Mass Effect 3 SPOILERS THREAD

[Florin22xxl]

Just replayed me 2 and at the end i had -2 loyal members,jack and zaeed. Garus,jack and another i can"t remember died, all the rest survived ,and i had all my ship upgrades to max . The first time i played the game i rushed to the end and everyone around me was dieing :d this time i wanted to save them all :d

 

[Ritorix]

Their deaths are actually variable depending on what assignments you give them. You can also avoid the loyalty missions of a couple squad mates and still have them survive. I didn't really think the burning of Palaven was all that intense. Honestly what happened to Earth or Thessia was far more impactful. Mainly because we never go to Palaven. Just it's desolate moon. Hard to give a damn about that moon.

See, I think Earth was handled badly. The intro scenes with reapers stepping daintily between generic future-city skyscrapers had zero emotional impact. An Independence Day-style montage of them destroying cultural centers would have been better. A ME3 commercial showed people huddled together praying as their church is attacked by reapers, holding onto loved ones as the end came - that sort of thing should have been in the game intro. People should have been affected. The same goes when you return to London - it basically looked the same as Hellgate:London when you return.

Thessia was even worse. They had the opportunity to show Asari civilization torn apart at its zenith and instead we had a street-level view followed by that temple.

Palaven was the first time you really got to take it to the Reapers. Setting it on the moon allowed for an epic backdrop of the world burning showing just how screwed everyone was. There you were shooting husks like it mattered when 2-kilometer-tall reapers walked in the background. So insignificant. Palaven set the right mood.

 

[J W]

And then there is Arrival. I think that is really where it starts. There is that giant progress bar for Object Rho, which is more of a threat than the guys shooting at you. If you survive to the end of it, Rho knocks you out and you get to spend two days under its influence regardless.

I'm curious about this. I've heard that people who didn't play Arrival DLC were basically told in ME3 that some random squad went in Shepard's place. I know that Shepard has still been exposed to a bunch Reaper tech outside of the Arrival DLC, but this could change some things.

Anyway, this time through the series I went the mission-first, 'kill em all' route. No, Miranda, I'm not helping you find your damn sister, we have a galaxy to save. I had a pretty impressive line of coffins at the end of ME2...Garrus, Tali, Thane, Jacob, Jack. Then those guys just get replaced by new characters in ME3, most of which also die. Sold Legion to Cerberus, left Grunt in his tank (no mention of the tank in ME3 so far), saved Morinth and Mordin by taking them with me to the Reaper larvae. I think the series works better with party member deaths along the way, the series becomes less 'Space Friends' where the good guys always win and nothing ever goes wrong until the end.

I may have to try this. Heck, everyone probably dies in the end of ME3 anyway

Jacob carried away screaming by bugs.

I definitely need to try this.

 

[Florin22xxl]

Me3 the most epic game ending in the history of gaming grats to bioware ) i think there has never been an analization of the writing on the wals ,of the textures on the ground to a games ending ever before! Shepard killing the bad guys and flying off into the sunset with the girl?would that have been better? Helll NO! At leats they can continue the story now :d

 

[Dan_D]

Just replayed me 2 and at the end i had -2 loyal members,jack and zaeed. Garus,jack and another i can"t remember died, all the rest survived ,and i had all my ship upgrades to max . The first time i played the game i rushed to the end and everyone around me was dieing :d this time i wanted to save them all :d

What determines life or death isn't the upgrades. If you want everyone to live you have to do all the loyalty missions, and then not lose their loyalty in a conversation / confrontation later. You can do Jack, Miranda's, Legion's and Tali's loyalty missions and still lose their loyalty. You can fix this later in conversation but it takes a lot more paragon or renegade points to do so than it does to keep their loyalty in the confrontations between crew members. You also need to assign the right people to the right tasks on the Collector base assault mission.

If you make one bad decision then someone will always die. One person dying leads to a reduced total during the hold the line part of the mission. This can lead to more deaths.

• Get all upgrades, ship and otherwise from all squad mates.
• Do all loyalty missions.
• Save Miranda or Jack's loyalty mission for later. You want to do one of their missions just prior to the Reaper IFF mission. This will allow you to accumulate enogh paragon renegade points to deal with the inevitable confrontation Jack and Miranda will have after both loyalty missions are done. You need to be able to use a paragon / renegade conversation option highlighted in blue or red to keep both their loyalties. Otherwise it forces you to choose a side which alienates the other. The same is true of Tali and Legion's confrontation after Legion's loyalty mission. (Unless you go full retard and do his before Tali's.)
• Go full paragon or full renegade. Don't half ass it if you want to be able to use charm / intimidate options on your crew in order to defuse confrontations. (You can still do the occasional paragon or renegade action / conversation topic, but overall you have to ride one line or the other. This is especially true if your background and character history do not grant paragon or renegade bonuses.)

