RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,718
Posts: 5,432,264
Members: 24,835
Currently online: 614
Newest member: SB118_T'Mar

TrekToday headlines

Episode Four of The Red Shirt Diaries
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Star Trek: The Compendium Review
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Orci Drops Rangers Project
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Retro Review: Image in the Sand
By: Michelle on Sep 20

Star Trek: Shadows Of Tyranny Casting Call
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

USS Vengeance And More Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

Trek 3 To Being Shooting Next Year
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

Trek Messenger Bag
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

Star Trek Live In Concert In Australia
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

IDW Publishing December Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Sep 17


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Gaming

Gaming Non-Star Trek Gaming

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 29 2012, 10:21 PM   #1651
ATimson
Rear Admiral
 
ATimson's Avatar
 
Location: Andrew Timson
Re: Mass Effect 3

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
Thats good seeing as the full trilogy set is about $60 bucks which is $20 per game I'd really be saving $5 or more depending on how much I would have gotten for the trade in of 2 and 3.
They're down to $20 new, so... not a whole lot!
__________________
Andrew Timson
===============
"Niceness is the greatest human flaw, except for all the others." - Brendan Moody

"...don't mistake a few fans bitching on the Internet for any kind of trend." - Keith R.A. DeCandido
ATimson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 03:57 PM   #1652
Demiurge
Vice Admiral
 
Location: with Kitty and Roo!
Re: Mass Effect 3

Yeah, looks like pushing the trilogy without the DLC content is a way to get the DLC content sold. Odd choice.

I'm holding out hope they release a 4th option as a DLC which is a better ending. I probably shouldn't, but the moral implications were pretty horrific in all 3.

Killing Edi and the newly innocent and sentient Geth were simply not an option for me. I REALLY wanted to destroy the Reapers, but I wasn't willing to commit genocide on a race that had already been victimized to do so.

Control you were fighting against the entire time. I have a hard time thinking that Shepard would be able to consistently control million year old intellects that were gestalts of entire races. Eventually he either becomes corrupt or is overwhelmed.

Synthesis itself was icky - making that choice for yourself is OK, but forcing it on every organic in the galaxy? That in of itself would cause chaos as people were changed into cybernetic beings against their will. Talk about a violation of civil rights and a prime breeding ground for chaos and terrorism. Those end scenes were just fantasy.

Overall didn't case for the Deus Ex Machinae ending, especially embodied in a god child that had no foreshadowing whatsoever.

And why exactly would Shepard BELIEVE him when he presented the choices? This is the being that is responsible for millions of years of galactic holocausts in the first place!

Great series. Shitty ending.

There's all sorts of potential for further shit hitting the fan after this ending. The problem being you have 3 endings, so you have to chose an 'official' choice after this - and that might invalidate your character's story. Each of the 3 has great possibilities - but may not be the choice you made, so any story divergence past this point is extremely problematic.
Demiurge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 04:11 PM   #1653
Reverend
Rear Admiral
 
Reverend's Avatar
 
Location: UK
Re: Mass Effect 3

^Welcome to 6 month ago.


In other news, there's supposed to be a patch coming this Thursday. Purportedly the largest one yet and it will apparantly include something to support some unspecified future DLC(s). Not sure what the rest of the patch will entail. I'm pretty sure they've already fixed most of the broken quests and I'm not exactly holding out hope for them to fix the journal at this point.
Reverend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 04:16 PM   #1654
Demiurge
Vice Admiral
 
Location: with Kitty and Roo!
Re: Mass Effect 3

One possible thought for 2 of the 3 endings that would make the back story make a little more sense - the Reapers are actually storage units for the harvested races. Actually, with a little work, this is OK with all 3.

All of them clearly store the genetic material of the harvested races. They even maintain their intellects in the gestalt form. Indeed, Harbinger talks about Shepard's resistance being 'wasting lives.'

What if the entire plan was to keep the genetic material and diversity of life viable until the endless cycle of organic/synthetic war could be ended.

The 'death' of the reapers could bring forth hundreds if not thousands of new races. And that would make a hell of a story. The reapers could become breeders, creches for the dissemination of the new races.

Indeed, both the control and synthesis options could include these as well. Under control Shepard could realize the purpose of the Reapers, and after helping rebuild the shattered civilizations could trigger the reseeding. Then create a new body for himself, restoring his mortality.

