Mass Effect 3

[roadkill2309]

I finished it this afternoon, ~43 hours total game play. I am slightly disappointed, not so much in the ending, but with the war assets aspect of the game's ending. I had close to 5500. My strength was close to 3000. My readiness was 50%.

Spoiler

I peeked online, and know that three options should have been given, but I was only given two...unless I wasn't paying attention to the "Creator" character.

Anyway...

Spoiler

In order to up your readiness, you had to play the multiplayer aspect quite a bit.

 

[KevInDaBassment]

Sorry the response is long! You made good points and I wanted to address them fairly and do them justice

Ultimately, once you accept the premise that the Reapers can't be beaten in conventional combat, there's no choice but the off-button. I mean, what kind of weapon could the Crucible possibly have been? I'd love to hear your ideas on this front.

That's not really an inherit fact, since we CONFIRMED two ways to kill Reapers (Thresher Maw and with enough firepower spit out by the Quarians). There were "upgrades" you could discover for the crucible such as things like "dark matter missiles" which led me to believe it was in fact a weapon. This along with other things seems out of place or pointless given how it is used in the game. The direction seemed to be the battering ram that takes down the impenetrable fortress, a completely plausible plot point. Your crew got resourceful concerning the Collectors in ME2, so we can see that galactic unity is a force to be reckoned with. Where arrogance was what made the Protheans fail, and possibly the other past races, we saw the unity of all the races proving that organic life isn't doomed to failure at all.

The whole idea of "control" expounded upon by the Catalyst wasn't extermination from its perspective. Think of the "inevitable" conflict between synthetics & organics OR created & creators as a zero-sum game. Mutually assured destruction - similar to nuclear proliferation in the Cold War. The Reapers assumed themselves to be the pinnacle of existence. In their eyes, they are doing the organic species a favor by harvesting their genetic material and creating new Reapers. Instead of a slow death by entropy, species can live forever in the form of a god-like machine. The motivations of the Catalyst are necessarily obscure to us because it and the Reapers are wholly distinct forms of life, unconcerned by any of the imperatives that motivate organic species.

I think it's implied who or whatever actually created the first Reaper(s) has long since ceased to exist. The Catalyst essentially serves as the Reapers' equivalent of Vigil, the Prothean VI on Ilos.

They were, however, still subject to what their creators designed them and commanded them to do. They detested and forbade the Geth from worshiping them as gods, because it's not what they are...they are a tool meant to carry out a pre-programmed purpose. Basically, they are the genocidal and unfriendly version of Wall-E, left only to perform their task until their destruction. The peace between Geth and Quarians proves that synthetics and organics can live in peace together.

It could be speculated, but this is, again, another plot hole that should not be left open. Were they destroyed by the Reapers? Why would they create, knowingly, something that would turn on them in theory? Did they become the Reapers? Why would they "create" a weapon such as the Crucible to facilitate their own destruction? I go back to my theme of unity, where all other races failed to create it in time, our unity caused it to be a success. One could even say this was the whole purpose of the Reapers to begin with...exterminating intelligent life until they can learn to unite. This would not be a fairy tale plot point or out of the realm of possibility in the ME universe.

I think the Mass Relays needed to go - along with the Citadel. They were the legacy of the Reapers. When you think about it, they were essentially tools of genocide in use for 1,000,000,000 years. The fact that most of the people in galaxy survived leads me to the conclusion that those survivors would eventually be able to replicate the technology (as the Protheans did) in their own fashion.

With the mass relays gone, all life other than those on the Normandy are destroyed. Earth was in shambles and you had FLEETS of various alien life stranded there...that spells death pretty much any way you slice it. Since they were unable to create mass relays, starvation and war due to no resources would entail an end to all that fought to liberate the galaxy. Sorry to sound like a pansy, but screw that...they did their part and deserve life for what they all sacrificed to win. I don't recall Protheans making mass relays, the Reapers said they (more likely their creators) made them.