Mission Assignment Break Down

• Technician: Legion or Tali
• Fire Team Leader: Miranda, Jacob, Garrus (Pick any one of these three for both instances.)
• Biotic: Jack, Samara/Morinth, Miranda (Thane and Jacob are NOT strong enough to do this and someone will die if you choose either of them.)
• Escort: Anyone who is loyal. It's best to send Mordin or Kasumi, but if you do your job right you can send anyone. I always send Jacob because he's useless.
• Hold the Line / Final Squad Selection: Take Kasumi, Mordin, or even Tali with you if you want the highest point total. They have the weakest defensive scores. However, taking Miranda ensures extra dialog with the Illusive Man. I usually take Garrus and Tali, or Garrus and Miranda. However, I have everyone loyal and picked all the right squad members for all tasks. Also if you have Zaeed and Kasumi, your totals are high enough to give you a lot of latitude on who you take with you as your final squad members. If you lack Zaeed and Kasumi, take Mordin and Tali with you, leave everyone else to hold the line.

If you follow this plan you'll always complete ME2 with zero squad mate casualties. However, the Normandy Crew also lives and dies based on your choices.

Once the Reaper IFF mission is done you can do precisely TWO missions prior to entering the Omega 4 relay and no more if you want to save everyone. If you take 3 missions or so then half the Normandy crew dies. If half dies than I believe engineer Gabriella Daniels dies and the guy survives or vice versa. I don't recall. 4 or more and all but Dr. Chakawas dies. If you send Dr. Chakawas back to the Normandy on her own she'll die too. If you send no one with the Normandy crew back to the ship, then I believe half to all of them can still die even if you did show up on time.

I've kept the memorial's list of names on the Normandy crew deck as short as the game allows it to be.

 

[Drown Babies]

While controversial, people tend to give ME more slack because it's so damned good.

I think this is a very important part of understanding why Bioware might think this real-ending-as-DLC thing might be a good idea. Considering the tripe that gets passed off as being worthy of charging $60 (no offense to any tripe lovers here), it's not surprising that a company which makes something so engaging might overestimate the level of patience and support that their fans will give.

I don't have any problem with paying $90-100 or more for the ME games and all their DLC; anything that retains it's value after 3 or 4 repeated, 30 hour, play-throughs is worth that in my mind. But dicking around with this not-ending nonsense is a different matter, especially because it's not even coherent or satisfying in any meaningful way.

If the ending is strictly interpreted as being a setup for further content, the real ending, then it makes more sense. But it still doesn't seem like the best way doing things. Of course, in a few months, we could all be back to say Bioware is the greatest, and that they pulled off a brilliant act of story telling...

 

[Dan_D]

I think this is a very important part of understanding why Bioware might think this real-ending-as-DLC thing might be a good idea. Considering the tripe that gets passed off as being worthy of charging $60 (no offense to any tripe lovers here), it's not surprising that a company which makes something so engaging might overestimate the level of patience and support that their fans will give.

I don't have any problem with paying $90-100 or more for the ME games and all their DLC; anything that retains it's value after 3 or 4 repeated, 30 hour, play-throughs is worth that in my mind. But dicking around with this not-ending nonsense is a different matter, especially because it's not even coherent or satisfying in any meaningful way.

If the ending is strictly interpreted as being a setup for further content, the real ending, then it makes more sense. But it still doesn't seem like the best way doing things. Of course, in a few months, we could all be back to say Bioware is the greatest, and that they pulled off a brilliant act of story telling...

Well there have been news stories which alluded to the future of gaming might be more subscrption based or episodic where what we see content wise is closer to Valve's episodic vision of gaming. However Valve couldn't deliver on that because they made episodes which were longer than most first person shooters were in general. Albeit somewhat shorter than their usual games. At least compared to HL1 and HL2.

Electronic Arts may figure now is the time to try something like that because Mass Effect is so popular. It's fan base is loyal enough to tolerate some BS to get the content they crave.

As for value, I've got 90 hours in Mass Effect 1. Around 400 hours in Mass Effect 2. Not counting multiplayer I have at least 110 in Mass Effect 3. I picked up ME1 and ME2 for $20 each and ME3 of course was full price for the Collector's Edition. Yeah, I've bought all the DLC for ME2 raising the price up. But that amount of entertainment was well worth it in my eyes. I've enjoyed this series more than almost any other. Though I've probably still got many more hours than that in UT99, UT2004 and Quake III. These days though I'm not sure if a simple arena shooter could grab my attention like that anymore. Especially after playing Mass Effect.