And the synthesis option this could happen as well. You could go with the synthesis option, which as we've seen isn't really that big a deal, as Shepard himself is part synthetic since ME2 with very little change in him.

Or you could open the way that the synthetic element allows for even larger scale indoctrination by Leviathan, who understand the technology, and were setting this all up to recover their own faded dominion over the galaxy.

Anyway, positing thoughts on how the story could continue.
Demiurge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 05:43 PM   #1655
Angel4576
Rear Admiral
 
Angel4576's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Re: Mass Effect 3

The end to ME3 was just a clusterfuck.

The Reaper cycle effectively came down to "Synthetic Reapers harvest organic species in order to save them from being wiped out by Synthetics in the future".....erm, right.

The end didn't really sit too well with me - why on earth would you be taking advice from the enemy CinC?

Plus, whichever way you went you were left with the feeling that you'd only 'won' because the enemy let you win.

Control - the choice itself comes just moments after you'd argued against TIM and his desire to control the Reapers. Minutes later though, it's not a problem?

Synthesis - No chance. In a moment you're signing up to changing all organic life in the galaxy at a cellular level without anyone's consent.

Destroy - the best of a bad bunch. Although technically a win, it comes at the cost of carrying out genocide against the Geth.

Refuse - well, refuse is just Bioware showing us the middle finger for daring to not like the original endings.

Plus the 'breath' scene at the end of 'Destroy+' really pissed me off. FFS, it's the end of Shepard's story - you've said countless times that he/she won't be in the next game -why would you possibly end that story with a scene like that?! Either kill the character, or don't, but don't leave us in limbo! According to Chris Priestly we're supposed to head canon our own ending. Well, after 5 years, and hundreds of hours playing the character, thanks for letting me pay £40 for the privilege of imagining my own ending.....

Suffice to say, I was not impressed.......
__________________
I am a Ranger. We walk in the dark places no others will enter. We stand on the bridge and no one may pass. We live for the One, we die for the One.
Angel4576 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 06:00 PM   #1656
Demiurge
Vice Admiral
 
Location: with Kitty and Roo!
Re: Mass Effect 3

Angel4576 wrote: View Post
The end to ME3 was just a clusterfuck.

The Reaper cycle effectively came down to "Synthetic Reapers harvest organic species in order to save them from being wiped out by Synthetics in the future".....erm, right.

The end didn't really sit too well with me - why on earth would you be taking advice from the enemy CinC?
Agree here absolutely. Why would you trust him at all?

Part of the theory was that the galaxy united for the first time to stand against the Reapers - why exactly would that have anything to do with the Intellect/Catalyst changing its mind that the cycle was broken?

It changes nothing about its purpose that I can see.

Instead, it really reminds me more of Neo meeting the Architect in Matrix 2 - its just another level of control.

The most logical response - he's lying.

Plus, whichever way you went you were left with the feeling that you'd only 'won' because the enemy let you win.
Can't say I had that take away - I felt more like I got there, there was nothing they could do to stop me at that point, so it tried to shape my choices based on its POV.

Control - the choice itself comes just moments after you'd argued against TIM and his desire to control the Reapers. Minutes later though, it's not a problem?
Well, that's the 'evil' choice IMO. I have a hard time justifying that one, especially as you've been fighting against that premise since the beginning, and what's more, the developers forced you into it.

If the Illusive Man was right, and Shepard was willing to go along with that, why not just work with him from the beginning? Even if he is indoctrinated - you just betray him at the last second, and in that case its justified IMO.

And again, I have to wonder if the Reapers can be controlled. They don't explain the mechanism where that works worth a damn, and I'd need far better assurances that they wouldn't break free next Tuesday and go about their business again.

Synthesis - No chance. In a moment you're signing up to changing all organic life in the galaxy at a cellular level without anyone's consent.
I agree that's morally repugnant, but I went with this one as the best of several bad option. Changing organic life at the cellular level is bad. Committing genocide against the Geth and killing EDI IMO is worse.

