Mass Effect 3

[Reverend]

TheGodBen wrote:

---

In my game, Ashley did it, and she was the one that held Shep's nameplate during the "funeral" scene. I'm assuming it's because she was the LI back in ME1 while Miranda was in ME2&3, so the game picked Ash. Garrus would have made more sense, but I imagine he was too overcome with grief and had probably been drinking to numb the pain.

Was Ash in your squad in the dash for the beam? If so then I have no idea what the criteria might be. As I said, in my game, Liara was the LI and I had her in my squad during the evac scene and it was Garrus that had the scene with Joker.

It wouldn't make much sense for either of your squadmates to be in that scene since they should have been down in medbay at that point.

firehawk12 wrote:

---

Oh, I understand what the kid is supposed to represent. I just think if they were serious about having your choices "matter", then tying that ghost kid to an actual loss from the very first game would have made much more sense.

The problem with that idea is that it's not universal for all Shepards. Aside from practical concerns like it doubling the memory budget by having to record the dialogue twice, what if you're playing a full on renegade that doesn't feel at all bad about the loss of Kaiden (I know I didn't!) It also risks alienating anyone who hasn't played the previous games as they'll have no clue who that person is, nor why they should care. Plus of course this would place that particular character's death as "important" over and above anyone else who may have died since in ME2 & earlier in ME3, which again is not universal to all Shepards.

They spent a lot of time in the game establishing the recurring dream and what it means to Shepard. The kid is just a symbol. Indeed, after one of the dreams (the second one I think?) Shepard can tell Liara that she was thinking about whomever died on Virmire.

[TheGodBen]

No, Garrus and Liara were with me at the beam.

It was weird that Ash had such a prominent role in the extended cut for me, but it was kinda nice, I guess. After Shep and her had that falling out on Horizon, they never really regained their friendship, there always seemed to be some distance between them. It was kinda like they regained their friendship through death, if that makes any kind of sense. Then my Shep ended up living and it ruined the moment.

[Reverend]

^Well there you go. With Liara & Garrus in your squad, Ash is probably next in line, or indeed, first in line. I'd be willing to bet the order is pre-set and after those three it goes Tali, EDI, James then Javik.

Probably a similar syste for the name plaque scene. The LI is the default, but failing that it's whoever is still alive in a given order of priority. Of course the only way to test it is to try a save file in which Ash, Liara & Garrus are dead.

[firehawk12]

Reverend wrote:

---

The problem with that idea is that it's not universal for all Shepards. Aside from practical concerns like it doubling the memory budget by having to record the dialogue twice, what if you're playing a full on renegade that doesn't feel at all bad about the loss of Kaiden (I know I didn't!) It also risks alienating anyone who hasn't played the previous games as they'll have no clue who that person is, nor why they should care. Plus of course this would place that particular character's death as "important" over and above anyone else who may have died since in ME2 & earlier in ME3, which again is not universal to all Shepards.

They spent a lot of time in the game establishing the recurring dream and what it means to Shepard. The kid is just a symbol. Indeed, after one of the dreams (the second one I think?) Shepard can tell Liara that she was thinking about whomever died on Virmire.

If you're a Renegade who doesn't feel bad about killing Kaiden, why would you care about a kid you have absolutely no connection with? If Shepard is worried about humans dying on Earth, why wouldn't she care about deaths among her own crew?

Kaiden/Ashley work precisely because it's the first "major" choice the franchise forces you to make. You can get out of killing Wrex, but you are forced into a no-win scenario that even Kirk couldn't worm his way out of on his best day, so it's something that's universal to all people who have played the three games.

As for new players? I don't think they would care about the story anyway.

[throwback]

I believe the
* Catalyst is a serial killer
* Reapers are its trophies
* and what the AI utters can't be construed as the truth of what happen as it is clearly delusional and is entirely immersed in its self-created reality.

As for the game, I have read that most new gamers are playing the multiplayer over the single player, and that most of them are moving onto other games with a more varied multiplayer.

[Reverend]

firehawk12 wrote:

---

If you're a Renegade who doesn't feel bad about killing Kaiden, why would you care about a kid you have absolutely no connection with? If Shepard is worried about humans dying on Earth, why wouldn't she care about deaths among her own crew?

Because no version of Shepard is a total socio-path? Like I said, there a difference between letting a comrade "die with honour for the cause" and watching a civilian get murdered.

I mentioned 'Schindler's List' before and IIRC that girl in the red coat is supposedly based on a real recollection of the events. Why amongst the piles and piles of bodies did that one suddenly mean more? It didn't really, it's just something amidst all the horror that can jump out and can stay with a person forever.

Had Shepard not see and spoken to the child then he might not have made such an impression when he died. Indeed, Shepard probably wouldn't have picked him out of the crowd before his shuttle blew up.

It's not a logical thing, it's an emotional thing.

Kaiden/Ashley work precisely because it's the first "major" choice the franchise forces you to make. You can get out of killing Wrex, but you are forced into a no-win scenario that even Kirk couldn't worm his way out of on his best day, so it's something that's universal to all people who have played the three games.

No that's precisely why it wouldn't work. The dreams aren't about no-win scenarios, tactical decisions, sacrifices made in the line of duty or even personal loss. It's about guilt, it's about helplessness, it's about responsibility and fear at a very deep, almost primordial level. It's not about people that *have* died but people that *are* dying right at that moment and are still dying because Shepard can't do anything to stop it.

The boy only says two things: "everyone's dying!" & "you can't help me."

*That* is what's plaguing Shepard's subconscious. Not the words, or the messenger but the basic truth. Everyone is dying and you can't help them. I'm sure I don't have to explain the symbolism of being lost in the woods, whispers of the dead or the ever increasing number of shadowy figures.