I'm curious about this. I've heard that people who didn't play Arrival DLC were basically told in ME3 that some random squad went in Shepard's place. I know that Shepard has still been exposed to a bunch Reaper tech outside of the Arrival DLC, but this could change some things.



I may have to try this. Heck, everyone probably dies in the end of ME3 anyway



I definitely need to try this.

The deaths of characters in Mass Effect 1 and 2 doesn't really alter the ending to Mass Effect 3, but it does change the feel of the game and change the outcome of individual story archs.

 

[J W]

I think this is a very important part of understanding why Bioware might think this real-ending-as-DLC thing might be a good idea. Considering the tripe that gets passed off as being worthy of charging $60 (no offense to any tripe lovers here), it's not surprising that a company which makes something so engaging might overestimate the level of patience and support that their fans will give.

I don't have any problem with paying $90-100 or more for the ME games and all their DLC; anything that retains it's value after 3 or 4 repeated, 30 hour, play-throughs is worth that in my mind. But dicking around with this not-ending nonsense is a different matter, especially because it's not even coherent or satisfying in any meaningful way.

If the ending is strictly interpreted as being a setup for further content, the real ending, then it makes more sense. But it still doesn't seem like the best way doing things. Of course, in a few months, we could all be back to say Bioware is the greatest, and that they pulled off a brilliant act of story telling...

I think this is precisely how BioWare and EA envision this. Some fans spend hundreds of dollars on ME themed stuff. $10 for a couple more hours is nothing.

Even still, people are pissy right now. It wouldn't surprise me if BioWare didn't run some promotion where the first DLC is half price -- only 400 BW points.

 

[Dan_D]

I think this is precisely how BioWare and EA envision this. Some fans spend hundreds of dollars on ME themed stuff. $10 for a couple more hours is nothing.

Even still, people are pissy right now. It wouldn't surprise me if BioWare didn't run some promotion where the first DLC is half price -- only 400 BW points.

Sadly, I bet your right on the money. And yeah, $10 isn't shit. My Normandy SR-2 model/statue was a lot more than that.

 

[MacLeod]

So you have to send Tali or Legion thru the tunnels in ME2 to get them to survive? I thought whoever you sent took one in the face......and not in a good way.

After everybody I sent dying, I just started sending Jacob because I liked him the least. Never thought about Tali cause I was always banging her and didn't want to risk it.

 

[Ritorix]

It has to be a 'tech specialist', I think Kasumi counts too. And they have to be loyal. Basically if you pick someone disloyal to do a task or someone inappropriate for a task, someone is going to die. It takes some planning if you want to get max deaths without actually failing the mission

 

[TexasAg05]

So you have to send Tali or Legion thru the tunnels in ME2 to get them to survive? I thought whoever you sent took one in the face......and not in a good way.

Actually, I found that if you choose the wrong person for the fire team, the tech in the tunnels gets it. I found that interesting.

 

[Dan_D]

So you have to send Tali or Legion thru the tunnels in ME2 to get them to survive? I thought whoever you sent took one in the face......and not in a good way.

After everybody I sent dying, I just started sending Jacob because I liked him the least. Never thought about Tali cause I was always banging her and didn't want to risk it.

You have to send a tech specialist. Also the tunnels are very hot. Someone in a sealed suit, or a machine seem like the only reasonable choices. If you send Tali she makes a comment about vents on the Geth Dreadnaught in ME3. "Vents, always vents." To that Shepard replies: "You did fine with the vents on the Collector base." And Tali retorts with; "I got set on fire!"

But to me only Tali and Legion made sense for this role. Miranda even states sending a tech expert is necessary.

It has to be a 'tech specialist', I think Kasumi counts too. And they have to be loyal. Basically if you pick someone disloyal to do a task or someone inappropriate for a task, someone is going to die. It takes some planning if you want to get max deaths without actually failing the mission

They do have to be loyal and I don't think Kasumi counts. She might though.

Actually, I found that if you choose the wrong person for the fire team, the tech in the tunnels gets it. I found that interesting.

If you pick the wrong person for any leadership role, then someone else bites it as a result. Not necessarily the fire team leader either.

 

[J W]

It has to be a 'tech specialist', I think Kasumi counts too. And they have to be loyal. Basically if you pick someone disloyal to do a task or someone inappropriate for a task, someone is going to die. It takes some planning if you want to get max deaths without actually failing the mission

It would be tough to get all squadmates killed, but not Shepard.

Sadly, I bet your right on the money. And yeah, $10 isn't shit. My Normandy SR-2 model/statue was a lot more than that.

