choices that you made throughout ME1-3. Because this is where we get to what I mentioned earlier: someone who assumed that every single choice they ever made is visually represented in a 5-minute cutscene just had exaggerated, unrealistic expectations. This has nothing to do with miscommunication or "lies" but simply individual predisposition, for *I* was never under the same assumption, and I've been following the very same inter- and previews.
Maybe that's also why I enjoyed the ending more - because I never expected it to be something it could never be. And, I admit, probably because I have a rather vivid imagination that does not require every single consequence to be spelled out, rather than simply leaving it to my interpretation.
That chart isn't even complete, by the way. I know that, for example, military casualties can be depicted differently as well (the fighter pilot may survive, or he may get shot down), and if you saved her in ME1, the Destiny Ascendant will show up as part of the asari fleet. Likewise, the composition of task force Hammer as seen in the cutscene also reflects whether you saved the geth, the quarians, or both, represented by ships and personnel. Oh, and I suppose we also should not forget who makes it out of the Normandy in the last scene before the credits roll. Or that you can actually still lose the game in the final stage thanks due to a hidden timer, triggering a "worst case scenario" cutscene (which I thought was rather awesome - both the cutscene as well as the timer idea).
And these are just the bits and pieces that immediately spring to my mind; I would not be surprised at all if there was more, but which you'd only ever notice if you actually did multiple play-throughs, meticulously tracking every single difference. It's funny how many of the fans were utterly unaware of them, but once the internet rage was unleashed there was no stopping the tide.
I find it ironic (and, given the flak the devs received from the playerbase, somewhat sad) that a fan who complains about supposedly missing detail would miss all the aforementioned details himself.
As you said, to each their own. I can only say that my choices did matter. If you feel that yours did not, you have my condolences. You missed out on something great.
kingbobb wrote:And if I have unrealistic expectations, it's because I have over 100+ hours of gameplay creating those expectations, and pre-release Dev. statements leading me to believe that they were trying to meet those expectations.
Well, these can't be the only reasons, as the very same goes for me.
There's quite a bit of emotional attachment to this series from its fans - both the ones that stay amazed as well as from the ones who feel disappointed or even "betrayed" (some actually wanted to sue BioWare) - so I apologise if anything I said may sound a bit harsh. I suppose I am somewhat defensive of this series/franchise, even if I did nothing with it for almost a year by now.
[Addendum]
I originally picked Destroy (and mentally retconned my Shep to stay dead, even if I had the "breather" cutscene) as I still feel it's the most suitable ending. However, as far as the new Ending DLC is concerned, I have to say that Synthesis is, to me, the one good thing that came out of it. I still don't prefer it as a choice, but after watching it I feel it was almost exactly similar to my own interpretation of that ending - though actually watching and listening to it was far more amazing than what even my own imagination was capable of making up.
Now that I remember ... was I the only one listening to piano music in the next couple days following the ending, by the way?
Soooo...Anyone believe in the Indoctrination theory?
There were a lot of heavy hints and foreshadowing throughout the game. The hallucinations and nightmares (the boy from Earth), the oily black shadows in the final scenes with Anderson and The Illusive Man, the extensive direct exposure to Reapers that Shepard has experienced... Hell, he/she was inside a dead (but dreaming?) Reaper in ME2, spoke to several Reapers, directly fought, came face to face and spoke with a Reaper.
Personally, I'm going to choose the Destroy ending. That is what Shepard set out to do, and anything less seems like a betrayal of your principles and the sacrifices made by all the races to get you to that point.
Control smacks of hypocrisy, The Illusive Man wanted to control the Reapers and their technology for the advancement of humanity and you've spent the last two games opposing his plans and telling him hes insane.
Synthesis arbitrarily rewrites the DNA / programming of all races organic and synthetic in the Galaxy without their consent. It takes their choice and self determination away from them, assimiliating everyone into one giant collective - reminiscent of what the Reapers were doing. You're effectively completing the Reaper's work for them.
Destroy [the Reapers] is what Shepard set out to do, what everyone's sacrifice's have been for. Choosing the other two feels like you're being subtly indoctrinatedby the Reapers and manipulated into a course of action that the Catalyst favours. Plus, there is the scene when Shepard wakes up in the rubble. I interpret that as Shepard having resisted the Indoctrination. And besides - the Catalyst told you that "Destroy" would result in the destruction of all Synthetic life, including Shepard who is mostly Synthetic him/herself but if Shepard survived, was the Catalyst lying? I don't think it to be particularly trustworthy. Is it possible that the Geth, EDI and other Synthetic races survived?
Perhaps its good that the ending is vague. Its reminiscent of Inception and Lost - not all questions were answered, some answers were vague, and some answers prompted new questions so the Ending is open to all kinds of interpretations. That way, there is no true Canonical story and everyone comes away with their interpretation.
I havn't completed ME3 myself yet, but I did watch cutscenes on youtube to learn the story because I was invested in it (as with lots of games. Sometimes I might lose interest in the gameplay, but still want to know how the story ends so I watch Youtube e.g. Assassin's Creed). I got ME2 around the time that ME3 was released, but didn't enjoy the gameplay (Vanguard & Soldier) and lost interest and stopped playing in favour of other big time sink games (Skyrim). Then I got ME3 just a month ago for the Multiplayer, and enjoyed it so much that I decided to revisit ME2 and this time played an Infilitrator (converted to Sentinel in ME3) which I enjoyed a lot more.
My version is a Renegade female (I much prefer Jennifer Hale over Mark Meer).
Caitlynn Shepard Colonist (Mindoir Colonist and survivor of a Batarian slaver attack).
Ruthless (hunted down Batarian slavers on Torfun).
No romance in ME1.
Killed the Rachni Queen.
Persuaded Wrex to stand down.
Sacrificed Kaidan Alenko
Saved the Destiny Ascension and Council (but regrets it somewhat).
Chose Anderson for the Council
Romanced Garrus in ME2.
Saved Genophage data.
Destroyed the Collector Base - does not trust Cerberus.
Cured the Genophage in ME3.
Continued romance with Garrus.
Ahh, every time ME is mention I get shivers. Without a doubt, alongside 40K (As they are poles apart in terms of 'feel'), Mass Effect is my favourite Sci-Fi setting. And inevitably, every time ME is mentioned, I get the urge to start up a new game and get the perfect ending - only a lack of time prevents me doing so (and the fact I've already done two full playthroughs).
Regarding the endings, I can sort of see the point in them. I don't really like them, purely on the principle that I always thought ME could be taken further, but at the time EA/Bioware was adamant ME 3 was the last in the setting. Hence, why wouldn't they give you the choice to go out the way you want to. Now though, they'll find it hard to incorporate all 3 endings (discounting the indoctrination theory - which I have to say is convincing IMO) into a post ME3 setting. As for my own choices, my second play through was the best.
In all games I played a Paragon Soldier (Albeit I did choose some of the more badass Renegade choices at times )
ME1:
Liara Romanced - Didn't want to, but as I like to explore all conversations options, I mistakenly got 'locked into' that route.
Saved Rachni Queen
Persuaded Wrex to stand down.
Sacrificed Kaiden Alenko.
Saved Destiny Ascension and Council - In some respects I regret it (seems kinda bad, leaving all those guys on the fleets to die for 3 Councillers) but the end result (Humanity on Council and a Fleet asset) was a 'Six or Two Threes' choice for me.
Promoted Anderson to Council
ME2:
Romanced Miranda - kinda passed it off as a lonely fling Saved Genophage Data.
All squad members survived Assault on Collectors Base.
Destroyed Collector Base - As with Shadow Captain Edithae's above post, I didn't trust Cerberus.
ME3
I managed to achieve the perfect ending, using the Extended Cut DLC, on this one:
Spoiler:
Where Shepard seems to take a breath in some ruins on earth - sort of supporting indoctrination theory (Not that it matters as Shepard isn't coming back.
Romanced Ashley - The one I was wanting to go for from ME1!
Cured Genophage
Saved Rachni Queen - again.
Reprogrammed Geth
Miranda deceased - Not sure how though, I must have made a wrong choice at some point in the past two games.
All squad Members survived last charge.
Finally, I chose the Destroy ending. I fully agree with Shadow Captain Edithae on this one. Shepard's whole goal was to go out and destroy the Reapers, ending their enslavement, so why would you throw away all those choices and dialogue in the past games to 'Syntheise' or control them. Similarly, if the Catalyst was so powerful it could create a highly advanced Synthetic race that could destroy it's own creators and all other lifeforms (See the Leviathan DLC), then why would it surrender itself to a mere human just because it's commanded to - that makes no sense to me.
Regarding ME4 - I'm as die-hard as any other ME fan, but I don't want Shepard back. The fun is in creating a new story - reinventing yourself as a new person, not just dragging up the past in multiple reincarnations. It'd be nice to see him/her make a cameo appearance, but that's it.
I don't even want a cameo appearence. It'll be cool to have an on going mystery over whether Shepard survived, was he/she indoctrinated, what exactly happened on the Crucible, was the Catalyst telling the truth?
Spoiler:
Maybe the Leviathans decide that with their errant creation (the Catalyst) gone and the Reaper's dealt with, the time is ripe for them to reclaim their place as the apex race of the galaxy?
@Shadow Captain Edithae - Yeah maybe it's for the best. I certainly don't want him/her as main protagonist. Just listened to that Youtube clip as well - words cannot describe the feelz Also, interest concept you have there. I'll put my concept in spoilers as I don't know if you've finished ME 3 yet:
Spoiler:
Depending on how much effort you put into collecting assets for the War Effort the endings vary slightly, but the general gist of it is that following the Crucible dischargeing a burst of energy, the Normandy is caught up in it whilst fleeing, and crashes on a unknown, habitable planet. Here, my concept starts:
ME 3 - Normandy crashes on Ilos after fleeing Crucible Explosion.