We're all going to die eventually. Does that mean that the events in our lives mean nothing because they inexorably lead to the same outcome?

I don't think it does. I feel the same way about this game.

I'd have loved to have been indulged with sunshine and rainbows at the end of a full-on Paragon career. But my philosophy (in real life) is such that I believe that the "good life" is its own reward. I don't need my choices to be validated by the carrot at the end of the stick.

Fair enough, but I (and a fair chunk of people) usually play a game to escape reality...Mass Effect series felt like a great way to do so since your decisions impacted so much and you were the hero without fail. Cinema portrays real life from a variety of perspectives, video games are where most people get to be something great and near invincible.

Doesn't even have to be sunshine and rainbows, but something that felt like more than a weak M. Knight twist meant to try and spin you on your head. I feel like Shepherd sacrificing his life to save everyone was suitable and totally acceptable...but it seemed as though it was a pointless notion. I don't even see how control is a paragon ending...the hero saves the day by holding the Reapers' leash? IMO, Paragon should have been "destroy" where Shepherd sacrifices his life to keep the mass relays in tact and ensure the other races can leave safely. Control seemed more like a renegade option, where Shepherd falls subject to the temptation of holding a power like that like Illusive Man.

All of these qualities are readily apparent in all of our own deities, especially in the Greek and Roman pantheons. They're immortal, their creations dictate the course of mortal lives, and they had successfully killed or subjugated every intelligent being in the galaxy every 50,000 years
for at least 1 billion years running.

Reapers were created though, and we know this from the ME3 ending. Something created had a creator and they were not accounted for in the ending. It seemed like a poorly altered deus ex machina ending imo. I would still have liked to wage war on the creators or possibly have entered some type of intergalactic effort with other galaxies to take out the creators of the Reapers. This would also be a neat opportunity to pull the crucible into combat again! Unity, again, could save the day!

 

[KevInDaBassment]

Same as with Nick G., wanted to give your info a fair shake so I'd respond to all your good points

1) Either you play REALLY fast or you may have missed out on some things. Just about everyone I know clocked in at 30ish hours for ME3, 40ish for ME2 and 30ish for ME1.

I was a bit anxious to see the ending. My GRR was VERY close to full (my paragon wasnt high enough to get both Geth and Quarians, that was why it wasn't full). See I beat ALL of ME2 in about 27 hours, which is what made me scratch my head at how short this game was. I see your numbers about match with mine proportionally since I beat ME3 in about 17 hours or so.

2) Glad the mining is gone. Wish they brought back the plant exploring from ME1 but with the Firewalker from ME2. Gameplay was changed A LOT actually if you use biotics and tech. They made both much more formidable than they were in ME2. ME3 was basically a perfect fusion of 1 and 2 in terms of combat. I'm almost disappointed I didn't choose insanity right off the bat as a Vanguard.

I found it relaxing lol. It was nice because you had a variety of resources to nab and could focus on different types depending on what you wanted to upgrade. YMMV, I thought it wasn't too bad to mine. I guess I'm used to games with some radical changes when they make new ones. I didn't expect them to re-invent the wheel, but it seemed more like a few tweaks than anything worthy of as much mention as it seems to be getting.

3) I actually felt like the character development was really well done. Consider where your crew started in ME1. A ragtag bunch of nobodies (except for you) saving the galaxy. Now everyone is in some kind of prominent position trying to do their best in uniting the galaxy. Sure there could be more intimate bits with the characters but at this point you've spent plenty of time with all off them. It doesn't seem like a step back at all.

This is something that can be up to opinion. True, we didn't really have a radical new set of characters to get familiar with, so I can cut them some slack on character development. I thought the Normandy cut-and-run was VERY uncharacteristic of your crew and made me wonder what the logic was behind that. If the destruction was promulgated by the mass relays, what did running through one solve for them? Definitely a head scratcher IMO.
[/QUOTE]

4) I loved the ending. Yes, there are glaring continuity issues and the lack of distinction between your options at the end bugged me but I loved the concept of it. The final question essentially asks you "What does it mean to be alive? What is the value of life?" and gives you the power to change galaxy's direction for possibly millions of years afterward. I chose Synthesize. It was beautiful.