There was a "limited edition" lithograph of a Reaper for $50 (not the weird one for $40 they have now) I thought about getting on BioWare's store. It's all sold out now. Good thing LOL. That would have been an absurd purchase.

 

[TwistedAegis]

They do have to be loyal and I don't think Kasumi counts. She might though.

Kasumi counts; I always send her through the vents and she does just fine. Funny that you always send Jacob back as the escort for the Normandy crew; I do the same.

 

[MacLeod]

Which DLC is Kasumi in? I only ever played Arrival and Shadow Broker as I thought those were the only ones that were actually tied into the story. I thought all the others were basically side missions. Kinda like From Ashes. I didn't see that as that important to the story. Yeah it was kinda cool to see the Protheans history but basically all you get is am extra character. Are there some other ME2 DLC that have anything substantial in them?

When I finish my ME3 game I'm probably going to start over with ME2 (did everytbing I wanted in 1) and fem-Shep and be more renegade but see if I can keep everybody alive and keep Maelon's data.

 

[Drown Babies]

Kasumi counts; I always send her through the vents and she does just fine. Funny that you always send Jacob back as the escort for the Normandy crew; I do the same.

Yeah, nobody likes Jacob. Even Bioware seems to realize this, because they gave him a totally random role in ME3, then just left him to stare at the wall in the hospital for half the game.

 

[Dan_D]

Kasumi counts; I always send her through the vents and she does just fine. Funny that you always send Jacob back as the escort for the Normandy crew; I do the same.

Pretty much everyone I know who played Mass Effect 2 sent Jacob back with the Normandy crew. Mostly because they either didn't like the character, or didn't ever use him. They pretty much figured he would be unavailable from that point on and wouldn't miss him.

It made sense to be. He's caring, supposedly a leader according to his dossier and useless for anything else. Think about it, there is nothing the character does that another can't do better. Miranda, Jack, and Samara/Morinth are all better biotics. Thane is about as good as Jacob in that regard, but he carries a sub-machine gun and a sniper rifle. Jacob gets a shotgun and a pistol. Jack and Tali are the only other characters to carry just a handgun and a shotgun. However, Tali's abilities are different as they are technical in nature and are far more useful than Jacob's mediocre biotic powers. Jack's biotic abilities are far better than Jacobs. So again it makes Jacob useless and redundant. If your Shepard is a biotic than he's even more useless. I typically pick a heavy hitter with a sniper rifle like Zaeed or Garrus for most missions. Being a soldier I usually take a biotic squad mate. That's always going to be Jack, Samara or Miranda. Preferrably the latter, but Jack is a powerful ally with squad warp ammunition. This means you can save your bonus power for something else and still get warp ammunition. Also weapons wise, with Garrus and armor piercing ammunition, their ammunition powers abilities and weapons allow you to handle virtually every situation. It's about as balanced as a team can get.

In other words, Soldier Shepard combined with Garrus and Jack is nearly the perfect team in regard to abilities and skills. Everyone covers medium range, barriers, shields and armor. Jack and Shepard cover close range with shotguns and handguns. Shepard and Garrus cover medium to long range with assault rifles and sniper rifles. So everyone overlaps a little, but covers unknowns on the field. On higher difficulty settings this is important. On easy or normal mode you can just take the squad mates you like to look at or hear commentary from. But on the higher difficulty settings their abilities, weapons and DPS come into play. Not only how they handle a given situation, but how they compliment your Shepard. A Shepard vanguard would really benefit more from using Zaeed and Garrus, vs. Garrus and Jack. If you are fighting synthetics then Tali and Garrus makes a lot of sense, etc.

But in pretty much any situation you can think of, there is always a better choice than Jacob. So unless you really like the character, he belongs on the ship cleaning guns and doing sit ups.

 

[Dan_D]

Yeah, nobody likes Jacob. Even Bioware seems to realize this, because they gave him a totally random role in ME3, then just left him to stare at the wall in the hospital for half the game.

If your female Shepard romanced him (I don't know why you would), it turns out that Jacob is a cheating bastard and you can not renew the romance. It's a total dead end no matter what choices you make. It is the only relationship which can not continue in some way from an earlier game. Now your choices in the game can alienate any romance from a prior game and they'll basically end it with you regardless of what you say. But Jacob's is just a total no go.

And yeah, I thought it would be hard for the guy to be even more useless in ME3 than he was in ME2, but I was proven wrong.

 

[TwistedAegis]

Poor Jacob. Even thousands of years in the future, with FTL travel, a black man can't get a decent shake.

 

[Dan_D]

Which DLC is Kasumi in? I only ever played Arrival and Shadow Broker as I thought those were the only ones that were actually tied into the story. I thought all the others were basically side missions. Kinda like From Ashes. I didn't see that as that important to the story. Yeah it was kinda cool to see the Protheans history but basically all you get is am extra character. Are there some other ME2 DLC that have anything substantial in them?