ME 1 - Ilos - Protheans worked out how to build Mass Relays, building a relay from Ilos to Citadel. Alliance/ Galactic Civilisations gain that knowledge.
Post ME 3 - Mass Relays destroyed/damaged. However Quantum Communicators (Non-Reaper tech) still work. Plans for Prothean Mass Relays spread via Quantum Communicators to major galactic civilisations (Human/Turian/Asari/Salarian) and new Mass Relays built. Galactic Travel restored between most major systems/clusters.
Inter ME 3/4 Period - Galactic Civilisations rebuilt, mass relay travel restored.
ME 4 - Storyline Starts - In the process of re-colonising a new world after the re-building of Mass Relays, (or during the Normandy's crew stay on Ilos), the discovery of Prothean plans for modifications to Mass Relays allows travel to other Galaxies (Based upon amplifying the range of those mass relays that can move ships anywhere but in a limited distance - The Secondary Relays). Travel through a prototype Prothean Galactic Mass Relay brings the galactically peaceful, but still independant, Mass Effect 3 races into contact with a new, aggressively violent galaxy - thus prompting the basis of a new Mass Effect Series, set after the Reapers, but retaining choices made in Mass Effect 3.
@Kanluwen - Pity, because the article I read laid it out in a convincing manner. Hell, I don't really care about the minutae of how ME 4 manages to tie into ME 3 - So long as ME starts off a fresh story arc with no 'nudge nudge wink wink' business I'll be happy.
The Mass Effect franchise is very dear to my heart. I loved the third one, especially the multiplayer.
I was not fond of the original ending, but the redone expanded ending was very satisfying to me. Of course, I did very well - I didn't lose anyone other than unavoidable ones, and I made good choices early on; though it was probably more luck than being a tactical genius. I saved the Racni, I saved the Krogan people, I reunited the Geth and the Quarians in peace and took Tali home, I punched a reporter who sassed me twice, I stopped the cycle of destruction from the Reapers, I kept Kelly from being disappeared by Cerberus, and I paved the way for a guy to have sex with a robot with everyone else taking it seriously.
I mean, I didn't 100% get the ending I wanted, but the one I got (after the redo) left me sad but satisfied.
Wait, wait wait. You punched a reporter who sassed you. Twice. How did I miss this option? Ouze, you have ruined my ending - I hope you're happy.
How did you get Miranda to stay alive? I did multiple reloads and all the conversation combinations with no luck - she just gets hit by a stray shot and dies. Very unsatisfying seeing as I went to the expense of saving her in ME 2.
Warpig1815 wrote: Wait, wait wait. You punched a reporter who sassed you. Twice. How did I miss this option? Ouze, you have ruined my ending - I hope you're happy.
How did you get Miranda to stay alive? I did multiple reloads and all the conversation combinations with no luck - she just gets hit by a stray shot and dies. Very unsatisfying seeing as I went to the expense of saving her in ME 2.
The reporter punching happens over 2 different games.
Here is the Miranda thing. I did every single side quest, afaik, in every single game, and had loyalty from everyone.
Yeah, as far as I can tell I did all that. I was really fastidious about sidequests (Went as far as scanning/landing on every planet available in ME1), did all sidequests in ME2+ME3. I warned Miranda about Kai Leng, gave her access to Alliance records. Basically the only thing I didn't do, was continue my romance with her from ME2 - ME3. And now it irritates me that my ME3 ending isn't 100% how I want it - but I can't be arsed to change that now
You've still ruined my ending because I didn't Falcon Punch that reporter - I'm not forgiving you for that transgression
I didn't romance her, though - maybe that make a difference? I hooked up with Liara (although I did get a lapdance from Kelly).
If it makes you feel better, I didn't get the ending I really wanted, either.
Also, you can apparently punch her three times (!). I only did twice. Also, my Shepard was a femshep, the default Shepard feels a little Chris Brown-esque.
Ahhh, I'm not too fussed. My only rage is that it was my second play through, and you know how long it takes to do everything (and everything right) in Mass Effect. So I got right to the end of ME3, having done everything right in the previous two games, but for the the two irritating points that I romanced Liara in ME1 (Which I wasn't aiming for) and Miranda died. Considering I'd done the rest right, it irritates me to no end, that I'm just about 99.9% of the way to getting a 'perfect ending', but I always balls something up. Good thing is I don't have to think about any of that with ME4 So I couldn't care less
I wouldn't say I wanted a Disney ending, exactly. - For example, a certain characters sacrifice right at the end made perfect sense.
However, I'd argue that Shepard wasn't defined by the Reaper Invasion and the defeat of that shouldn't have signalled the end of Shepard's story, the end of Mass Effect 3 shouldn't be the end of Shepard's story, there should have been a sense that s/he goes on to further adventures, we're just not necessarily following them any more.
Leave the complete grim-darkness to the Dragon Age setting, it belongs more comfortably there.
How I would have ended Mass Effect 3, would have been as a bookend, comparing it to the very first opening cutscene.
Shepard staring out of the window of The Normandy SR2 at the debris field over Earth. We then have a tour as s/he heads to the bridge, going past the assorted survivors.
Then possibly end in the ultimate homage and ultimately, somewhat disney-ish.
"Where to, Captain?"
"Second star on the right, and straight on til morning."
Or, maybe let you pick your own final lines, or determine it due to your Paragon/Renegade value.
"Council / Alliance command reports pirates in the Terminus Systems, lets go take a look."
"It's a big galaxy out there, lets find us some trouble."
-------------------------
In any case, The Mass Effect series is pretty much the greatest media series I've ever experienced. I don't think there's a day that goes by where I don't end up humming a couple of bars of the 'Suicide Mission' theme or I'm not reminded of the opening 'swoosh' of the theme tune by some elevator doors opening.
The truth is, most of my miniature games seem to have developed some sort of homage to Mass Effect in them now, whether it's the paint scheme of my Scourge in Dropzone Commander.
Or it's my Cerberus Corporation Marines in Warpath or my N7 Enforcers in Deadzone.
I'd argue that it has even overtaken Star Wars and Dune on the science fiction front and only matched by The Lord of The Rings in impact of media in my life.
I'd probably wear out my TV rewatching the film if it ever gets make and turns out half decently.
Kanluwen wrote: The developers flatout killed the "Indoctrination Theory".
Shephard was not indoctrinated.
Most of the evidence "supporting" the theory was circumstantial at best, based upon conjecture.
I know the developers publicly "killed" the theory, but IMO it was an abrupt about turn and bad writing.
And I disagree that the "evidence" was circumstantial.
For an entire trilogy, we've had warnings about the symptoms and the dangers of Indoctrination. The codex describes several symptoms. Paranoia, hallucinations, hearing alien voices, betraying friends, trusting enemies, ghostly presences manifesting as oily black shadows. Shepard displays several of these symptoms at various points in ME3. Whether Shepard was successfully indoctrinated is of course debateable, but clearly he/she was being subjected to and attacked by the indoctrination process. Its been building up over the entire trilogy, a sense of dread and foreboding, with heavy foreshadowing and hints. Do you really think its a coincidence that the codex entry on Indoctrination mentions hallucinations, alien voices in the mind, ghostly presences that manifest as oily black shadows; symptoms that Shepard quite clearly experiences at various points in the game?
IMO, Shepard is clearly in, at least, the early stages of indoctrination by the end of ME3 which begs the question, was he manipulated? How trustworthy therefore is our perception of events towards the end?
To spend an entire trilogy foreshadowing and hinting at indoctrination, only to do an abrupt turn and hand wave it away as though Shepard is somehow the only sentient being (barring the Rachni Queen?) in the galaxy capable of resisting it just strikes me as odd and bad writing. We know Shepard is special, but surely he's not so special that he's completely immune to Reaper influence. If Shepard truly is immune to Indoctrination, then its a bizaree and inexplicable immunity that hasn't been explained. Its as though Bioware is completely ignorant of their own Lore.
The Ending of the trilogy is either really bad writing (Indoctrination is an insidious and dangerous form of mind control that threatens every sapient race in the galaxy except the protagonist who's inexplicably immune because Video Game duh).
Or its a very clever ending akin to Lost and Inception, with enough questions answered for a satisfying conclusion but sufficiently vague with enough questions left unanswered for it to be open to multiple valid interpretations.
If it really is true that Shepard is completely immune to Indoctrination and that the Developers had to make a public statement to counter the conspiracy theories, then they really cocked up, teasing and foreshadowing something only to change their mind at the eleventh hour, creating an unsatisfying and inexplicable anti climax.
Its like Game of Thrones and the foreshadowing over R+L=J. If it turns out not to be true, then it'll be one hell of an anti climax and all that foreshadowing and hinting would become inexplicably pointless.
[/spoiler]
Codex Entry: Indoctrination wrote:Reaper "indoctrination" is an insidious means of corrupting organic minds, "reprogramming" the brain through physical and psychological conditioning using electromagnetic fields, infrasonic and ultrasonic noise, and other subliminal methods. The Reaper's resulting control over the limbic system leaves the victim highly susceptible to its suggestions.
Organics undergoing indoctrination may complain of headaches and buzzing or ringing in their ears. As time passes, they have [i]feelings of "being watched"[/i] and [b]hallucinations of "ghostly" presences[/b]. Ultimately, the Reaper gains the ability to use the victim's body to amplify its signals, manifesting as "alien" voices in the mind.
Indoctrination can create perfect deep cover agents. A Reaper's "suggestions" can manipulate victims into betraying friends, trusting enemies, or viewing the Reaper itself with superstitious awe. Should a Reaper subvert a well-placed political or military leader, the resulting chaos can bring down nations.