I think closure and the bloated "16 endings" figure was what made most people pissed. I felt it wouldn't be hard to figure what the gamers were aiming for with the paragon/renegade concept they have used in the game, since they contrast so much to each other. If you're a paragon, you want to be the classic save-the-day war hero that saves everyone at the end of the day and never leaves a fellow soldier behind. In that regard, you'd like the triumphant "we took them out...together" speech in front of all the races at the new citadel everyone constructed, with Shepherd sporting some gray hair and fancy robes showing the honor he was bestowed for destroying the Reapers and leading the galaxy to peace and prosperity. Even a self-sacrifice ending where he's laid to rest with all his crew bearing his coffin and burying it in the new citadel would have been a moving and solemn ending with resolve. But no....they had to opt for the DLC-farm ending that George Lucas wet dreams about being able to do with all of his films. This seemed like a serious ploy to ensure more cash flow than to finish off the series for the gamers who vested time and money on the ME series...felt like fan betrayal to make a buck IMHO.

Life is the here-and-now, the race we run and give our all. It is the struggle and inevitable will to survive that we have instinctively burned into us. Many situations in real life have shown what a disregard for human life leads to and what is truly behind it. The series shows that no matter how advanced or powerful the Reapers may have been, they still could not comprehend the sanctity of life and why it must be preserved. Machines are task-oriented and short-sighted, this is even true of the Reapers. Art, creativity, and compassion are all things that organics do naturally that machines cannot understand.

To me, the reapers are hardly god-like entities. They were advanced, yes, but they were also arrogant, unreasonable and most importantly not infinite, in form or intelligence. They could be killed, they just happened to have a force more formidable that what the galaxy had been able to combat previously.

I chose synthesize because it was the galaxies chance at something new - a possible end to large scale war and the need of the Reapers themselves. My hope is that the synthesis of organic and in-organic life would lead to some higher understanding that that is not actually necessary. But, it's anyone's guess as to how that will play out long term. The other options just didn't make sense to me.

I agree, my unity theory for Reaper destruction still stands as a better plotline IMO. I don't want to just publish my plot resolution for my fan fiction fix for ME3 out here, but the thematic element used in the Wizard of Oz of "the man behind the curtain" would lend more purpose to the Reapers and a resolution with the creator of them as well. Benevolence to keep organic life from creating machines that will kill them off? Ehhh...I'm gonna have to call weaksauce on that one since that is exactly what the Reapers are doing. I realize they are sent to destroy intelligent life, but one could see this as an ongoing problem with no point or reason to keep repeating. Assimilation or making drones out of them was a really lame life preserver they were throwing to themselves to try and make that sound valid. It's like "Here, give me the gun so I can shoot you in the foot...that way, you won't be able to shoot yourself in the foot."

Synthesis seemed like giving the Reapers what they wanted all along or doing what they were going to do eventually. I could go on about how I find it illogical, but that would all be theory based on my logic. I chose destroy because that seemed like the only decision that you could return home and tell the others about without being executed as a traitor. Control seemed power-hungry or selfish, and synthesis just didn't make sense..like fusing together oil and water so that they don't really have the properties of either anymore.

I will say that I'm looking forward to seeing what Bioware has to say about the ending in May. Probably DLC. Probably planned from the beginning knowing that people would be up in arms about the ending. Probably done for the sole purpose of generating hype and cash... and I still want it. I'm a terrible consumer

Normally I would look forward to this, but Bioware has completely thrashed my loyalty. Story-vital DLCs is a weak way to make a buck. I had hopes for Bioware being the next Blizzard, but looks like they aren't knocking them off the throne after all. People can say what they want, but Blizzard would never do such a thing to their fanbase of any series. Needless to say, Dragon Age 3 will NOT be purchased by me...neither will these BS DLCs that's are essentially cash cows.