When I finish my ME3 game I'm probably going to start over with ME2 (did everytbing I wanted in 1) and fem-Shep and be more renegade but see if I can keep everybody alive and keep Maelon's data.

Kasumi: Stolen Memory. Neither that or Zaeed: The Price of Revenge is explicitly tied to the main story but both of them have a lot of commentary while on missions and both their missions are fun with Kasumi's being one of the most unique and entertaining in the whole series. It's not as epic as say Lair of the Shadow Boker. It's really light hearted and fun. And of course Kasumi adds to your overall point total for the hold the line portion of the final mission. Zaeed is a HUGE point total. I believe he has the highest or one of the highest defensive scores. He also does more damage than any other character does because of his class bonus. Everyone does less damage than Shepard, but Zaeed is the closest to Shepard for that.

 

[MacLeod]

I think the biggest problem with Jacob is he has a boring personality and is about as interesting as watching grass grow and he has the weirdest loyalty mission. OK I get it, you hate your dad.

 

[Dan_D]

Poor Jacob. Even thousands of years in the future, with FTL travel, a black man can't get a decent shake.

I don't think Jacob being terrible has anything to do with his skin color. Anderson is black and I like that character a lot. Not only is Anderson cooler, but he's a better squad mate for the brief time you can fight with him. I'd go drinking beers with Anderson. Jacob, not so much.

I think the biggest problem with Jacob is he has a boring personality and is about as interesting as watching grass grow and he has the weirdest loyalty mission. OK I get it, you hate your dad.

Despite not really liking the character, I do like his loyalty mission. He also adds a lot of interesting extra dialog to the mission: Packages with Ish, if you take both him and Miranda with you.

Oh and for those of you who may not like Jacob and don't have Zaeed, here is one good reason to get Zaeed's DLC. You meet him in the hallway of the docking area to the Normandy on Omega. So you can literally walk off the Normandy, talk to Zaeed, and then turn around click on the airlock and hit "request new squad mate" which allows you to replace Jacob right away. And doing so on Archangel's recruitment mission grants a lot of extra dialog because Zaeed has a history with the Blue Suns.

 

[MacLeod]

Poor Jacob. Even thousands of years in the future, with FTL travel, a black man can't get a decent shake.

LOL! Where's a futuristic Al Sharpton when you need one?

 

[TwistedAegis]

I don't think Jacob being terrible has anything to do with his skin color. Anderson is black and I like that character a lot. Not only is Anderson cooler, but he's a better squad mate for the brief time you can fight with him. I'd go drinking beers with Anderson. Jacob, not so much.



Despite not really liking the character, I do like his loyalty mission.

I know, I was just kidding. I think his issue is he's just too "normal" (boring) compared to everyone else. He isn't from another planet, he doesn't have too crazy of a backstory, etc. Honestly I had the same issue with James.

 

[Fix Me]

Well, I haven't totally finished Mass Effect 3 (I got tired of wave after wave of the same 10 enemies on the Priority:Earth mission - sounds like I didn't miss much), but I did watch the endings on youtube. I also read several of the theories about indoctrination/dream ending. As some others have stated, I too thought the ending was going to be horribad from all the complaining, which surprised me because the story in ME3 seemed to be pretty good. I didn't think the ending was quite as bad as some of you do, I liked it when I first watched it. However, there are some good points made that have made me reconsider my initial reaction:

How did the crew members on Earth end up on the Normandy?
Why was the Normandy speeding away from the beam? Wasn't Joker fighting in Earth's orbit?
What happened to everyone after the relays were destroyed?
How did Shepard survive? (Definitely supports indoctrination theory)

I think the rage against the ending is a bit much. It's not THAT bad. It is disappointing, but I don't think I would show up at BW HQ with a torch and pitchfork. However, I probably wouldn't buy their next game on release day. I think if they explained things a little better at the end, they wouldn't have the rage they're seeing. The definitely could have looked at how DA:O wrapped things up at the end and run with that, though in their own style. Hell, even a cheesy stop frame with some exposition about Garrus settling down and having a litter of blue whatevers with Liara would have led to less rage. lol I never expected my actions to have THAT much impact on the story as a whole, but then I am jaded. They definitely have an impact on how the main story plays out and can make minor differences in the endings. I would assume, as some of you have, that it was rushed (if that forum post is true, maybe they didn't have time to go through the final revision process with the whole writing team), and EA didn't think much of it since they can just fix it with patches and DLC. It may be interesting to see where BW goes from here. If they release paid DLC to placate us, they're in trouble. I might buy it when it's on sale for $1. Maybe. Free DLC wouldn't be so bad, but doing it right the first time would have been better. Why not delay the game for a few months to better flesh out the ending, I wouldn't have cared.