Long-term physical effects of the manipulation are unsustainable. Higher mental functioning decays, ultimately leaving the victim a gibbering animal. Rapid indoctrination is possible, but causes this decay in days or weeks. Slow, patient indoctrination allows the thrall to last for months or years.
I'm not going to argue there. - It was just the first youtube video of the intro I could find as a reminder - The game did come out 7 years ago, after all.
I both like and dislike the indoctrination theory. I like it, frankly, because it paves the way for more adventures with Shepard and maybe a happier ending.
On the other hand, the more realistic part of me says that "it was all a dream" is a bs ending and that Shepard got, in the end, exactly what she wanted: she defeated the reapers. That it cost her life to do so was something neither unanticipated nor unacceptable to her.
"She died so all could live" is a pretty good epitaph, I think, for someone who went out on top.
Ouze wrote: I both like and dislike the indoctrination theory. I like it, frankly, because it paves the way for more adventures with Shepard and maybe a happier ending.
On the other hand, the more realistic part of me says that "it was all a dream" is a bs ending and that Shepard got, in the end, exactly what she wanted: she defeated the reapers. That it cost her life to do so was something neither surprising nor unacceptable to her.
I don't think it was a dream - she really did go to the Crucible, and meet the Catalyst. But I do think that Shepard's will was undermined by the early stages of Indoctrination to the point that it may have influenced her decisions. The Reapers were messing with her mind, making her hallucinate and trying to demoralise her or steer her towards a particular course of action (Control? Synthesis? Rejection?).
The Codex quite explicitly describes the various symptoms of Indoctrination, and Shepard clearly experiences some of them. At the very least, her mind is being attacked and she is resisting ongoing Indoctrination.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:Soooo...Anyone believe in the Indoctrination theory?
Not me. Never did. Because it can be debunked by a single, simple fact:
Spoiler:
The post-credit Stargazer scene, which renders everything you just witnessed part of a story told by an old man to a child. And since the Stargazer acts as omniscient narrator, there are no hidden meanings or secrets to interpret.
Which, by the way, also provides a rather convenient cop-out for BioWare if they ever do choose to advance the setting beyond ME3 - by simply rendering any ending that does not fit their vision an incorrect fable. Kind of like how 40k fluff works!
If I remember correctly, they even directly trigger this opportunity in the cinematic, with the child asking "is this really what happened?", and the Stargazer responding "more or less".
Also, the game ends with a "Earth just got glassed, gj slowpoke" message if you wait too long, which arguably wouldn't be the case if it was just a "dream" sequence, either.
Warpig1815 wrote:but at the time EA/Bioware was adamant ME 3 was the last in the setting
Wasn't it rather that they were adamant it was to be the last one in the series?
I don't recall them ruling out any other games in the IP, ever. That would have been a dumb decision to make at any point in time, considering they just spent years crafting it, building it up to a point where they can sell novels, comics and toys...
Either way, I can't wait for ME4. I just hope it'll have playable aliens this time.
Warpig1815 wrote:Regarding ME4 - I'm as die-hard as any other ME fan, but I don't want Shepard back. The fun is in creating a new story - reinventing yourself as a new person, not just dragging up the past in multiple reincarnations.
Word!
That's also why I liked the sacrifice idea, by the way. Going out with a big boom, rather than fading into oblivion.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:If it really is true that Shepard is completely immune to Indoctrination and that the Developers had to make a public statement to counter the conspiracy theories, then they really cocked up, teasing and foreshadowing something only to change their mind at the eleventh hour, creating an unsatisfying and inexplicable anti climax.
There was no foreshadowing at all, at least I never encountered anything I would have interpreted as such. I think a lot of fans simply misinterpreted - or chose to misinterpret - these "teasers", misconstruing and twisting them into something completely different and what the writers did not intend. By ME3, Shepard was clearly suffering from a trauma triggered by the first attempt of the Reapers' invasion on Earth - specifically the child that got killed, and whose image burned itself in his/her mind, causing nightmares and ultimately having the Catalyst take its appearance (presumably after sifting through his/her mind). The symptoms displayed by Shep are classic signs of PTSD - however, whenever this topic comes up, a dozen people immediately start a riot, stating how "their Shepard" would supposedly be above that and could never possibly be affected this way by something as "silly" as a dying kid after everything he/she already went through. Regardless of similar cases in the real world.
Anyways, I believe that is what the writers tried to allude to, possibly influenced by contemporary media coverage of PTSD on the news regarding troop involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The very same subject is also touched on elsewhere in the game, if you happen to stop by the Citadel hospital and follow that Asari Commando's story.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:The Ending of the trilogy is either really bad writing (Indoctrination is an insidious and dangerous form of mind control that threatens every sapient race in the galaxy except the protagonist who's inexplicably immune because Video Game duh).
I wouldn't describe it that way. It's a matter of willpower - exactly like the Dark Side of the Force in Star Wars, or with Chaos in Wh40k. Mass Effect was far from treading new ground with indoctrination - it was simply its own take on the invisible corrupting force that exists in about every 2nd sci-fi setting. BioWare's Dragon Age has something similar in the Darkspawn Taint.
So, no-one is intrinsically immune, and in fact I do believe that the black mist "infecting" your screen towards the ending was an attempt at infection ... however, Shepard was either so driven and focused that she/he resisted, or the Catalyst just scanned Shep's memories and was honest about not trying to take him/her over (or, didn't the Catalyst actually state that Shep wasn't at risk from indoctrination? perhaps because it just tried, unsuccessfully?). We already know since the very first game that willpower can override indoctrination - you can talk Saren into shooting himself after realising he's become a puppet, after all - so it is a simple matter of being mentally strong enough, and Shepard arguably was. As were the others in her/his team, though it stands to reason that they were somewhat "protected" by having someone they can believe in.
And there's nothing that says there cannot be others in the galaxy who would be able to withstand indoctrination, if only their faith is strong enough.
motyak wrote:Good god yes. I would buy the hell out of that.
Sign me up as well.
I liked the anime, actually, but I think it was a mistake to make the Dragon Age movie CGI, and Mass Effect an anime. The other way around it may have worked better, simply because CGI always looks more "technical", whereas anime is more "spiritual", if that makes any sense?
Warpig1815 wrote:but at the time EA/Bioware was adamant ME 3 was the last in the setting
Wasn't it rather that they were adamant it was to be the last one in the series?
I don't recall them ruling out any other games in the IP, ever. That would have been a dumb decision to make at any point in time, considering they just spent years crafting it, building it up to a point where they can sell novels, comics and toys...
Either way, I can't wait for ME4. I just hope it'll have playable aliens this time.
It's possible I did mis-read that bit. I only got into ME at the suggestion of a friend when ME3 came out. I didn't play ME3 first, I went straight to ME1 and played through, so I was all a bit new to it. Possibly in my enthusiasm to see a new ME I mis-read the info that finished the series not setting. I usually, play human (You'll understand why in my next comment), but I'd like the option to play as a filthy Xeno - so long as it's not one of Shepard's squadmates. Sure, expand upon their stories as an NPC, but every character should have a little mystery to them - that's what makes them interesting. Don't give me the option to play as Garrus because then I'll know all there is to know about him, and I won't be richer for the knowing.
Warpig1815 wrote:Regarding ME4 - I'm as die-hard as any other ME fan, but I don't want Shepard back. The fun is in creating a new story - reinventing yourself as a new person, not just dragging up the past in multiple reincarnations.
Word!
That's also why I liked the sacrifice idea, by the way. Going out with a big boom, rather than fading into oblivion.
Yup. I can't understand why people get hung up over Shepard. I always thought of my Shepard as a mere placeholder for myself and for what I'd do in the situation (Which would probably be to choose the destroy ending ). The thing that makes books, videogames, to an extent even settings such as 40K or ME, is that you can let your imagination run rampant. When you create your character, really you're translating yourself - if not direct physical attributes (It's pretty hard to sculpt an exact likeness of your own face on a console ), then certainly mental traits, ideals and characteristics - into the game. In the case of ME, Shepard essentially does the talking for me, it's more about putting yourself into the setting than just guiding about a cutscene driven and explored character, ala Call of Duty or Assassin's Creed Characters. Those characters are defined by a pre-set storyline (Which isn't bad, just different), but Mass Effect's system ensures that your choices develop the character, not the other way around. Hence, why bring Shepard back, to re-hash old memories - give me a tabula rasa to create a new persona. Hence, it's a bit childish, IMO, of fans (Not directed at yourself here) to force their opinions on others and tell us what is and isn't Shepard - like I said before, Shepard is simply a reflection of the gamer. It's because of this disparity that another Shepard ME would be too difficult. What if, I did like ME3's ending, and I did want Shepard to die - who is anybody else to tell me I'm wrong? (Even if I tell myself I'm wrong )
Lynata wrote: By ME3, Shepard was clearly suffering from a trauma triggered by the first attempt of the Reapers' invasion on Earth - specifically the child that got killed
Was it ever really confirmed that the child died? As far as I recall, he simply crawled back into the duct. However, if he did survive, then it would be an awesome backstory for a new character/protagonist for ME4. Survives Earth's fall and meets Shepard - but ultimately, aside from that, has nothing to do with the last story arc.
I forgot how much I loved the score of that game...
Also thanks a lot thread, because of you now I'm finishing that Xth mass effect 1-2-3 (2/3 way through 2 at the moment) playthrough that I started last year.
Formosa wrote: Funnily enough I have started talking to bioware and ea to begin preliminary steps to see if I am able to licence the Ip for a miniatures game, this is very early and in all reality they may so no, but I'm willing to take the risk and try.
Thought I would share.
This sounds interesting. Have you ever produced or contributed to any games in the past? Ever worked for a notable company like Gamesworkshop, Privateer Press, Warlord Games, Gripping Beast? What calibre of sculptors have you got working with/for you, and what miniatures have they made in the past?