Link Removed

 

[Kwesi]

To clarify a few things:

- The Reapers are not purely machine. They are organic-synthetic hybrids. They could not exist without organic life and they couldn't exist without synthetic constructs. And it's not as if they feed on organics, their sentience is dependent on the integration of organics.

- They were not created to destroy sapient life, they were created to preserve the sapient species of each cycle (in a new form) and prevent the complete and utter annihilation of ALL organic life. Though, we don't know if long term peace between synthetics and organics is possible because, for millions of years, the Reapers haven't allowed life to develop that far.

Now for my opinion on the ending: To me, choosing the destroy option would mean that I regard synthetic life as less than organic. That wasn't true so I couldn't choose it. Control would essentially be more of the same except I would be at the reigns. Not a totally horrible option but I would much rather an opportunity for ALL life to understand each other on some level without the threat of overwhelming force crushing them should the ever have disagreements. Synthesize made sense for me but I can see why other wouldn't be able to get down with it.

I'm pretty much completely with you on the DLC side of things. It sucks and I hope it changes. That said, I just can't leave ME3 unfinished. As for whatever new IPs EA/Bioware puts out... I may just have to pass. I've done pretty much the same thing with Capcom fighters. I won't buy until 6-12 months after release when the 2nd version is out .

 

[nick g.]

That's not really an inherit fact, since we CONFIRMED two ways to kill Reapers (Thresher Maw and with enough firepower spit out by the Quarians). There were "upgrades" you could discover for the crucible such as things like "dark matter missiles" which led me to believe it was in fact a weapon. This along with other things seems out of place or pointless given how it is used in the game. The direction seemed to be the battering ram that takes down the impenetrable fortress, a completely plausible plot point. Your crew got resourceful concerning the Collectors in ME2, so we can see that galactic unity is a force to be reckoned with. Where arrogance was what made the Protheans fail, and possibly the other past races, we saw the unity of all the races proving that organic life isn't doomed to failure at all.

That's just the thing, though; there are thousands of Reapers to contend with. It took an entire fleet to bring down Sovereign in ME 1. While they're obviously not invincible, there simply isn't enough firepower in the galaxy to bring to bear in order to destroy all of the Reapers. This has always been treated as an axiomatic truth in the games.

They were, however, still subject to what their creators designed them and commanded them to do. They detested and forbade the Geth from worshiping them as gods, because it's not what they are...they are a tool meant to carry out a pre-programmed purpose. Basically, they are the genocidal and unfriendly version of Wall-E, left only to perform their task until their destruction. The peace between Geth and Quarians proves that synthetics and organics can live in peace together.

I don't remember this being the case at all. Sovereign used their reverence gladly.

It could be speculated, but this is, again, another plot hole that should not be left open. Were they destroyed by the Reapers? Why would they create, knowingly, something that would turn on them in theory? Did they become the Reapers? Why would they "create" a weapon such as the Crucible to facilitate their own destruction? I go back to my theme of unity, where all other races failed to create it in time, our unity caused it to be a success. One could even say this was the whole purpose of the Reapers to begin with...exterminating intelligent life until they can learn to unite. This would not be a fairy tale plot point or out of the realm of possibility in the ME universe.

This actually occurred to me as well. I think this is a pretty compelling and plausible idea.

With the mass relays gone, all life other than those on the Normandy are destroyed. Earth was in shambles and you had FLEETS of various alien life stranded there...that spells death pretty much any way you slice it. Since they were unable to create mass relays, starvation and war due to no resources would entail an end to all that fought to liberate the galaxy. Sorry to sound like a pansy, but screw that...they did their part and deserve life for what they all sacrificed to win. I don't recall Protheans making mass relays, the Reapers said they (more likely their creators) made them.

The Conduit from ME1 was actually a Prothean-built mass relay.