Speaking of DLC, I don't bother with DLC (I think I bought one for ME1, can't remember which one), so I have no idea what many of you are talking about wiith "they said this in that DLC or that gun was in the CE and not in ME3". I don't bother with any of that, so maybe that's where part of my perspective comes into play? I also don't listen to developers talk about their games, they talk a lot about nothing most of the time. Just give me the plot summary and show me that gameplay is fun and you have a sale (if feedback is good, too). My experience with the ending, and possibly the game as a whole, is somewhat different from most of you, I think. Most of us seem to be in agreement that it's a great series of games, but the ending was executed poorly and left too many questions.

 

[Ritorix]

The worst part about Jacob is if you do take him on missions, he whines whenever you do something renegade. I took him on the Thane recruitment, and he actually whines when you push a merc out a window. Due process my ass, they just bombed a civilian building.

...which is why the best fate for Jacob is to be carried away screaming by the seeker swarms.

And then we get the Jacob replacement, James. Situps replaced by pullups. But he at least turns out to be a little amusing.

 

[Dan_D]

I know, I was just kidding. I think his issue is he's just too "normal" (boring) compared to everyone else. He isn't from another planet, he doesn't have too crazy of a backstory, etc. Honestly I had the same issue with James.

Agreed. There are so many interesting character in the Mass Effect series. It's hard to like Jacob. He's not a good squad member and he adds no amusing or funny dialog to the game's missions, and he's really just lame all around. I think Vega is slightly more interesting but mostly because he has a little more personality and some good dialog on missions. He's also more useful because he fills the role of a tank on missions. Vega at least has good back and fourth with Garrus and Javik. Jacob doesn't even have that going for him.

 

[TwistedAegis]

Yeah on my second playthrough I've taken him out a few times and was surprised at the quality of his mission dialog. The stereotypical spanish mixed in though just really rubs me the wrong way; a dozen different species of alien are all speaking nothing but english, but of course the hispanic crew member calls you "Loco" and is cooking his abuela's special juevos rancheros in the kitchen.

 

[J W]

Well, I haven't totally finished Mass Effect 3 (I got tired of wave after wave of the same 10 enemies on the Priority:Earth mission - sounds like I didn't miss much), but I did watch the endings on youtube. I also read several of the theories about indoctrination/dream ending. As some others have stated, I too thought the ending was going to be horribad from all the complaining, which surprised me because the story in ME3 seemed to be pretty good. I didn't think the ending was quite as bad as some of you do, I liked it when I first watched it. However, there are some good points made that have made me reconsider my initial reaction:

How did the crew members on Earth end up on the Normandy?
Why was the Normandy speeding away from the beam? Wasn't Joker fighting in Earth's orbit?
What happened to everyone after the relays were destroyed?
How did Shepard survive? (Definitely supports indoctrination theory)

I think the rage against the ending is a bit much. It's not THAT bad. It is disappointing, but I don't think I would show up at BW HQ with a torch and pitchfork. However, I probably wouldn't buy their next game on release day. I think it they explained things a little better at the end, they wouldn't have the rage they're seeing. The definitely could have looked at how DA:O wrapped things up at the end and run with that, though in their own style. Hell, even a cheesy stop frame with some exposition about Garrus settling down and having a litter of blue whatevers with Liara would have led to less rage. lol I never expected my actions to have THAT much impact on the story as a whole, but then I am jaded. They definitely have an impact on how the main story plays out and can make minor differences in the endings. I would assume, as some of you have, that it was rushed (if that forum post is true, maybe they didn't have time to go through the final revision process with the whole writing team), and EA didn't think much of it since they can just fix it with patches and DLC. It may be interesting to see where BW goes from here. If they release paid DLC to placate us, they're in trouble. I might buy it when it's on sale for $1. Maybe. Free DLC wouldn't be so bad, but doing it right the first time would have been better. Why not delay the game for a few months to better flesh out the ending, I wouldn't have cared.

Speaking of DLC, I don't bother with DLC (I think I bought one for ME1, can't remember which one), so I have no idea what many of you are talking about wiith "they said this in that DLC or that gun was in the CE and not in ME3". I don't bother with any of that, so maybe that's where part of my perspective comes into play? I also don't listen to developers talk about their games, they talk a lot about nothing most of the time. Just give me the plot summary and show me that gameplay is fun and you have a sale (if feedback is good, too). My experience with the ending, and possibly the game as a whole, is somewhat different from most of you, I think. Most of us seem to be in agreement that it's a great series of games, but the ending was executed poorly and left too many questions.