Destroy - the best of a bad bunch. Although technically a win, it comes at the cost of carrying out genocide against the Geth.
Couldn't do it. I see them as sentient, and therefore alive, and I couldn't kill EDI. This was the worst option to me. The mass murderer option. The Reapers deserve to die. There's an entire chapter devoted to why the Geth don't - and in my play through Legion sacrificed himself to bring them to full sentience. Now I have to murder them to get rid of the Reapers? Fuck that's low.

Refuse - well, refuse is just Bioware showing us the middle finger for daring to not like the original endings.
My take as well.

Plus the 'breath' scene at the end of 'Destroy+' really pissed me off. FFS, it's the end of Shepard's story - you've said countless times that he/she won't be in the next game -why would you possibly end that story with a scene like that?! Either kill the character, or don't, but don't leave us in limbo! According to Chris Priestly we're supposed to head canon our own ending. Well, after 5 years, and hundreds of hours playing the character, thanks for letting me pay £40 for the privilege of imagining my own ending.....

Suffice to say, I was not impressed.......
Agreed.

I think the Reapers as the receptacles of life for the next cycle is an interesting thought - it actually makes the reason the universe is the way it is not completely friggin' insane as the current 'explanation.' There's a lot of hints toward that, I'm sure I'm not the only one that's thought of that.

And would make for an interesting play ground for the next series of games.
Demiurge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 06:02 PM   #1657
6079SmithW
Vice Admiral
 
6079SmithW's Avatar
 
Re: Mass Effect 3

Angel4576 wrote: View Post
Control - the choice itself comes just moments after you'd argued against TIM and his desire to control the Reapers. Minutes later though, it's not a problem?
In the original ending control seemd like the most "stable" choice as it didn't kill EDI or the Geth and didn't overtly destroy the relays. Besides, Reaper Shep could just fix them. In all it left the galaxy closest to status quo.

Synthesis - No chance. In a moment you're signing up to changing all organic life in the galaxy at a cellular level without anyone's consent.
Yeah, this one was obviously supposed to be the utopia/happy ending and is clearly favored by bioware. Its got lots of problems and basically turns everyone into the borg. I admit I picked it on my second play through but I plan to correct that mistake later.

Destroy - the best of a bad bunch. Although technically a win, it comes at the cost of carrying out genocide against the Geth.
Agreed. It is the best one and was a no brainer for my renegade Shep. The Geth and EDI are acceptable losses. I'll be choosing this one to correct my earlier error.

Refuse - well, refuse is just Bioware showing us the middle finger for daring to not like the original endings.
I think this is the worst choice. So Shep is just going to stand there and watch the galaxy get reaped when they have their hands on a reaper off gun? Seriously? I think its worse than synthesis. At least you stop the reapers with synthesis.
__________________
Sir Isaac Newton is the deadliest son-of-a-bitch in space.
6079SmithW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 06:12 PM   #1658
Angel4576
Rear Admiral
 
Angel4576's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Re: Mass Effect 3

Demiurge wrote: View Post
Angel4576 wrote: View Post
Plus, whichever way you went you were left with the feeling that you'd only 'won' because the enemy let you win.
Can't say I had that take away - I felt more like I got there, there was nothing they could do to stop me at that point, so it tried to shape my choices based on its POV.
You're forgetting the space elevator. The Catalyst could very easily have left you to die with Anderson. Instead, he sends down his 'elevator' and brings you up to him for a chat. At that point, had the Catalyst not bothered then the Crucible was fucked, and Shepard would have died alongside Anderson. Beyond that the rest of the allied forces would have been completely dependent on a conventional victory, which just wouldn't happen, as evidenced by the refuse ending.

No matter which ending you pick, you're completely dependent on the Catalyst even entering a dialogue with you, ergo, you win because he lets you win.


And again, I have to wonder if the Reapers can be controlled. They don't explain the mechanism where that works worth a damn, and I'd need far better assurances that they wouldn't break free next Tuesday and go about their business again.
Plus, if you're playing renegade, then you've effectively just been handed the keys to conquering the galaxy yourself.


I agree that's morally repugnant, but I went with this one as the best of several bad option. Changing organic life at the cellular level is bad. Committing genocide against the Geth and killing EDI IMO is worse.
In the end, I weighed the fate of one species, against the fate of all. Sorry Legion, you lost!