Replacing all that with just Ash or Kaiden would utterly cheapen it and wouldn't provide anything in the way of emotional depth to Shepard's story.

As for new players? I don't think they would care about the story anyway.

No game designer worth their salt would ever approach an RPG with *that* attitude and I'm glad they didn't in this case. If they player doesn't care then *make* them care!

[Crazy Eddie]

Reverend wrote:

---

Probably a similar syste for the name plaque scene...

Which brings me to my next question.

Finished the Synthesis ending and saw Liara giving Shepard's eulogy... why is Talitha's name on the Normandy's memorial plaque? I didn't even know she was dead, let alone on Normandy's squad.

Or is was there another unmentioned Talitha on the original Normandy and we just didn't know that for some reason?

[Skywalker]

Talitha Draven is one of the names on the dog tags Shepard picks up during the Normandy Crash Site mission in ME2. That's where most of the other names came from, too.

[Reverend]

^And judging by where you find her tag, she's was probably that Ensign sat by Joker; the one killed by an explosion just after Pressly.

[Skywalker]

So I just beat the game again (only for the second time, though). My God, how can anyone ever choose anything but Destroy? I don't even care that you supposedly kill EDI and the geth that way. It's far easier to ignore that and enjoy the rest of the ending than it is to choose an ending you don't want just because of some stupid BS complication BioWare added so that people would choose their "ideal" ending.

The only other time I'll choose something different is with my pure Renegade, who'll pick Control and rule the galaxy!

[Evil Twin]

...because I didn't spend all that time turning the Geth into sentient beings and convincing them to peacefully coexist with the Quarians and rebuild Rannoch only to go and wipe them all out. Nope, not gonna happen. I go synthesis every time. It ends the cycle once and for all, life in the galaxy ascends to its next stage of evolution, and everyone lives happily ever after. I think ya'll just can't get over the glowy green eyes.

[Skywalker]

Psh, they don't get wiped out. I don't know what you're talking about. Destroy ends the cycle once and for all, life in the galaxy is free to evolve in the manner evolution actually works, and everyone lives happily ever after without being forced to look like green glowy freaks.

[Reverend]

Skywalker wrote:

---

So I just beat the game again (only for the second time, though). My God, how can anyone ever choose anything but Destroy? I don't even care that you supposedly kill EDI and the geth that way. It's far easier to ignore that and enjoy the rest of the ending than it is to choose an ending you don't want just because of some stupid BS complication BioWare added so that people would choose their "ideal" ending.

The only other time I'll choose something different is with my pure Renegade, who'll pick Control and rule the galaxy!

Although I do still favour destroy (and I agree is "drawback" is bollocks), I really wish the EC would have shown the consequences to the other synthetics. A brief scene where EDI drops dead as the wave hits and just slumps over in the co-pilot seat right next to Joker would have worked. Some shots of Geth platforms dropping dead should have been in there too.

[RyuRoots]

Skywalker wrote:

---

Psh, they don't get wiped out. I don't know what you're talking about. Destroy ends the cycle once and for all, life in the galaxy is free to evolve in the manner evolution actually works, and everyone lives happily ever after without being forced to look like green glowy freaks.

Exactly. GEE, THE LEADER OF THE MACHINES I HAVE BEEN FIGHTING FOR THE LAST 3 GAMES TRIES TO CONVINCE ME THAT KILLING HIM AND ALL HIS GOONS WON'T SOLVE MY PROBLEM EVEN WHEN THEY'RE THE DIRECT CAUSE OF THE CYCLE. Yeah, I'm sure that has a frigging ton of merit to it.

They're all bile space magic-fueled silliness, but Destroy is the least horrendous of the lot and the only one that actually accomplishes your goal.

[firehawk12]

Reverend wrote:

---

No that's precisely why it wouldn't work. The dreams aren't about no-win scenarios, tactical decisions, sacrifices made in the line of duty or even personal loss. It's about guilt, it's about helplessness, it's about responsibility and fear at a very deep, almost primordial level. It's not about people that *have* died but people that *are* dying right at that moment and are still dying because Shepard can't do anything to stop it.

The boy only says two things: "everyone's dying!" & "you can't help me."

*That* is what's plaguing Shepard's subconscious. Not the words, or the messenger but the basic truth. Everyone is dying and you can't help them. I'm sure I don't have to explain the symbolism of being lost in the woods, whispers of the dead or the ever increasing number of shadowy figures.

You could bring up Schlinder's List, but they had kids that were murdered in the Star Wars prequel as well and in that movie it was just laughable.

Maybe the idea would have been good if human beings were human beings in the universe, but outside of watching NPCs standing around on the Citadel, there's no real connection that the player to these newly introduced characters.

When the game tells you that millions of humans are being harvested by the Reapers everyday and you're off having coffee with Liara at the cafe or shooting beer cans with Garrus, there's already a disconnect. Forcing this new narrative element onto the player in the third game - especially when she has already seen two human colonies (Eden Prime and Horizon) wiped out and basically brushed it off, it just seems awkwardly written at best.

How we react to the story is subjective, of course, but in two of the three origin stories that you can pick, Shepard has had a horrible life. In my version, she survived a bunch of slavers wiping out her friends and family - you'd think that would be more traumatic to her than seeing some random kid wiped out, yes?

But sure, I understand that they're not going to go back and actually flesh out those origin stories. She's not going to have nightmares about her dead family because only a certain number of people will have picked that origin story. They were meant to just give stat boosts to your character in ME1 (Spacer = Paragon, Earthborne = Renegade, Colonist = both), but it's just an example of how they just missed all these small things that they allow the player to choose throughout three games.