I was talking earlier how people get really into ME by buying all sorts of "gear." What BioWare does at the end of ME3 is about like Disney killing off Mickey, Donald, Goofy and Minnie.

 

[Dan_D]

I was talking earlier how people get really into ME by buying all sorts of "gear." What BioWare does at the end of ME3 is about like Disney killing off Mickey, Donald, Goofy and Minnie.

That's one way of looking at it. And not at all unfounded or without basis either.

 

[Fix Me]

I was talking earlier how people get really into ME by buying all sorts of "gear." What BioWare does at the end of ME3 is about like Disney killing off Mickey, Donald, Goofy and Minnie.

I'm not sure what you mean, but then I don't get attached to the characters like some of you do. You'd probably all hate me as a writer, I'd kill off characters left and right if it moved the story forward. I'd rather see a hero die without the writer writing in some inane plot device that saves him at the last second, but that's just me. I think killing off main characters can make a better story, but in and of itself won't make a story great. You also risk alienating your audience (as you see in this very thread).

 

[Dan_D]

I'm not sure what you mean, but then I don't get attached to the characters like some of you do. You'd probably all hate me as a writer, I'd kill off characters left and right if it moved the story forward. I'd rather see a hero die without the writer writing in some inane plot device that saves him at the last second, but that's just me. I think killing off main characters can make a better story, but in and of itself won't make a story great. You also risk alienating your audience (as you see in this very thread).

Some of the characters are killed off in Mass Effect. Quite a few of them are in the course of the series. However it's always for emotional resonance and to move the story forward. (Excluding the ending to ME3 which only does so if taken at face value.) The nice thing about the series is that many deaths can be avoided by making the right choices. Other choices, which seem to be right will get someone killed for the greater good. Others like Ashley/Kaiden are done because you have to choose. You only have time to help one of them. It adds emotional effect and resonance. It also makes you hate the bad guy more.

But obviously these deaths as plot devices only work if you are really vested in the story and it's outcome.

 

[TwistedAegis]

I'm not sure what you mean, but then I don't get attached to the characters like some of you do. You'd probably all hate me as a writer, I'd kill off characters left and right if it moved the story forward. I'd rather see a hero die without the writer writing in some inane plot device that saves him at the last second, but that's just me. I think killing off main characters can make a better story, but in and of itself won't make a story great. You also risk alienating your audience (as you see in this very thread).

George RR Martin, is that you?!

I agree that not always saving every character and hero adds suspense to a story; doing it just to do it however is poor writing. The worst thing about the ending of ME3 is that they bring in a crappy plot device at the end AND kill the hero AND basically tells you your epic quest was a failure.

It's like booking a 5 star hotel, calling the concierge for a high class call girl, and up comes a 6'6" tranny who takes a dump on your chest.

 

[J W]

I'm not sure what you mean, but then I don't get attached to the characters like some of you do. You'd probably all hate me as a writer, I'd kill off characters left and right if it moved the story forward. I'd rather see a hero die without the writer writing in some inane plot device that saves him at the last second, but that's just me. I think killing off main characters can make a better story, but in and of itself won't make a story great. You also risk alienating your audience (as you see in this very thread).

BioWare nuked the Magic Kingdom, man.

 

[Fix Me]

Some of the characters are killed off in Mass Effect. Quite a few of them are in the course of the series. However it's always for emotional resonance and to move the story forward. (Excluding the ending to ME3 which only does so if taken at face value.) The nice thing about the series is that many deaths can be avoided by making the right choices. Other choices, which seem to be right will get someone killed for the greater good. Others like Ashley/Kaiden are done because you have to choose. You only have time to help one of them. It adds emotional effect and resonance. It also makes you hate the bad guy more.

But obviously these deaths as plot devices only work if you are really vested in the story and it's outcome.

In that, we do agree.

George RR Martin, is that you?!

I agree that not always saving every character and hero adds suspense to a story; doing it just to do it however is poor writing. The worst thing about the ending of ME3 is that they bring in a crappy plot device at the end AND kill the hero AND basically tells you your epic quest was a failure.

It's like booking a 5 star hotel, calling the concierge for a high class call girl, and up comes a 6'6" tranny who takes a dump on your chest.

Haha, I love that guy. I agree, killing them off just to kill them off (when you don't know what else to do with them) does suck, but can be good if well executed.

That's the thing, I have no way of knowing if the epic quest was a failure. I don't see it as a total failure. Some element of organic life has survived, but we don't know to what extent or if they will all die off anyways with the relays gone.

@JW, Space Magic Kingdom!