Couldn't do it. I see them as sentient, and therefore alive, and I couldn't kill EDI. This was the worst option to me. The mass murderer option. The Reapers deserve to die. There's an entire chapter devoted to why the Geth don't - and in my play through Legion sacrificed himself to bring them to full sentience. Now I have to murder them to get rid of the Reapers? Fuck that's low.
I do agree, to have to kill off the Geth, especially after you'd just freed them and given the peace with the Quarians, was hard to take - but as per above, I saw it as the lesser of two evils (just).


I think the Reapers as the receptacles of life for the next cycle is an interesting thought - it actually makes the reason the universe is the way it is not completely friggin' insane as the current 'explanation.' There's a lot of hints toward that, I'm sure I'm not the only one that's thought of that.

And would make for an interesting play ground for the next series of games.
I seriously have no idea how they're going to go about continuing a series beyond ME3. They would have to canonize one of the four possible endings. It's highly unlikely to be refuse, but the other three - well each has problems.
__________________
I am a Ranger. We walk in the dark places no others will enter. We stand on the bridge and no one may pass. We live for the One, we die for the One.
Angel4576 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 06:49 PM   #1659
Demiurge
Vice Admiral
 
Location: with Kitty and Roo!
Re: Mass Effect 3

Angel4576 wrote: View Post
You're forgetting the space elevator. The Catalyst could very easily have left you to die with Anderson. Instead, he sends down his 'elevator' and brings you up to him for a chat. At that point, had the Catalyst not bothered then the Crucible was fucked, and Shepard would have died alongside Anderson. Beyond that the rest of the allied forces would have been completely dependent on a conventional victory, which just wouldn't happen, as evidenced by the refuse ending.

No matter which ending you pick, you're completely dependent on the Catalyst even entering a dialogue with you, ergo, you win because he lets you win.
Again, disagree.

The space elevator was the point of entry chosen by Andersen. It was how they were sending bodies up to the Citadel to render the new human Reaper. Remember your point of entry in the processing area with the bodies all around you?

That was the Reapers being true to their programming. Their initial attempts to create a human Reaper were thwarted in ME2 with the destruction of the Collector base, and they were still attempting that at this late stage. Indeed, its why they were on Earth in the first place.

And if all that's true, there's a very distinct reason that the Reapers would still feel the need for processing the Earth, even at this point when they were actually loosing Reapers to armed resistance.

They refused to see it as a war, and only as a harvest -and that Shepard was actually destroying life by fighting them.

As far as the Catalyst - there seemed to be some point that unifying the races allowed Shepard access, which had never happened before.

That was the part I was criticizing - not sure WHY that changes things.

Of course, this is all writer fiat - I'd much rather have crashed the Normandy through the beam and sent out my squad to fight our way in. Makes just as much sense - and is far more in character for Shepard.

Plus, if you're playing renegade, then you've effectively just been handed the keys to conquering the galaxy yourself.
Agreed there.

In the end, I weighed the fate of one species, against the fate of all. Sorry Legion, you lost!
Well, personal ethics then - I couldn't see the synthesis, as invasive and violating as it was, the same as genocide. Either choice clearly sucks though.

I do agree, to have to kill off the Geth, especially after you'd just freed them and given the peace with the Quarians, was hard to take - but as per above, I saw it as the lesser of two evils (just).
Yep.


I seriously have no idea how they're going to go about continuing a series beyond ME3. They would have to canonize one of the four possible endings. It's highly unlikely to be refuse, but the other three - well each has problems.
Agreed. There's lots of ways you could try, but the big problem is the multiple endings mean you come from the galaxy in a vastly different state.

One way would be to 'meta' it - the Mass Relays being broken/frakked up could have all sorts of consequences. One interesting one would be an alternate reality - all three endings happen, but different places in the Mass Relay circuit have different endings in place. It would make for a series of cool what ifs. But I think there's be a lot of blow back on that one for being too Star Trek, as much fun as exploring all the different outcomes would be in one setting.

That's why I thought about the Reaper Rebirth idea - all of the three endings work there, and it can dramatically alter the universe. You get past the Reaper threat, and have a whole new series of questions. Hell, remember how warlike the Protheans were? Imagine them and hundreds of other species popping up. LOL.

It's going to be hard to come up with a way that legitimizes the choice and still makes for a game setting that all three endings could provide. The control by itself is a bitch - what possible threats could arise that the Reapers themselves couldn't deal with under a benevolent God-Shepard?