If you can come up with a game and miniature range comparable to something like Infinity then I'd be very interested.
@Ouze and Compel - Ahh yeah, I forgot about that bit
@Formosa - I'd love to see a Mass Effect miniatures range as well. I wouldn't do the gaming side, but I'd certainly be interested in collecting some miniatures if the sculpts were good, even if just for the nostalgia.
To be honest, this thread should be re-named the 'Mass Effect appreciation thread - there's just too much win in all 3 games for us to confine ourselves to ME3
Formosa wrote: Funnily enough I have started talking to bioware and ea to begin preliminary steps to see if I am able to licence the Ip for a miniatures game, this is very early and in all reality they may so no, but I'm willing to take the risk and try.
Thought I would share.
This sounds interesting. Have you ever produced or contributed to any games in the past? Ever worked for a notable company like Gamesworkshop, Privateer Press, Warlord Games, Gripping Beast? What calibre of sculptors ha@ve you got working with/for you, and what miniatures have they made in the past?
If you can come up with a game and miniature range comparable to something like Infinity then I'd be very interested.
I have been doing gw for 26 years and do multiple systems including infinity. So I have alot of first hand experience in practice, something I have found severely lacking in several game systems over the decades, this is very preliminary work I'm doing at the moment and I am talking to several notable sculptors who are interested (mainly due to being long term friends), first and foremost I need to get through the legalities of acquiring a licence to the miniatures as if that does not work then nothing else will follow, thankfully I have a legal background so that will cost very little in real terms.
As of yet I have several ideas that I have pitched around and will happily share through proper channels when we have something more solid.
Formosa wrote: Funnily enough I have started talking to bioware and ea to begin preliminary steps to see if I am able to licence the Ip for a miniatures game, this is very early and in all reality they may so no, but I'm willing to take the risk and try.
Thought I would share.
This sounds interesting. Have you ever produced or contributed to any games in the past? Ever worked for a notable company like Gamesworkshop, Privateer Press, Warlord Games, Gripping Beast? What calibre of sculptors ha@ve you got working with/for you, and what miniatures have they made in the past?
If you can come up with a game and miniature range comparable to something like Infinity then I'd be very interested.
I have been doing gw for 26 years and do multiple systems including infinity. So I have alot of first hand experience in practice, something I have found severely lacking in several game systems over the decades, this is very preliminary work I'm doing at the moment and I am talking to several notable sculptors who are interested (mainly due to being long term friends), first and foremost I need to get through the legalities of acquiring a licence to the miniatures as if that does not work then nothing else will follow, thankfully I have a legal background so that will cost very little in real terms.
As of yet I have several ideas that I have pitched around and will happily share through proper channels when we have something more solid.
Well its certainly ambitious. EA is a big Company, and Mass Effect is a popular and well known franchise. Best of luck to you.
Formosa wrote: Funnily enough I have started talking to bioware and ea to begin preliminary steps to see if I am able to licence the Ip for a miniatures game, this is very early and in all reality they may so no, but I'm willing to take the risk and try.
Thought I would share.
This sounds interesting. Have you ever produced or contributed to any games in the past? Ever worked for a notable company like Gamesworkshop, Privateer Press, Warlord Games, Gripping Beast? What calibre of sculptors ha@ve you got working with/for you, and what miniatures have they made in the past?
If you can come up with a game and miniature range comparable to something like Infinity then I'd be very interested.
I have been doing gw for 26 years and do multiple systems including infinity. So I have alot of first hand experience in practice, something I have found severely lacking in several game systems over the decades, this is very preliminary work I'm doing at the moment and I am talking to several notable sculptors who are interested (mainly due to being long term friends), first and foremost I need to get through the legalities of acquiring a licence to the miniatures as if that does not work then nothing else will follow, thankfully I have a legal background so that will cost very little in real terms.
As of yet I have several ideas that I have pitched around and will happily share through proper channels when we have something more solid.
Well its certainly ambitious. EA is a big Company, and Mass Effect is a popular and well known franchise. Best of luck to you.
Compel wrote: You could argue the same for DC and Marvel, yet Knight Models managed to get licenses from both of them, *at the same time*.
Different story entirely. Knight models has been established in the field for quite some time with some big licenses(Star Wars before they had DC/Marvel...interestingly though the Star Wars one has seemingly lapsed)--and it's only recently that they have been starting to get into making games with the "Arkham" games.
If EA was looking for a company, I think it far more likely they would find either a smaller company with high quality products(Corvus Belli) that they can invest into heavily and expand, with EA owning a stake of the company. The other option is to use an established company with quality products and in-house manufacturing like GW or Mantic or Privateer Press.
With that said, and there definitely being at least one Mass Effect game in the works now? They will probably be looking for one that they can have things ready by the time the new game comes out.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Compel wrote: Have they switched off Mass Effect 3's multiplayer now?
I decided to boot it up just there to have a look again and all of a sudden it's asking me for an online pass.
The multiplayer is not slated to turn off until November.
There was a known bug with the online pass thing but I can't remember the specifics of it.
Ah, that's the trick, from my understanding. - The PC version shouldn't have had an Online Pass in the first place. That was a bug.
It's just, in the process of them fixing this.... Another bug cropped up.
In short, they completely ballsed it up, made it worse and I'm now redownloading and reinstalling the whole thing in the faint hope that it'll actually help.
Really gotta download all the ME3 DLC sometime. Did an epic playthough through the trilogy with all of the ME1 and ME2 DLC, but still gotta do one last complete run of 3 to cap things off. The Citadel DLC especially looks like a lot of fun.
As for my two-cents on the ending, I'll say I preferred the extended ending. The original one jsut left me feeling empty and unfufilled. It was still a damn epic build-up, but I felt like the original ending just took the edge off of it. The new one gave some closure, you get to see how your choices impact the galaxy and how it all begins to rebuild.
Nah. I recall that it's pretty much debunked via ingame dialogue. Remember when you go to that temple on Thessia, and find the Prothean VI? The VI is willing to talk to you, but when Leng and his minions show up, it says something like "indoctrinated presence detected". Now, why wouldn't it have said that about Shepard, were he/she indoctrinated?
kitch102 wrote: So here's a question: what armour did you guys run?
Default armour all the way, man. Though with the helmet on.
Warpig1815 wrote: Liara Romanced - Didn't want to, but as I like to explore all conversations options, I mistakenly got 'locked into' that route.
Weirdly, it's actually very hard to escape romancing somebody in an ME1 save that's carried over to ME2. From what I've heard, the only prequisite is talking to a romance option a lot.
Her dialogue is funnier if you've carried your save over and punched her the previous two times. When she dodges, she says something like "not this time, you military brute!", as if she'd anticipated that happening again and had prepared.
I think by the time I was at Mass Effect 2 and 3, I had moved onto playing 'hardcore' mode (not insanity, wasn't quite that err... insane) as an Infiltrator. The only way I could even half pull that off, wasn't loading up the shield items. Heck no, they weren't any help at all. It was going all out onto Headshot, Weapon damage then power buffs.
If somethings dead, it isn't shooting you to take away your shield.
Nah. I recall that it's pretty much debunked via ingame dialogue. Remember when you go to that temple on Thessia, and find the Prothean VI? The VI is willing to talk to you, but when Leng and his minions show up, it says something like "indoctrinated presence detected". Now, why wouldn't it have said that about Shepard, were he/she indoctrinated?
Maybe the Indoctrination wasn't advanced enough, or just hadn't taken hold yet when Shepard visited Thessia.
Whether you believe that Shepard was successfully indoctrinated or not, you've got to admit that certain aspects of the ending do match the known symptoms of Indoctrination, so the Reapers were at the very least attempting to Indoctrinate Shepard.
Shepard entered the Crucible first, yet somehow Anderson managed to get ahead of her.
The bizarre encounter with TIM.
The "ghostly presences manifesting as oily black shadows".
Shepard's inconsistent injuries.
The Destroy ending when Shepard's gunshot wound seems to spontaneously heal and Shepard stops limping and strides confidently forward shooting the power conduit.
Shepard apparently waking up in the rubble in the Destroy ending despite the Catalyst asserting that all Synthetics would die, including the "mostly synthetic Shepard".
There are/were so many plot holes, inconsistencies and vagaries in the (original?) ending that it was either bad inconsistent writing, or clever writing with multiple layers of meaning and symbolism, open to multiple interpretations - an ending akin to that of Lost and Inception.
I get the impression that Bioware initially intended for a vague, open ended Ending to the story (Was Shepard Indoctrinated? Was the Catalyst telling the truth? How much of the ending was real?) but then changed their minds or someone high up overruled them. Indoctrination was an interesting and mind bending concept, but seems to have been brushed aside at the eleventh hour.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Maybe the Indoctrination wasn't advanced enough, or just hadn't taken hold yet when Shepard visited Thessia.
Eh, I don't know. If it was going to, you'd think it would have by then. I don't recall Shepard being directly exposed to any more Reaper tech following Thessia.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Whether you believe that Shepard was successfully indoctrinated or not, you've got to admit that certain aspects of the ending do match the known symptoms of Indoctrination
Not necessarily. I think that the reasons you cite could just have easily been creative choices for effect or simple oversights. Regardless, probably best we agree to disagree on it.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Maybe the Indoctrination wasn't advanced enough, or just hadn't taken hold yet when Shepard visited Thessia.
Eh, I don't know. If it was going to, you'd think it would have by then. I don't recall Shepard being directly exposed to any more Reaper tech following Thessia.
You don't regard coming face to face with the Catalyst, the supreme controlling intelligence of the entire Reaper race as an example of Shepard being exposed to Reaper tech?
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Whether you believe that Shepard was successfully indoctrinated or not, you've got to admit that certain aspects of the ending do match the known symptoms of Indoctrination
Not necessarily. I think that the reasons you cite could just have easily been creative choices for effect or simple oversights. Regardless, probably best we agree to disagree on it.