 

[Sycraft]

George RR Martin, is that you?!

I agree that not always saving every character and hero adds suspense to a story; doing it just to do it however is poor writing. The worst thing about the ending of ME3 is that they bring in a crappy plot device at the end AND kill the hero AND basically tells you your epic quest was a failure.

It's like booking a 5 star hotel, calling the concierge for a high class call girl, and up comes a 6'6" tranny who takes a dump on your chest.

Ya the problem isn't with a character dying, it is with a character dying for no real reason. Mordin's death was a great one. He sacrificed himself, willingly and knowingly for a greater good. Not just that, but to deal with in final an issue from his past. He finds his peace with what he's done as he sets it right. Hence his singing show tunes as he goes down.

That was a great scene.

Just killing off a main character because you think it makes you "hardcore" or something is stupid, and is extremely shitty writing. Killing a character needs to be done for a better reason than shock value.

So you could have Shepard die in the end and have it be good. For example maybe it turns out the Crucible needs someone to continually adjust things to work at full efficiency, but it is going to kill that person with radiation as it happens. Shepard has a choice to make the ultimate sacrifice for the team and the galaxy. That would be a good death story wise.

Hell look at DAO. Unless you made a dark deal with Morigane, someone had to die. No matter what the choice it was a good death, your hero could make the ultimate sacrifice if you wanted. Also it offered a great redemption for a bad guy if you wanted to go the route of getting Logaine and letting him do it.

Could even take something like that in to ME3, with the right choices in the series, you have the option to convince the Illusive Man to sacrifice himself to save the galaxy, that in death he might be able to redeem himself and also achieve his goal of protecting humanity. Maybe for the best ending you and he have to stand side by side, the great hero and the great villain united in purpose to stop a greater threat, both willing to lay down their lives for the greater good. A heroic and and a great redemption all in one.

However the fucking nonsensical death in the end of ME3? Stupid. A shock value or emo "hardcore" type of thing. Not good writing.

 

[MacLeod]

I'm not sure what you mean, but then I don't get attached to the characters like some of you do. You'd probably all hate me as a writer, I'd kill off characters left and right if it moved the story forward. I'd rather see a hero die without the writer writing in some inane plot device that saves him at the last second, but that's just me. I think killing off main characters can make a better story, but in and of itself won't make a story great. You also risk alienating your audience (as you see in this very thread).

Ive said this in another ME thread but getting attached to our characters is what makes Mass Effect so good and my favorite game of all time. Its not the best shooter, its not the best RPG, it doesnt have the best graphics but it does have one of the best stories in gaming history and absolutely the best cast of characters in gaming history and most of their fates rest on choices you make while playing. Add to that the fact that you can hook up with some of them.

Obviously theyre not going to appeal to everybody so if youre one of those that dont get attached to the ME characters then youll never be as rabid a fan of the game as guys like me. I am really attached not to mention emotionally invested in these characters so Im addicted to the game because of them along with the story line and atmosphere.

Mass Effect is one of the few, if not only game out that I know of that is great NOT because of the traditional "gaming" aspects but rather the personal aspects.

 

[Dan_D]

Ive said this in another ME thread but getting attached to our characters is what makes Mass Effect so good and my favorite game of all time. Its not the best shooter, its not the best RPG, it doesnt have the best graphics but it does have one of the best stories in gaming history and absolutely the best cast of characters in gaming history and most of their fates rest on choices you make while playing. Add to that the fact that you can hook up with some of them.

Obviously theyre not going to appeal to everybody so if youre one of those that dont get attached to the ME characters then youll never be as rabid a fan of the game as guys like me. I am really attached not to mention emotionally invested in these characters so Im addicted to the game because of them along with the story line and atmosphere.

Mass Effect is one of the few, if not only game out that I know of that is great NOT because of the traditional "gaming" aspects but rather the personal aspects.

I'd argue that it's one of the best RPG games out there. It isn't to everyone's tastes necessarily, but it's definitely a damned good RPG. Though some more traditional aspects of an RPG like looting and inventory management aren't really present in the series. That stuff is just tedious in my opinon and not central to the story. Managing items isn't what makes an RPG game an RPG when you really think about it.

 

[J W]

Rumor
EA: DLC will not change ending; Shepard's story is done

I'd hate it if Shepard's story is done, but it's forgivable to an extent. It may be weird to play as someone else in the Mass Effect universe. Hopefully they can salvage what's left of the universe.

I don't know. I really liked being a star ship captain and having a squad. I hope the new character, whoever it is, can also have these things.

Edit: The more I think about it, the more i think this guy doesn't actually say anything we didn't already know. He's just repeating stuff BioWare said in the past.