I think you need to get rid of the Reapers to continue the story no matter which choice you make.
Demiurge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 07:06 PM   #1660
Angel4576
Rear Admiral
 
Angel4576's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Re: Mass Effect 3

Demiurge wrote: View Post
Again, disagree.

The space elevator was the point of entry chosen by Andersen. It was how they were sending bodies up to the Citadel to render the new human Reaper. Remember your point of entry in the processing area with the bodies all around you?

That was the Reapers being true to their programming. Their initial attempts to create a human Reaper were thwarted in ME2 with the destruction of the Collector base, and they were still attempting that at this late stage. Indeed, its why they were on Earth in the first place.

And if all that's true, there's a very distinct reason that the Reapers would still feel the need for processing the Earth, even at this point when they were actually loosing Reapers to armed resistance.

They refused to see it as a war, and only as a harvest -and that Shepard was actually destroying life by fighting them.

As far as the Catalyst - there seemed to be some point that unifying the races allowed Shepard access, which had never happened before.

That was the part I was criticizing - not sure WHY that changes things.

Of course, this is all writer fiat - I'd much rather have crashed the Normandy through the beam and sent out my squad to fight our way in. Makes just as much sense - and is far more in character for Shepard.
It's me, I didn't explain that very well - it's the elevator that takes you up to the catalyst, just after Anderson dies. Hackett contacts you to let you know that the Crucible has docked but isn't working, and then you try to get to a control panel but collapse. At that point, the Catalyst could literally just let you die.

Tbh the whole Catalyst thing pisses me off - having the main antagonist introduced as a deux ex machina in the last 10 minutes, never my idea of a good ending.

Well, personal ethics then - I couldn't see the synthesis, as invasive and violating as it was, the same as genocide. Either choice clearly sucks though.
Yup. We get that there are sometimes hard decisions, especially in war, but c'mon, this just doesn't sit right.


Agreed. There's lots of ways you could try, but the big problem is the multiple endings mean you come from the galaxy in a vastly different state.

One way would be to 'meta' it - the Mass Relays being broken/frakked up could have all sorts of consequences. One interesting one would be an alternate reality - all three endings happen, but different places in the Mass Relay circuit have different endings in place. It would make for a series of cool what ifs. But I think there's be a lot of blow back on that one for being too Star Trek, as much fun as exploring all the different outcomes would be in one setting.

That's why I thought about the Reaper Rebirth idea - all of the three endings work there, and it can dramatically alter the universe. You get past the Reaper threat, and have a whole new series of questions. Hell, remember how warlike the Protheans were? Imagine them and hundreds of other species popping up. LOL.

It's going to be hard to come up with a way that legitimizes the choice and still makes for a game setting that all three endings could provide. The control by itself is a bitch - what possible threats could arise that the Reapers themselves couldn't deal with under a benevolent God-Shepard?

I think you need to get rid of the Reapers to continue the story no matter which choice you make.
I can only really see them going in three directions with this;

1) Prequal - if only to give them more time to ponder what to do with the galaxy post ME3.

2) Far future - Looking at the 3 endings historically through the prism of time, will probably give them the best chance of trying to run with a scenario where parts of all 3 endings play a part.

3) Canonize one ending over the other two

Personally, I think it'll be #3. They'll canonize 'destroy'. In terms of narrative it would have the least impact and give them the best platform to move forward in terms of keeping what they had in ME1-ME3. They'd lose the Geth, and they'd lose EDI, but beyond that, not much difference.
__________________
I am a Ranger. We walk in the dark places no others will enter. We stand on the bridge and no one may pass. We live for the One, we die for the One.
Angel4576 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 07:49 PM   #1661
Demiurge
Vice Admiral
 
Location: with Kitty and Roo!
Re: Mass Effect 3

Angel4576 wrote: View Post

It's me, I didn't explain that very well - it's the elevator that takes you up to the catalyst, just after Anderson dies. Hackett contacts you to let you know that the Crucible has docked but isn't working, and then you try to get to a control panel but collapse. At that point, the Catalyst could literally just let you die.

Tbh the whole Catalyst thing pisses me off - having the main antagonist introduced as a deux ex machina in the last 10 minutes, never my idea of a good ending.
Ah, understood. Yes, I see what you are getting at. My take is a bit different, though I can see how you can look at it a different way.