Christ, how many times does it have to be said before it gets through people's skulls?
The symptoms of Indoctrination are explicitly stated in-game, in the Codex. Shepard exhibits these symptoms.
Ghostly presences manifesting as oily black shadows.
Alien voices in the head.
Do you seriously think its just coincidence that Shepard several of the symptoms of Indoctrination? If that really is just creative choices for effect, then its poor writing and a sign of internal inconsistencies within the games Lore. The Right Hand not knowing what The Left Hand is doing.
I've already granted that its unlikely that Shepard was successfully Indoctrinated, but can you two not grant that the Reapers were attempting to Indoctrinate Shepard, given that she exhibits the symptoms?
Its a FACT.
The Codex says "X" and "Y".
Shepard Exhibits "X" and "Y".
If the Mass Effect Universe's Lore has any value and significance at all, then it is clear that Shepard was being attacked by the Indoctrination process during the Ending sequence. The only issue that is debateable is whether or not the Indoctrination succeeded, or whether Shepard was able to resist it.
Jeez, do you guys just never read the in-game Codex?
This is just my own speculation that's just occurred to me, but IIRC, Shepard wasn't exposed to any sources of Reaper indoctrination for an extended period, right? I recall that in ME2. those Cerberus operatives were hanging around on that dead Reaper for a while before they got indoctrinated. So it could be that Shepard wasn't exposed enough to be affected.
This is just my own speculation that's just occurred to me, but IIRC, Shepard wasn't exposed to any sources of Reaper indoctrination for an extended period, right? I recall that in ME2. those Cerberus operatives were hanging around on that dead Reaper for a while before they got indoctrinated. So it could be that Shepard wasn't exposed enough to be affected.
Probably. But her exposure certainly seems to have built up to the point that the Reapers were able to begin attacking her mind and attempt to Indoctrinate her by the time she arrived on the Crucible and met with the Catalyst. In which case, it was a desperate last ditch attempt by the Reapers to stop Shepard through Indoctrination.
I just don't get why some people think Indoctrination is something that couldn't possibly affect Shepard, as though shes so strong that she has an inexplicable immunity. To me, theres an ongoing but subtle theme through ME3 of Shepard resisting Indoctrination and fighting to retain her humanity. The story IMO is better, and Shepard more heroic, if she isn't immune to Reaper influence and has to struggle and fight to resist Indoctrination just like everyone else. It strikes me as too Video Gamey for the protagonist to be the lone sapient creature in the Galaxy to be immune to it.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: You don't regard coming face to face with the Catalyst, the supreme controlling intelligence of the entire Reaper race as an example of Shepard being exposed to Reaper tech?
Not really, since I don't think it would necessarily have given itself the indoctrination effect, nor had motive to use it.
Ghostly presences manifesting as oily black shadows.
Alien voices in the head.
Did some googling, and those happen when you're at the final meeting with TIM, right? Those could have just been there to act as cues to his deteriorated state of mind, or his exerting control over Shepard and Anderson. It could be interpreted as matching the stated symptoms of indoctrination, yes, but I don't think that they're definite signs.
Ghostly presences manifesting as oily black shadows.
Alien voices in the head.
Did some googling, and those happen when you're at the final meeting with TIM, right? Those could have just been there to act as cues to his deteriorated state of mind, or his exerting control over Shepard and Anderson. It could be interpreted as matching the stated symptoms of indoctrination, yes, but I don't think that they're definite signs.
Well then, why didn't they use different effects and symptoms to represent his deteriorated state of mind? Why use the symptoms that are explicity stated in-game to be signs of Indoctrination?
The ghostly presences/oily shadows are also present in the nightmares throughout the game.
I'll grant that they would have wanted to, sure, but it's my own view that they were unsuccessful.
Thats what I'm saying. At the End on the Crucible, the Reapers were making a last ditch attempt to break through Shepards mental defences and Indoctrinate her. And as such, I think the Ending was intended to be vague and open-ended, open to multiple interpretations like Lost and Inception.
But some people seem to think the in-game Lore is irrelevant, and that Shepard is immune to a process that threatens all sapient races in the Galaxy.
Melissia wrote: Or maybe your pet theory really isn't all that great.
Ok then. Please tell us more about how Shepard is inexplicably immune to Indoctrination, seeing as you know everything.
Go learn to read, then go back and read my posts, and you'll find that I never made that claim.
You present a false dichotomy, and given you active attempts to disrespect anyone who disagrees with you, I don't feel any obligation to tell you any more than that.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: to the point that the Reapers were able to begin attacking her mind and attempt to Indoctrinate her by the time she arrived on the Crucible and met with the Catalyst. In which case, it was a desperate last ditch attempt by the Reapers to stop Shepard through Indoctrination.
Though to be fair, all we see is TIM exerting mental control over them, and he's trying to make them kill themselves/join his own cause. We don't know that he himself can indoctrinate others.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: I just don't get why some people think Indoctrination is something that couldn't possibly affect Shepard, as though shes so strong that she has an inexplicable immunity.
It could be that some are more resistant to it. As we see throughout, sufficient willpower can grant temporary immunity to it. And, as I said, it could be that Shepard just wasn't exposed enough anyway.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: The story IMO is better, and Shepard more heroic, if she isn't immune to Reaper influence and has to struggle and fight to resist Indoctrination just like everyone else. It strikes me as too Video Gamey for the protagonist to be immune.
Eh, IMO, Shepard being indoctrinated would be a bit of a let-down. The Mass Effect series does, of course, have a lot of emphasis on choice. To say that your character was in fact being influenced by an external force rather than their own will for the duration would kind subvert the freedom of it all, for me, that last epic choice not actually being yours to make. Leaving it so ambigous would also be a bit of a negative point to it. Okay, fair enough if some NPCs had dropped hints before, like worrying about whether Shepard had been indoctrinated, but to leave it as something that's only very lightly implied and which the supposed hints themselves are debatable seems way too minor for such a major thing.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Well then, why didn't they use different effects and symptoms to represent his deteriorated state of mind? Why use the symptoms that are explicity stated in-game to be signs of Indoctrination?
As I said, possibly an oversight. Those things also work well for making the atmosphere creepy/threatening, and they're not really all that specific. Oily shadows work well for a vague, weird dreamscape and the voices are good signs of madness or mental attack.
Ouze wrote: You know, I really enjoyed the Mako. I know a lot of people didn't, but I did.
Me too! I loved driving around on those planets, exploring all over and blasting enemies with the Mako's cannon. I especially enjoyed the random Thresher Maw attacks. Any set of debris you came across could be a trap laid by a Thresher. Those encounters were always especially fitting, since my main Shepard had the background where they survive a Thresher attack.
Melissia wrote: Or maybe your pet theory really isn't all that great.
Ok then. Please tell us more about how Shepard is inexplicably immune to Indoctrination, seeing as you know everything.
Go learn to read, then go back and read my posts, and you'll find that I never made that claim.
You present a false dichotomy, and given you active attempts to disrespect anyone who disagrees with you, I don't feel any obligation to tell you any more than that.
No. You're projecting your own rudeness and disrespect. It was your snarky one liner that completely ignored my points which prompted my ill tempered response to you. This only became an argument when you joined it. Before your remark, it was a civil debate between people who simply disagreed. Do you not see the irony in simultaneously accusing someone of "disrespecting anyone who agrees with you" and telling them to "learn to read" ?
If you want to criticise someone for being disrespectful, its probably best not to be disrespectful yourself.
Ouze wrote: You know, I really enjoyed the Mako. I know a lot of people didn't, but I did.
Yeah, the Mako was nice. It was the repetitiveness of the maps that weren't so hot, really.
I liked the Mako. I absolutely loathed the auto-generated terrain used for side missions, it was really lazy game design. The maps used in the main storyline missions used terrain that was deliberately designed, and so the gameplay flowed much better.
I think I wasted hours upon hours struggling to climb up sheer cliffs, taking shortcuts and getting trapped in a valley with no way out.
But I guess the flip side is that I also spent hours launching myself off of mountains shouting "Weeeeeeeeeeeee!!!" I probably got more Game Over screens as a result of destroying my Mako on impact with the ground than I did due to enemy action...
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:Christ, how many times does it have to be said before it gets through people's skulls?
The symptoms of Indoctrination are explicitly stated in-game, in the Codex. Shepard exhibits these symptoms.
Or Shepard simply exhibits the aforementioned symptoms of PTSD, which would be a rather human thing to experience given what she/he went through. And would be more fitting than the hero being mind-controlled into ... into what, exactly? Into not showing us what happens? What sort of crappy ending would that be?
If you do agree (though I don't think it is necessary that we actually agree on an ultimate explanation or solution, given how much depends on interpretation here) that "its unlikely that Shepard was successfully Indoctrinated", then why is everyone still argueing?
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:The ghostly presences/oily shadows are also present in the nightmares throughout the game.
Fairly sure Shep already had nightmares before Thessia ... to tie into Troike's interesting remark regarding the VI's ability to detect indoctrination.
In this sense, perhaps the oily shadows are simply a reflection of Shepard's sanity?
Another +1 for the Mako. I liked the maneuverability of the M-44 Hammerhead (If you got the Firewalker free DLC), but it had absolutely no durability and the waypoint orientated missions were pants. Mako ftw.
@Shadow Captain Edithae - I can't agree that Shepard would have been indoctrinated by exposure to the Catalyst for one reason:
Spoiler:
The Leviathan DLC (I have't got it, but I read up on the gist), explains how the Leviathan's created the Catalyst to solve the problem of synthetics rebelling against organics. The Catalyst then developed the Reapers to act as a 'final solution'. Hence, the Catalyst wasn't Reaper tech and in all probability wouldn't utilise any Indoctrination technology - being just a very powerful AI/VI (Not sure which)
@Melissia - I'll just compile your last few contributions to our conversation:
Melissia wrote: Or maybe your pet theory really isn't all that great.