Fair enough, but I (and a fair chunk of people) usually play a game to escape reality...Mass Effect series felt like a great way to do so since your decisions impacted so much and you were the hero without fail. Cinema portrays real life from a variety of perspectives, video games are where most people get to be something great and near invincible.

It's not that I don't identify with the ideal of escapism. The journey itself serves that role for me. Everything Shepard accomplishes in the prosecution of the war is ****ing incredible. The fact is - you accomplish your goal in the end. The Reapers, one way or another, are stopped, and the galaxy's sapient species are still alive.

Doesn't even have to be sunshine and rainbows, but something that felt like more than a weak M. Knight twist meant to try and spin you on your head. I feel like Shepherd sacrificing his life to save everyone was suitable and totally acceptable...but it seemed as though it was a pointless notion. I don't even see how control is a paragon ending...the hero saves the day by holding the Reapers' leash? IMO, Paragon should have been "destroy" where Shepherd sacrifices his life to keep the mass relays in tact and ensure the other races can leave safely. Control seemed more like a renegade option, where Shepherd falls subject to the temptation of holding a power like that like Illusive Man.

The problem is that the "destroy" option would include the destruction of the Geth and EDI as well. That's not a Paragon action at all, in my mind. Synthesis and Control at least offer the benefit of not simply eliminating one form of life from the galaxy.

My ideal ending would've had Shepard controlling the Reapers, thereby forcing them to somehow self-destruct (overload the core? lol), thus saving the synthetics and then the mass relays.

Now, I do find it strange that the Control option only effects the Reapers whereas the Destroy option mysteriously targets all synthetic life. That seems like a pretty glaring plot hole.

Reapers were created though, and we know this from the ME3 ending. Something created had a creator and they were not accounted for in the ending. It seemed like a poorly altered deus ex machina ending imo. I would still have liked to wage war on the creators or possibly have entered some type of intergalactic effort with other galaxies to take out the creators of the Reapers. This would also be a neat opportunity to pull the crucible into combat again! Unity, again, could save the day!

No argument here, really.

 

[KevInDaBassment]

That's just the thing, though; there are thousands of Reapers to contend with. It took an entire fleet to bring down Sovereign in ME 1. While they're obviously not invincible, there simply isn't enough firepower in the galaxy to bring to bear in order to destroy all of the Reapers. This has always been treated as an axiomatic truth in the games.

Which is why the Crucible turns the tide! I was thinking it was a sophisticated EMP that was aimed at a frequency they were vulnerable to? At any rate, you need the fleets and you need the Crucible. Like I said earlier, the battering ram that takes down the "impenetrable fortress". This would make it seem more like an actual tool to win, and not just a Reaper off button that screws things up worse.

I don't remember this being the case at all. Sovereign used their reverence gladly.

Legion tells you of this in ME3 when you speak with him (and he alludes to it in ME2). They used them, but did not want to be deified by the Geth.

This actually occurred to me as well. I think this is a pretty compelling and plausible idea.

I'm glad you like it...it's one of the cornerstones of my fan fiction conclusion to the ME series

The Conduit from ME1 was actually a Prothean-built mass relay.

Well I was referring to the network of them, but You are probably right on that. However, even if you had Javik from the DLC, he's a general and not a scientist. Not many options for generating them lol. The codex from ME2 was where I got the information about the Mass Relays.

It's not that I don't identify with the ideal of escapism. The journey itself serves that role for me. Everything Shepard accomplishes in the prosecution of the war is ****ing incredible. The fact is - you accomplish your goal in the end. The Reapers, one way or another, are stopped, and the galaxy's sapient species are still alive.

I feel ya. I personally thought that Shepherd dying to save everyone else was the noblest of acts and why I thought destroy should have been the paragon action. Either way, w/out mass relays and limited resources, it's hard to believe all the other races would do anything but die on Earth. I'm sure this will be addressed in the DLCs, but if they are not free then it will make no difference to me.