The Crucible unlocked the Catalyst, basically inserting code into it that allowed the choices before you.

Getting the Crucible to the Citadel was what caused the elevator to come down.

Prior to that, the Intellect/Catalyst was there, but wasn't going to let you in.


There's still all sorts of flaws in that construct though - why the Prothean/Ancient Race crucible required the Leviathan's VI/Intellect/Catalyst in the first place.

Of course, while the Catalyst was the collective consciousness of the Reapers, it wasn't in direct control of them (at least that is my take). Harbinger said they were all distinct intellects in ME2.

Lots of unnecessarily compicated hookum for what could have been a straightforward situation.

I can only really see them going in three directions with this;

1) Prequal - if only to give them more time to ponder what to do with the galaxy post ME3.

2) Far future - Looking at the 3 endings historically through the prism of time, will probably give them the best chance of trying to run with a scenario where parts of all 3 endings play a part.

3) Canonize one ending over the other two

Personally, I think it'll be #3. They'll canonize 'destroy'. In terms of narrative it would have the least impact and give them the best platform to move forward in terms of keeping what they had in ME1-ME3. They'd lose the Geth, and they'd lose EDI, but beyond that, not much difference.
I remember seeing the overwhelming majority of people chose destroy, and it does leave the setting mostly intact.

I still think you need the Reapers to be gone (at least initially - they always make a come back) in the post setting.

If it were me, I'd do more with the reason behind the Reapers because right now it's pretty bogus - other characters investigating the Reaper legacy and how it interacts with the ongoing events. You could do lots with that, and continue to build the story to a more satisfying conclusion.
Demiurge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 07:53 PM   #1662
mclea1mm
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: United States
View mclea1mm's Twitter Profile
Re: Mass Effect 3

Angel4576 wrote:
I can only really see them going in three directions with this
I could see a 4th direction, let's call it the Orson Scott Card approach: Tell a new story within the same timeframe of one you've already told.

For example, following new characters in a new story while Shepard & company are tracking down Saren (so, ME1 time frame). Or to use an in-game example, we know that James Vega had a tough mission of his own during the events of ME2. And of course, there's that 2-year gap after ME1 (though the comics have filled that in a bit).

I actually like this idea, as it suggests there may have been many such stories occurring parallel to Shepard's that are just as important and striking. You could throw in some character cameos from the main trilogy to seal the deal

On preview, this might also fit well with Demiurge's suggestion.
mclea1mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 08:26 PM   #1663
PsychoPere
Vice Admiral
 
PsychoPere's Avatar
 
Re: Mass Effect 3

That's likely the story direction they will take (i.e., concurrent with the trilogy or pre-trilogy), and it's the one Casey Hudson mused about before ME3 even shipped.

It definitely won't be Vega's story, though, because that's being told in the Paragon Lost anime film.
PsychoPere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 09:11 PM   #1664
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: Mass Effect 3

Angel4576 wrote: View Post
Personally, I think it'll be #3. They'll canonize 'destroy'. In terms of narrative it would have the least impact and give them the best platform to move forward in terms of keeping what they had in ME1-ME3. They'd lose the Geth, and they'd lose EDI, but beyond that, not much difference.
Of course they could also pull a minor recont. that keeps the Geth and EDI in play if they want to.
Hartzilla2007 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 10:04 PM   #1665
Demiurge
Vice Admiral
 
Location: with Kitty and Roo!
Re: Mass Effect 3

Hmmm... this is interesting.

The Voices of the Catalyst
http://www.ign.com/wikis/mass-effect-3/Easter_Eggs

At the ending of the game when Shepard speaks with the Catalyst you may notice the unusual voice of the Catalyst. The Catalyst actually has three voice actors and this is easier to notice if you listen with headphones. In the left speaker the Catalyst has the voice of a Jennifer Hale (Female Shepard), and in the right speaker you can hear the voice of Mark Meer (Male Shepard). The child voice is played in both.
So Catalyst is speaking to you in a weird voice that includes your own voice fed back to you?

That very much sounds like a clue to it messing with your head.
Demiurge is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
auto dialogue, bioware, mass effect, mass effect 2, mass effect 3

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:05 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.