Ok then. Please tell us more about how Shepard is inexplicably immune to Indoctrination, seeing as you know everything.
Go learn to read, then go back and read my posts, and you'll find that I never made that claim.
You present a false dichotomy, and given you active attempts to disrespect anyone who disagrees with you, I don't feel any obligation to tell you any more than that.
Read in the context of the thread, I'd hardly call either of those three remarks courteous nor respectful. Regarding your later comments - Yes, Shadow Captain Edithae may like the Indoctrination theory, Yes, you may not agree - but that's up to them to express their opinion and engage in an intellectual debate with others about it in a fair and balanced way and should you be a mature person, you'd respond in like. What is not needed is your frequently sour or confrontational interjections, with rude overtones that were entirely unprompted, such as you've just displayed. We are here to participate in a discussion about what we like about the Mass Effect series - we, including you, are not here to tell others how to think. May I remind you that this forum has rules, which thus far have been observed by this thread's participants, and does not exist to massage your ego!
Now, I hope you don't think I'm picking on you Melissia, I'd say the same to anybody else acting like this, but I was enjoying this thread, and I'll not have it devolve into a senseless OT argument.
I think you might be overthinking the 'This is Shepard' remark...
In any case, I'm now downloading all the flipping DLC again and I'm also a bit sad that the Normandy SR-1 model that I bought and ended up waiting in all day yesterday for is notably smaller scale than Dropzone Commander.
Possibly Compel, so I'll remove that one, but I still feel the others are pretty close to the mark.
Back on-topic - I'm kind of avoiding Mass Effect DLC as there's that much it all ramps up in price. Come ME4 I may get it, but I'll need a 3rd playthrough to get the full experience - which I can't be bothered to do right now
Was anybody else slightly annoyed that they removed the neutral option off of the dialogue wheel in 3? I liked that in the first two, you usually had the option to be more neutral rather than more of an extreme like the paragon/renegade options. It being taken out felt like a bit of a "dumbing down", for me. Still loved the game and all, but I liked having that option.
The thing is, 99% of people never chose the neutral option. As the neutral option would pretty much always result in a less-than-ideal outcome, compared to one of the two others. So, at that point, why bother including it?
However, if the neutral responses were a viable dialogue option, upgrading like the others, with it having a suitable influence on the game, then yes I'd rather it be in there.
For example, an ideal circumstance to me would be something like:
With each one having an impact, not always positive or negative... Perhaps the Paragon Response is, "yes, ma'am, I'll bring your child back safe and sound, I guarentee it. You don't need to worry at all." but the Neutral Reponse is, "I'll do my best, ma'am but you must prepare yourself for the worst..."
And, due to various reasons outside your control, the child cannot be saved. The paragon choice there was a Bad Thing as the mother now blames you.
Hmmm, not a bad idea Compel, but then doesn't that defeat the purpose of the Renegade/Paragon option? Why give you the option to be super good/bad, when it's all left to chance anyway?
Seeing as it hasn't come up already - what's everyone's favourite weapon of the series?
Is that you've got a super good, super bad, and super neutral option. And they all balance out, so it, ultimately, comes down to the way you want to play 'your' Shepard. Of course, you may end up managing to 'scam' it, and pick the best outcome for every option... However, that ends up with your Paragon/Neutral/Renegade level all over the place so you end up not having a high enough level in any one of them in certain situations.
Otherwise, yeah ,don't bother having the neutral option.
As for my favourite gun? The N7 Valiant. Sniper all the way!
But not every conversation had some important outcome. A lot of the time, you're just talking to people. And the neutral option was cool to have around in those cases. And most really important decisions also rendered the other two usual options "less than ideal" anyway, since you'd need the charm or intimidate options to get the best outcome.
Like I said, it didn't bother me too much, just felt like a slight loss of depth.
Fallout had a perk that is right up your alley. While maintaining neutral karma you got a +X to speech and barter or something. Basically a reward for toeing the line between good and evil. That would have been good in ME, an ability to use charm/intimidate sort of options without going full hero/villain.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:Christ, how many times does it have to be said before it gets through people's skulls?
The symptoms of Indoctrination are explicitly stated in-game, in the Codex. Shepard exhibits these symptoms.
Or Shepard simply exhibits the aforementioned symptoms of PTSD, which would be a rather human thing to experience given what she/he went through.
True, it could be PTSD. In fact I think its probably a mix of both. Shepard's PTSD and guilt over Earth and the boy left her mind vulnerable to assaullt by Indoctrination by the time she reached the Crucible.
And would be more fitting than the hero being mind-controlled into ... into what, exactly? Into not showing us what happens? What sort of crappy ending would that be? If you do agree (though I don't think it is necessary that we actually agree on an ultimate explanation or solution, given how much depends on interpretation here) that "its unlikely that Shepard was successfully Indoctrinated", then why is everyone still argueing?
So the main reason you're against the possibility of Indoctrination or attempted Indoctrination is that you simply don't like that Ending? Personally I think the ME Ending works best if it is left slightly vague and open to interpretation, like Lost and Inception. And in fact, it already is, as we're already arguing over interpretation.
Can you not at least accept that the Reapers were probing her mind and attempting to Indoctrinate her? Speaking for myself here, I'm still arguing because everyone is sticking their fingers in the ears and saying "la-la-la I can't hear you, Shepard is not being Indoctrinated, the symptoms are just creative licence".
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:The ghostly presences/oily shadows are also present in the nightmares throughout the game.
Fairly sure Shep already had nightmares before Thessia ... to tie into Troike's interesting remark regarding the VI's ability to detect indoctrination.
In this sense, perhaps the oily shadows are simply a reflection of Shepard's sanity?
Then why does the in-game Codex list oily black shadows as a symptom of Indoctrination?
People here keep saying "It could just be her sanity or PTSD". But you never address the fact that the in-game Codex and Lore explicitly lists these things as the the known symptoms of Indoctrination. Why then, if its merely PTSD and her sanity slipping away, do her symptoms match that of Indoctrination?
READ THE CODEX.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Warpig1815 wrote: Another +1 for the Mako. I liked the maneuverability of the M-44 Hammerhead (If you got the Firewalker free DLC), but it had absolutely no durability and the waypoint orientated missions were pants. Mako ftw.
@Shadow Captain Edithae - I can't agree that Shepard would have been indoctrinated by exposure to the Catalyst for one reason:
Spoiler:
The Leviathan DLC (I have't got it, but I read up on the gist), explains how the Leviathan's created the Catalyst to solve the problem of synthetics rebelling against organics. The Catalyst then developed the Reapers to act as a 'final solution'. Hence, the Catalyst wasn't Reaper tech and in all probability wouldn't utilise any Indoctrination technology - being just a very powerful AI/VI (Not sure which)
Perhaps. I've not yet played that DLC, so I may change my mind when I do.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Warpig1815 wrote: Hmmm, not a bad idea Compel, but then doesn't that defeat the purpose of the Renegade/Paragon option? Why give you the option to be super good/bad, when it's all left to chance anyway?
Seeing as it hasn't come up already - what's everyone's favourite weapon of the series?
Phaeston. The Turian Assault Rifle with a high capacity (45) and rate of fire that becomes a beast of a machinegun when you upgrade the mag (75) and stability to reduce the recoil making it very accurate too.
motyak wrote: Fallout had a perk that is right up your alley. While maintaining neutral karma you got a +X to speech and barter or something. Basically a reward for toeing the line between good and evil. That would have been good in ME, an ability to use charm/intimidate sort of options without going full hero/villain.
Yeah, that would have been nice. Not sure I would have used it much, though.
The only one projecting here is you, trying to claim I said something I didn't say.
It "became an argument" as soon as one person disagreed with the other. There's nothing wrong with an argument, it's just two people disagreeing. But it became an *unpleasant* argument when you decided to claim that I believed something I never gave any indication of believing.
That is inherently disrespectful and you need to apologize for it.
Warpig1815 wrote: @Melissia - I'll just compile your last few contributions to our conversation:
There is nothing inherently disrespectful about what I posted. I stated my opinion on the Indoctrination theory, reiterated my opinion when he was trying to present a false dicohotomy fallacy, and then stated that I was offended (which remains true) at him claiming I believed something I do not believe.
@Melissia and Shadow Captain Edithae - To be honest, I don't really care about your whole tit-for-tat thing going on here. I'm not a Moderator, but I am a participator, and I'd like the thread to stay pleasant. By all means, continue your debate in an intellectual manner, considering each others points in a balanced way, but don't let it get personal. That's all I have to say on the matter - I have no interest in the why's or wherefores. Keep it respectful please.
@ Motyak - Just when you mentioned Fallout there - It may be a bad idea, but I'd like to see the next Mass Effect get a more open world Skyrim-esque (The link being that Bethseda makes both Fallout and Skyrim) feel to it. I'd keep the planet exploring and the fast, action based linear main missions, but I'd kind of like them to re-work it so that there's a larger open world with loads of side-quests. The only trouble I see with this is that in doing so, it would possibly mean that they can't put as much detail in and it would lose some of it's charm.
As for my own favourite weapon - Mattock w/ extended mag (Or was it rate of fire?), scope and extended barrel. The only one to trump it was the M-99 Sabre, with it's only drawback being rate of fire. Still, it'll put a Reaver down in one shot
The only one projecting here is you, trying to claim I said something I didn't say.
And yet you still fail to recognise that the only person I was being disrespectful to was YOU, after you posted a sarcastic one liner. And then you began making insults.
Like I said, if you're going to accuse someone of being disrespectful, its best not to be disrespectful yourself.