The problem is that the "destroy" option would include the destruction of the Geth and EDI as well. That's not a Paragon action at all, in my mind. Synthesis and Control at least offer the benefit of not simply eliminating one form of life from the galaxy.

My ideal ending would've had Shepard controlling the Reapers, thereby forcing them to somehow self-destruct (overload the core? lol), thus saving the synthetics and then the mass relays.

Now, I do find it strange that the Control option only effects the Reapers whereas the Destroy option mysteriously targets all synthetic life. That seems like a pretty glaring plot hole.

I think you're definitely onto something there. Shepherd piloting the Reapers to their doom sounds fantastic, but I'd be wary of indoctrination attempts and the likelihood of that. Shepherd taking them to the far reaches of the galaxy and destroying them along with himself, or gathering the Reapers together and making the crucible go off on his command would also have seemed like a heroic ending.

Yes...the discontinuity between control and destroy was a massive plot hole IMO too. I think we're agreeing more than we're disagreeing at this point!


No argument here, really.[/QUOTE]

Should be the expansion pack...or ME4, but we all know that's too heady and large for a DLC by EA. Anyhow, thank you for the kind words on it (no sarcasm there)...it's nice to talk with other people who have genuine feedback and don't just say "It was awesome!" or "I don't like it" and don't articulate anything at all about it lol.

 

[Kwesi]

Hell, I've gotta say that I enjoy this discussion a thousand times more here than on actual gaming sites. It's nice to see folks can have differing opinions and not be dicks about it. High fives all around, seriously.

I also dug your "Unity" idea for the ending Vanilla. That's actually the second rewrite I'd be happy with. Can't say I'd dig all these other theories coming out of the woodwork.

 

[KevInDaBassment]

To clarify a few things:

- The Reapers are not purely machine. They are organic-synthetic hybrids. They could not exist without organic life and they couldn't exist without synthetic constructs. And it's not as if they feed on organics, their sentience is dependent on the integration of organics.

- They were not created to destroy sapient life, they were created to preserve the sapient species of each cycle (in a new form) and prevent the complete and utter annihilation of ALL organic life. Though, we don't know if long term peace between synthetics and organics is possible because, for millions of years, the Reapers haven't allowed life to develop that far.

Now for my opinion on the ending: To me, choosing the destroy option would mean that I regard synthetic life as less than organic. That wasn't true so I couldn't choose it. Control would essentially be more of the same except I would be at the reigns. Not a totally horrible option but I would much rather an opportunity for ALL life to understand each other on some level without the threat of overwhelming force crushing them should the ever have disagreements. Synthesize made sense for me but I can see why other wouldn't be able to get down with it.

I'm pretty much completely with you on the DLC side of things. It sucks and I hope it changes. That said, I just can't leave ME3 unfinished. As for whatever new IPs EA/Bioware puts out... I may just have to pass. I've done pretty much the same thing with Capcom fighters. I won't buy until 6-12 months after release when the 2nd version is out .

- I guess I'm sort of reasoning with my eyes or other parallels I'm seeing in the stories. The Geth and EDI have consciousness, but I've yet to see them comprehend emotion at all. You can see them display character such as loyalty and self-sacrifice (when Legion destroyed himself to upload the Reaper coding), but that's a far cry from something such as compassion or understanding art/creativity. They seem to be mostly machine and little flesh, if any at all. A science experiment gone wrong would be a great origin story for them too..."The unthinkable has been achieved...We've grafted souls to steel."

- Kinda makes me think of the Borg from Star Trek...you will be assimilated! lol. Either way you slice it, "Reaper" in that creature's name will always be the noun... i.e. - Human Reaper and never Reaper Human. It's kind of hard to swallow it as benevolence, even in a narrative of science fiction. This is of course my opinion, but the other question would be "Why not destroy AI instead of organics?" They easily dismantled the Geth and even Legion made easy work of defeating them with the Reaper code in his platform. Sure the organics create them, but they could have shortened the years between cycles and just hacked into the AIs to dismantle them from a distance or indoctrinate them.