It "became an argument" as soon as one person disagreed with the other. There's nothing wrong with an argument, it's just two people disagreeing. But it became an *unpleasant* argument when you decided to claim that I believed something I never gave any indication of believing.
Perhaps if you had bothered to elaborate beyond "Maybe your pet theory isn't so great". and actually said what you believe, then I wouldn't have needed to make a sarcastic response. The argument became unpleasant when you joined it.
That is inherently disrespectful and you need to apologize for it.
Sure. I'll apologise when you apologise. Seeing as the only people in this thread that are being disrespectful are you and myself, to each other. I've not been "disrespectful" to anyone else, except perhaps when I said "Christ, when will people get it through their skulls".
Warpig1815 wrote: @Melissia - I'll just compile your last few contributions to our conversation:
There is nothing inherently disrespectful about what I posted. I stated my opinion on the Indoctrination theory, reiterated my opinion when he was trying to present a false dicohotomy fallacy, and then stated that I was offended (which remains true) at him claiming I believed something I do not believe.
If you want people to respond properly to your opinion on something, it helps to actually elaborate on your opinion beyond "maybe your theory isn't so great". A proper civilised argument involves rebuttals of your opponent's points and arguments, not just your idea is stupid and "Learn to read". You made no comment on my points that Shepard displays the known symptoms of Indoctrination as stated by the in-game Codex. Indeed, I don't even know if you've actually bothered to read my comments as you havn't even acknowledged my arguments yet.
The Codex lists certain things as indictators of Indoctrination - Shepard displays these indicators. IMO that is significant - otherwise, what is the point of the Codex?
I've said all I want to say, and I'll let you have the last word. No doubt you'll use it to insult me again.
In regards to weapons, I've always liked the Vindicator. It's good for headshots, so I can be picking off enemies from a distance. But can also work as a general use gun.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: So the main reason you're against the possibility of Indoctrination or attempted Indoctrination is that you simply don't like that Ending?
Personally, I don't like the indoctrination theory because, to me, it feels like a "and it was all a dream" ending. The stuff we see wasn't real and didn't actually matter, and the "waking up" (being indoctrinated) really comes out of nowhere.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Can you not at least accept that the Reapers were probing her mind and attempting to Indoctrinate her?
I don't think that they ever really got the chance to. I see no evidence that her mind was probed throughout.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: i]Then why does the in-game Codex list oily black shadows as a symptom of Indoctrination?[/i]
Well, as I said before, those shadows did take place in a dream. If they'd been happening out in waking life, okay, that'd be odd, but a dream is a bit of an abstract place. And, as Lynata said, it'd be odd if the Prothean VI didn't detect anything about Shepard if they were supposedly experiencing outright symptoms of indoctrination, by that point.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: But you never address the fact that the in-game Codex and Lore explicitly lists these things as the the known symptoms of Indoctrination.
Those things were addressed. Basically, the response was that they're not necessarily signs of indoctrination. Yes, they can be viewed as similar to what's described in the codex, but they can also be explained in other ways.
Hey now, no need for this. We know what it says, you've posted it ITT. But people continuing to disagree with you doesn't mean that they're ignorant of the lore or anything.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: i]Then why does the in-game Codex list oily black shadows as a symptom of Indoctrination?[/i]
Well, as I said before, those shadows did take place in a dream. If they'd been happening out in waking life, okay, that'd be odd, but a dream is a bit of an abstract place. And, as Lynata said, it'd be odd if the Prothean VI didn't detect anything about Shepard if they were supposedly experiencing outright symptoms of indoctrination, by that point.
They also occur in the end game sequence during the encounter with TIM, IIRC.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: But you never address the fact that the in-game Codex and Lore explicitly lists these things as the the known symptoms of Indoctrination.
Those things were addressed. Basically, the response was that they're not necessarily signs of indoctrination. Yes, they can be viewed as similar to what's described in the codex, but they can also be explained in other ways.
So you think its simply a coincidence? A design oversight? I personally find it odd that we'd be given an explicit description of Indoctrination's symptoms and Shepard then displays these symptoms, but the two are in no way connected. Why would Bioware say (in the Codex) "X is an indication of Y", have Shepard then display "X", but its entirely unconnected? IMO its a plothole and an internal inconsistency in the game's Lore.
Hey now, no need for this. We know what it says, you've posted it ITT. But people continuing to disagree with you doesn't mean that they're ignorant of the lore or anything.
You're right, I apologise. But it seems like people keep side stepping the point and are not addressing it, hence why I keep restating it.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Perhaps if you had bothered to elaborate beyond "Maybe your pet theory isn't so great". and actually said what you believe, then I wouldn't have needed to make a sarcastic response. The argument became unpleasant when you joined it.
Stop lying to yourself, you never "needed" to be a jerk.
Melissia and shadow, if you want to keep arguing this do it via pm or just go away, we want to talk mass effect not who owes whom an apology.
Ot: I love the me universe not necessarily the games themselves, I consider it a untapped goldmine with so much more potential than the creators have realised, it's the modern day star wars (or at least what star wars could have been) and I predict will be referenced in popular culture for decades to come.
Formosa wrote: Melissia and shadow, if you want to keep arguing this do it via pm or just go away, we want to talk mass effect not who owes whom an apology.
Agreed. I've made my last comment on it and won't be reading any further posts from Melissia.
Ot: I love the me universe not necessarily the games themselves, I consider it a untapped goldmine with so much more potential than the creators have realised, it's the modern day star wars (or at least what star wars could have been) and I predict will be referenced in popular culture for decades to come.
I agree shadow, that's the point I clearly failed to make haha, this game is our generations star.wars and kids growing up with it will be just as influenced I think
Formosa wrote: I agree shadow, that's the point I clearly failed to make haha, this game is our generations star.wars and kids growing up with it will be just as influenced I think
Yes. A generation of Christian conservative kids will be forever traumatised and haunted by nightmares of blue alien side boobs. God bless Fox News for warning the world of the danger of blue boobies.
Hmm, never knew that. I could solo bronze with the right class, I usually played at Silver, but did gold at times if I was wanting to properly pay attention to the game. I think I succeeded in a platinum game twice, but only 1 of those was what I'd call a 'legitimate' win, the other involved hiding in a cargo container and shooting through walls.
In that case, I might do fine at insanity, it'll only be me being massively out of practice that'll cause problems.
Warpig1815 wrote:Back on-topic - I'm kind of avoiding Mass Effect DLC as there's that much it all ramps up in price.
You don't need all of them. But at least get Lair of the Shadow Broker and the Citadel DLC, asap!
Warpig1815 wrote:Seeing as it hasn't come up already - what's everyone's favourite weapon of the series?
Depends on what role I play. As Shep in the campaign, and as Asari Adept in multiplayer, I stuck to the classy M-8 Avenger assault rifle.
When playing the Human Sniper, though, which I did a lot, I almost always pick the N7 Valiant, only rarely switching it for the Black Widow. It may not pack quite the same punch, but the higher rate of fire lets you take off targets ridiculously fast if you're good with headshots.
Lastly, for a pistol sidearm, I swear by the M-77 Paladin, of which I also have a replica in my room. This gun is just sexy.
Honourable mention goes towards the Phaeston. Originally only picking it because I wanted my multiplayer Turian Soldier to have a "proper" turian gun, I quickly grew to appreciate its extreme rate of fire and accuracy. It has low damage, but it shoots so fast that this little baby almost feels like a Reaper beam.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:So the main reason you're against the possibility of Indoctrination or attempted Indoctrination is that you simply don't like that Ending?
No. The main reason is that I'm content with the ending I got, that Indoctrination is directly contradicted by the game itself, and that I don't agree about the foreshadowing.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:Can you not at least accept that the Reapers were probing her mind and attempting to Indoctrinate her? Speaking for myself here, I'm still arguing because everyone is sticking their fingers in the ears and saying "la-la-la I can't hear you, Shepard is not being Indoctrinated, the symptoms are just creative licence".
Why should I accept this, given the evidence offered by the game?
To be honest, I could just as well say that it's you who is sticking their fingers in the ears.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:Then why does the in-game Codex list oily black shadows as a symptom of Indoctrination? [...] READ THE CODEX.
It doesn't.
Apart from it being rather offensive to simply assume that we "did not do our homework" just because we don't agree with this theory, you have actually cited the relevant codex entry yourself on page 2. And there is nothing about "oily black shadows" in there. In fact, the codex entry about Indoctrination might even serve as another proof against Shepard having been indoctrinated. When has Shep complained about headaches? Where exactly were those hallucinations? Did Shepard, at any point in the game, feel paranoid to you?
So where does this conviction that the codex says this come from? A lapse in memory? Or have you allowed yourself to become Indoctrinated by the Indoctrination Theory?
Warpig1815 wrote:@Melissia and Shadow Captain Edithae - To be honest, I don't really care about your whole tit-for-tat thing going on here. I'm not a Moderator, but I am a participator, and I'd like the thread to stay pleasant. By all means, continue your debate in an intellectual manner, considering each others points in a balanced way, but don't let it get personal. That's all I have to say on the matter - I have no interest in the why's or wherefores. Keep it respectful please.
+1
I think you are both goading each other and escalating the situation. I know it's easy to fall into this trap, but ... just try to shift down a gear.
Warpig1815 wrote:It may be a bad idea, but I'd like to see the next Mass Effect get a more open world Skyrim-esque (The link being that Bethseda makes both Fallout and Skyrim) feel to it. I'd keep the planet exploring and the fast, action based linear main missions, but I'd kind of like them to re-work it so that there's a larger open world with loads of side-quests. The only trouble I see with this is that in doing so, it would possibly mean that they can't put as much detail in and it would lose some of it's charm.
It would lose much of its pacing, and the experience would not be nearly as cinematic.
Still, I think I'd enjoy this, too. It'd be a completely different kind of game, but that does not mean it would have to be worse...
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:Yes. A generation of Christian conservative kids will be forever traumatised and haunted by nightmares of blue alien side boobs. God bless Fox News for warning the world of the danger of blue boobies.
Oh goddess, now you made me remember that crap. The worst thing is that I still have a hunch that the conservatives' reaction to ME had influenced BioWare's design in other titles like TOR and Dragon Age. This perversely hypocritical society is driving me nuts.
I think you are both goading each other and escalating the situation. I know it's easy to fall into this trap, but ... just try to shift down a gear.
Yes, I admit I made a sarcastic response to her sarcastic one liner and it all escalated from there. So I already have "shifted down a gear" and decided to stop responding to Melissia. So lets not bring it up again and just agree to disagree?
Warpig1815 wrote:Back on-topic - I'm kind of avoiding Mass Effect DLC as there's that much it all ramps up in price.
You don't need all of them. But at least get Lair of the Shadow Broker and the Citadel DLC, asap!
Will do, I'm needing an excuse to start up another game I've always got the best of intentions of starting as a different class, using different powers and different guns, but inevitable it always ends up; Soldier, Ammunition modifiers, Mattock. I can't help it, it's just too damn badass literally walking through a Cerberus assault, absorbing all their fire and popping Centurion's heads off left right and centre.
Lynata wrote:
Warpig1815 wrote:Seeing as it hasn't come up already - what's everyone's favourite weapon of the series?
Depends on what role I play. As Shep in the campaign, and as Asari Adept in multiplayer, I stuck to the classy M-8 Avenger assault rifle.
When playing the Human Sniper, though, which I did a lot, I almost always pick the N7 Valiant, only rarely switching it for the Black Widow. It may not pack quite the same punch, but the higher rate of fire lets you take off targets ridiculously fast if you're good with headshots.
Lastly, for a pistol sidearm, I swear by the M-77 Paladin, of which I also have a replica in my room. This gun is just sexy.
Honourable mention goes towards the Phaeston. Originally only picking it because I wanted my multiplayer Turian Soldier to have a "proper" turian gun, I quickly grew to appreciate its extreme rate of fire and accuracy. It has low damage, but it shoots so fast that this little baby almost feels like a Reaper beam.
Ooh, just reminded me - what was that human sniper rifle based on a Turian assault rifle, name escapes me, but it was white and blue in the default version. Now that gun, that was awesome. It didn't pack the same punch as the Mattock or M-99, but with upgraded rate of fire and magazine capacity, it made one hell of a battle rifle - far surpassed the Vindicator in that role.
Lynata wrote:
Warpig1815 wrote:It may be a bad idea, but I'd like to see the next Mass Effect get a more open world Skyrim-esque (The link being that Bethseda makes both Fallout and Skyrim) feel to it. I'd keep the planet exploring and the fast, action based linear main missions, but I'd kind of like them to re-work it so that there's a larger open world with loads of side-quests. The only trouble I see with this is that in doing so, it would possibly mean that they can't put as much detail in and it would lose some of it's charm.
It would lose much of its pacing, and the experience would not be nearly as cinematic.
Still, I think I'd enjoy this, too. It'd be a completely different kind of game, but that does not mean it would have to be worse...
Yeah, that's what I half suspected. It's a pity, simply because I often feel Mass Effect undersells it's huge potential for lore, in exactly the opposite way that Skyrim capitalises on it. :(
I think you are both goading each other and escalating the situation. I know it's easy to fall into this trap, but ... just try to shift down a gear.
Yes, I admit I made a sarcastic response to her sarcastic one liner and it all escalated from there. So I already have "shifted down a gear" and decided to stop responding to Melissia. So lets not bring it up again and just agree to disagree?
Glad to hear it. It may be best if we all move past the Indoctrination theory - it's always been highly contentious. I don't know if the OP's still about, but is it ok to talk about what we'd like to see in ME4?
I think I'd like to see a few more NPC's knocking about the battlefields. I know Shepard's team was usually did more Special forces, flanking-actions type of stuff, but with next-gen consoles having higher performance thresholds, they could really go all out and have some spectacular sized battles. It's for this reason that I really liked ME3 - It really did have that feel that the whole galaxy was at war by including NPC's fighting alongside you (Conversely, something that Skyrim, for all it's grand scale, completely failed at ), especially in the Priority: Thessia and Priority: Earth missions.
Warpig1815 wrote: I've always got the best of intentions of starting as a different class, using different powers and different guns, but inevitable it always ends up; Soldier, Ammunition modifiers, Mattock. I can't help it, it's just too damn badass literally walking through a Cerberus assault, absorbing all their fire and popping Centurion's heads off left right and centre.
I do that with my Sentinel, as a sort of medium tank.
Shields and HP ~ 1100.
Tech Armour focused on boosting shields.
Phaeston Assault Rifle upgraded for ammo capacity and stability.
Warp & Throw for Biotic combo's (will be replacing Throw with Flare as Flare has a freaking HUGE and powerful explosion).
The combination of Tech Armour and Shields lets me wade through enemy fire, blasting away with my Phaeston machinegun and occassionaly chaining Warp & Double Throw with Liara's singularity for massive biotic explosions.
I'm like a Jedi Terminator with an M60 machinegun and the power of the force.
I think I'd like to see a few more NPC's knocking about the battlefields. .... It's for this reason that I really liked ME3 - It really did have that feel that the whole galaxy was at war by including NPC's fighting alongside you (Conversely, something that Skyrim, for all it's grand scale, completely failed at ), especially in the Priority: Thessia and Priority: Earth missions.
The Civil War storyline was fun when you got to attack or defend Whiterun, and when you assaulted Solitude or Windhelm because of the high NPC count, though the corpses did fade away quickly. More of these battles were needed out in the wider world. A random encounter of Imperial and Stormcloak patrols clashing in the wilderness would have been awesome. Nothing particularly huge, but some large fights of 10 NPC's a side would have helped to give the feeling of a wider war being waged throughout the country. Also, the two sides were at a stalemate anyway by the time the Dragonborn joined the war, so more massive battles akin to Whiterun, Windhelm and Solitude aren't necessary - just a few minor skirmishes triggered randomnly in the wilderness.
Incidentally the gun, itemwise, was originally an assault rifle. It was not until Cerberus was finalized as "the Bad Guys" for ME3 that the developers realized that having the Nemesis using the M-98 Widow(which was originally what the Nemesis was armed with visually--and still is actually what they are armed with according to the damage they deal and the fact that sometimes you will have them shoot at you through cover since the M-98 Widow has innate piercing) resulted in a severe lack of actual Cerberus weaponry.
So the M-13 Raptor gets reclassed as a Sniper Rifle and gets some fluff about having been a Cerberus design based off a Turian zero gravity assault rifle that was semiautomatic to prevent issues with fighting in zero gravity. And voila, the Nemesis gets their own special Cerberus sniper rifle!
@Kanluwen - That rings a bell. Fluff idiosyncracies aside though, it was still a pretty epic battle rifle. I didn't find it as useful as a Black Widow in the sniper role, simply because it lacks stopping power in that role, but I found it very useful as a mid-range general purpose rifle.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Warpig wrote:I think I'd like to see a few more NPC's knocking about the battlefields. .... It's for this reason that I really liked ME3 - It really did have that feel that the whole galaxy was at war by including NPC's fighting alongside you (Conversely, something that Skyrim, for all it's grand scale, completely failed at ), especially in the Priority: Thessia and Priority: Earth missions.
The Civil War storyline was fun when you got to attack or defend Whiterun, and when you assaulted Solitude or Windhelm because of the high NPC count, though the corpses did fade away quickly. More of these battles were needed out in the wider world. A random encounter of Imperial and Stormcloak patrols clashing in the wilderness would have been awesome. Nothing particularly huge, but some large fights of 10 NPC's a side would have helped to give the feeling of a wider war being waged throughout the country. Also, the two sides were at a stalemate anyway by the time the Dragonborn joined the war, so more massive battles akin to Whiterun, Windhelm and Solitude aren't necessary - just a few minor skirmishes triggered randomnly in the wilderness.
Yeah, Skyrim wasn't great for that. The closest I ever got to that was when two of the 3-man patrols clash, but it's just not the same. Mass Effecy on the other hand, would be ripe for NPC's in large scale battles - but you hardly seem to find any! Even those that you do find, such as the Thessian Commando's in Priority: Thessia are only present for a short introductory interlude before the mission proper takes over and it's just you and your two chosen squadmates. Hell, even if the NPC's weren't special characters, but just the other members of your team who you hadn't picked going about their own tasks - ala ME2's Suicide mission - it'd be a touch better. All this said though, none of these points mean the Mass Effect games are bad, just limited in hindsight.
EDIT: On a completely off-topic note - Why didn't the Thalmor play a larger role in Skyrim? For the instigators of the whole mess, you'd have thought that you'd see quite a few more of them going about enforcing the Aldmeri Dominion's will...
I think Bioware are actually aware of that, Warpig. In the ME3 'Citadel' DLC, on one of the missions everyone comes along, splitting into 3 'fire teams' and starts doing assorted tasks. It's pretty neat and is something I'd like to see more often.
It actually reminded me a bit of the Stargate SG-1 episodes, where, although you're following SG-1, you see another couple of the backup SG teams helping out.
It would certainly be a change of pace from the small-scale actions type gameplay that we're used to. Not that spec-op's stuff is bad of course. I appreciate Shepard and his team were elite, and had to do stuff others couldn't, but even Special forces in our world are known to work alongside the regular forces, acting as a vanguard to crack open a breach and then move on, letting others exploit it. Overall though, I'd be happy with ME4 simply being a new story arc, with minimal changes of gameplay. I can't really fault ME3 in terms of game mechanics too much, as it was very well polished.
)