- Yeah it kind of digs into a few different what if's and what people's understanding of synthetics are to them or what they view them as. Common sense would dictate the created is below the creator, but AI is just that...artificial intelligence. This is, again, all my theoretical understanding of the ME universe, but I tend to bring in a bit from real life as well. As a PC technician and Network Administrator, you realize how simply complex that anything electrical really is. Thought is mimicked by a very sophisticated set of instructions and algorithms, giving the illusion of interaction. There was an episode of the Twilight Zone where a man was sentenced to imprisonment on a deserted planet and only had a robot designed to look and seem like a female to keep him company. I don't want to ruin the story, but it's rather applicable to this concept.




Yes, but at the end of the day, we know what REALLY happened after the Reapers were no more....

Ponies took over and filled the world with magic, friendship, and friggin delicious pastries

 

[KevInDaBassment]

I also dug your "Unity" idea for the ending Vanilla. That's actually the second rewrite I'd be happy with. Can't say I'd dig all these other theories coming out of the woodwork.

Thank you!!! That really does mean a lot to me. Creative writing is one of my other passions (I write all the lyrics for my band, thus you can see why it isn't a stretch to like narrative) and the fact that someone enjoys that makes me smile like a crazy pink earth pony

 

[nick g.]

Hell, I've gotta say that I enjoy this discussion a thousand times more here than on actual gaming sites. It's nice to see folks can have differing opinions and not be dicks about it. High fives all around, seriously.

I also dug your "Unity" idea for the ending Vanilla. That's actually the second rewrite I'd be happy with. Can't say I'd dig all these other theories coming out of the woodwork.

+50,000

 

[Jake Saint]

Normally I would look forward to this, but Bioware has completely thrashed my loyalty. Story-vital DLCs is a weak way to make a buck. I had hopes for Bioware being the next Blizzard, but looks like they aren't knocking them off the throne after all. People can say what they want, but Blizzard would never do such a thing to their fanbase of any series. Needless to say, Dragon Age 3 will NOT be purchased by me...neither will these BS DLCs that's are essentially cash cows.

I was right with you up to this point, (sorry for almost ressurecting a dead one, but hey... )

See, BioWare, the game development company, will always be bought by me. after the travesty that was DAII, and the almost travesty that was ME3, you might be wondering why? quite simple... BioWare wasn't the one who we have to blame for this. Who owns BioWare? EA. when the HELL has EA ever shown the slightest care what gamers really want? i browse quite a bit on another gaming/social media site, and quite a few people (who provided pretty much irrefutable proof to the moderators and devs before they were allowed to post any of this info) left BioWare over the way that EA was handling the whole company. That's a good part of why the plot was so weak.

And BioWare has always hated DLC's. it's EA who loves them. Javik, the Prothean that everybody was so excited about? Cut by demands from EA. the really horrible endings? caused in part by EA's practices alienating the guy who gave us the storylines in the first two games.

So people. please. Redirect the hate a little bit. love the gaming dev company that has given us the masterpiece that is the mass effect universe, and which gave us the original dragon age and the first Knights of the Old Republic. Hate the disaster of a company that is EA, and don't utilize them wherever possible.

 

[roadkill2309]

I was right with you up to this point, (sorry for almost ressurecting a dead one, but hey... )

See, BioWare, the game development company, will always be bought by me. after the travesty that was DAII, and the almost travesty that was ME3, you might be wondering why? quite simple... BioWare wasn't the one who we have to blame for this. Who owns BioWare? EA. when the HELL has EA ever shown the slightest care what gamers really want? i browse quite a bit on another gaming/social media site, and quite a few people (who provided pretty much irrefutable proof to the moderators and devs before they were allowed to post any of this info) left BioWare over the way that EA was handling the whole company. That's a good part of why the plot was so weak.

And BioWare has always hated DLC's. it's EA who loves them. Javik, the Prothean that everybody was so excited about? Cut by demands from EA. the really horrible endings? caused in part by EA's practices alienating the guy who gave us the storylines in the first two games.

So people. please. Redirect the hate a little bit. love the gaming dev company that has given us the masterpiece that is the mass effect universe, and which gave us the original dragon age and the first Knights of the Old Republic. Hate the disaster of a company that is EA, and don't utilize them wherever possible.

I didn't mind DA 2. I think that if there'd been no DA before it, we'd likely have seen much better reaction to 2.

 

[Jake Saint]

I didn't mind DA 2. I think that if there'd been no DA before it, we'd likely have seen much better reaction to 2.

Probably true. but like i said, compared to DA1, and DA:A it was a travesty.

 

[roadkill2309]

Probably true. but like i said, compared to DA1, and DA:A it was a travesty.

I played the first DA through way more than once, but I don't feel the same urge with 2, so I ain't going to disagree with you completely.

 

[KevInDaBassment]

I was right with you up to this point, (sorry for almost ressurecting a dead one, but hey... )

See, BioWare, the game development company, will always be bought by me. after the travesty that was DAII, and the almost travesty that was ME3, you might be wondering why? quite simple... BioWare wasn't the one who we have to blame for this. Who owns BioWare? EA. when the HELL has EA ever shown the slightest care what gamers really want? i browse quite a bit on another gaming/social media site, and quite a few people (who provided pretty much irrefutable proof to the moderators and devs before they were allowed to post any of this info) left BioWare over the way that EA was handling the whole company. That's a good part of why the plot was so weak.

And BioWare has always hated DLC's. it's EA who loves them. Javik, the Prothean that everybody was so excited about? Cut by demands from EA. the really horrible endings? caused in part by EA's practices alienating the guy who gave us the storylines in the first two games.

So people. please. Redirect the hate a little bit. love the gaming dev company that has given us the masterpiece that is the mass effect universe, and which gave us the original dragon age and the first Knights of the Old Republic. Hate the disaster of a company that is EA, and don't utilize them wherever possible.

With no sarcasm, very good point and you are more than likely as right as rain on that part. I almost feel like I should change all my "bioware" comments to "EA"

When I think of other games EA has done (i.e. - the Sims being a GREAT example), they like to have new content fed out at a price. At least in the Sims you CAN design your own stuff if you are able, can't really do anything like that in many other genres with DLCs. I take your word for it that EA has mistreated Bioware, and that makes a great deal of sense...thank you for your contribution!

 

[KevInDaBassment]

I didn't mind DA 2. I think that if there'd been no DA before it, we'd likely have seen much better reaction to 2.

Yeah, having played both, I liked DA:2 a great deal. There were a few things that I actually preferred in DA:2 to DA:O but I wouldn't call it a better game because of them. I usually played a dual-wield city elf warrior in DA:O, but I liked the speaking parts and indicators of how Hawke would say them (i.e. - sarcasm, anger, peacefully) in the dialogue selector. I played as a 2-hand warrior in DA:2 and felt like it wasn't as sluggish to do 2-hand as it was in DA:O. I also liked the "attack closest enemy" button option...made playing as a 2-hand warrior MUCH more effective since you have so sweeping attacks.

I personally found Varric and Isabela pretty funny. Merrill had her moments of humor and Anders was pretty cool as well. I'd call it a tie on characters from my point of view. When Dragon Age 3 comes out, I'll be waiting a few months to see how it goes before I buy

 

[Jake Saint]

I take your word for it that EA has mistreated Bioware, and that makes a great deal of sense...thank you for your contribution!

This is my point. People see the BioWare logo, with the very understated little EA thing, and freak out about the big logo.

Personally, i'm extremely pissed at EA for how they're running my single favorite game development company into the ground.


As for taking my word for it... Just look how BioWare treats their fanbase, before, and after being bought out by EA. it's a SIGNIFICANT difference.