HugeNavi


























  1. I have a million problems with ME3. The eavesdropping quests. Kai Leng. The Citadel Coup. Thane jumping on a sword, while Shepard and crew watch from 3 feet away. The MP maps in the SP. "We fight or we die". "Krogan air drop". The Rachni Queen. The sidelining of the ME2 cast. Legion's unreasonable, nonsensical, illogical death. Repetition of sacrifices for cheap drama, that often falls flat. Streamlining of dialogue options. The implementation of the Reapers on the Galaxy Map. The Reapers being side characters in their own game. Cerberus being the primary villain. The entirety of Priority: Earth being an underwhelming, to say the least, mission. Reaper motives that make absolutely no fucking sense, and actually contradict themselves. The Reapers completely forgetting about the Citadel, until the last 30 minutes of the game, which should have already been a game over. The turret segment in Rannoch, which literally does nothing. The nightmares. The kid. No holstering. Infinitely respawning enemies, unless you rush past spawn points. Enemy wave mechanics. The quest log system. The waypoint system.

  2. That's cool that you have that opinion, it's interesting to me since it's in such strong opposition to how I feel. Andromeda has nothing on 3, and I try my best to forget that it exists at all.

  3. I find Andromeda to be an indifferent spinoff, whereas ME3 does some irreparable damage to the franchise. Had ME3 not done what it did, there wouldn't even be a need for it. It's ME3 that actively forced Bioware Montreal's hand. As bad as it was, it doesn't really matter to the overall franchise.

  4. Depends on the protagonist and crew. Trilogy? Yes. Andromeda or new? Not interested.

  5. Actually, ME3 did manage to drive me into a depression. But I am glad it works for you, dude.

  6. You are missing the personality aspect of this. Windows is not alive and does not have a personality, so we don’t even know if something like that could be backed up

  7. We literally see entire hallways full of rows of mainframes filled with Geth runtimes, in ME2. If it can't be backed up, that means that not even Legion can host himself. It can't work that way. I have yet to encounter anything that can't be backed up, unless we are talking about pure drive capacity. We've worked through these problems. Humans have. In 2022. Fuck it, we've worked through these issues since 2010, at least. Virtual drives, multiserver hosting, network image drives, local backups, you name it. You can back up an AI. Nothing indicates that Legion simply couldn't copy itself. I have no reason to even think it, I am given no reason to believe it, and then he just dies. What am I supposed to make of it?

  8. Sci-fi logic isn't magic. Sci-fi is supposed to, at least, adhere to some real world logic, and expand on it, based on application of that knowledge, and supposing an extrapolation. I have no reason to assume that future AI coding works worse than human coding of the early 21st century.

  9. The biggest mistake, was forcing Bioware to release this game, in 18 months, from the moment they hit full production. ME3 should have been delayed to, at least, 2014, if not 2015, and be made in Unreal 4. Bioware staff would have figured out the rest.

  10. If you're not having fun, there's no need to push yourself further. Try something else.

  11. While true, romancing non-crew members presents two problems; one is that it takes away space, resources, and time from other crew members, resulting in a watered down experience, that goes both ways, and secondly, maybe you just don't care for people that aren't in your squad. I never cared for Campbell, Westmorland, Traynor, Allers, Cortez, or Kelly. Perhaps I am the exception, but if you're not part of the team, I don't care about you.

  12. If you have to call it Gigachad, then it isn't Gigachad.

  13. I understand what you're saying, but some things are more appealing than others, objectively. You can make something that is bad, but successful. You can make something good that doesn't appeal to many, which is a failure, when talking about a product that is meant to be mass consumed, which is the AAA segment. You can also make something that is good, with mass appeal. Some things are arguably more appealing to the masses, while also being good. Either you strike a balance, or you make something bad, that sells well, or something good that doesn't sell.

  14. Too many to easily make a choice. It'd be easier to say who I didn't like.

  15. That's a trick question. I invoke the right to remain silent.

  16. Realistic alternatives? Well, considering how little we know about the game right now, literally anybody that's capible of using a gun is most likely a realistic alternative

  17. I don't think that you can sell the next game, without giving players someone that they want to play as. Anyone that can use a gun, isn't a pitch. There's a million games out there, with guys that use guns. Not all of them are profitable, not all of them can carry franchises. We're going to need to give players something better. If possible, something that they also haven't rejected in the past. Terminator: Dark Fate 2 is going to be a much harder sell, than Terminator: Dark Fate was, for example. Not impossible, but definitely not easy. And I'd argue that Bioware could use something easy.

  18. I'm sorry, I didn't realize you expected me to make up an OC to try and base my argument around

  19. I don't expect anyone to. It's going to be very difficult for any character to step into Shepard's spot. You need to make a viable alternative to that, which is no easy task. And like I said, Bioware could use something easy. They're not exactly at the best of track records, for anyone to confidently expect them to deliver, and that will influence the next ME's both critical and market performance.

  20. They also got the guy who made morbius! They hand picked the worst of the worst of all guys they could find to make a real shipwreck, i'll nickname it the suicide mission cause it looks like they're prepping for a mission whose goal is to achieve cinematic suicide

  21. Yes, that's Avi Arad. But Avi Arad has done some really good things in the past. And it's very likely that he is past his prime, and won't be doing good stuff anymore. Which is why I said that, until proven otherwise, I am expecting to see the CW version of Mass Effect. Not to fault anyone, but who honestly expects it to be anything better than the Resident Evil live action Netflix show? Or the Halo show? Not me.

  22. To be fair it's got a lot more chance to be like the other resident evil live action movie series (the thing with the mary sue) than the netflix adaptation

  23. You mean the Paul Anderson movies, with Mila Jovovic, where she played Alice? I'd take it. Those moves were bad, but in a fun kind of way. But I don't really expect it to be like that.

  24. Either or, not both. My interest in the next game is limited, but Bioware should limit their story to one, or the other. It's going to be hard enough to invigorate the franchise, they should try to sabotage themselves as little as possible.

  25. Then they shouldn't make more Mass effect games.

  26. I agree. But I don't think they have that option.

  27. Foremost, love the name. Second, yeah, Garrus and Wrex will absolutely drive up sales. They are franchise favourites. However, again, the dynamics of those two with a new protagonist will not be the same. The relationships will not be the same and cannot be the same. As it should. It will feel underwhelming. Maybe the writers can make it so that they buddy up to the new protagonist, even more than Shepard, but that's not going to sit well with a lot of people. It's going to be difficult to justify this new character being even better friends with Wrex and Garrus, in less than a game.

  28. No argument here, and devs know it too which is probs why we're (for the most part) going back to Milky Way

  29. We both know the story is going to suffer, because Mike Gamble has been quoted that the next ME will connect the Milky Way with Andromeda. I wish they'd drop it, and commit to either one, or the other.

  30. Well, maybe they'll muster up something good out of Andromeda thanks to this though? And it's not like a MAJOR event like that should be just ignored/handwaved within the universe anyway. I mean, in real life if we had ships going to Mars with first colonists right now you know damn well most of the planet would be talking/interested in what eventually happened with them

  31. Sure. Only in 3 games, 4 books and dozens of comic books, nobody even mentions it. I don't really care for the justification, and the result isn't worth it. I don't care if the next game connects the two, it's not what I want to see in the next game. I can only see it being detrimental, if Bioware needs to go out of their way to accommodate it. If they want to commit to it, I'd rather they went on and did an Andromeda 2. Andromeda's problem wasn't that it wasn't connected enough to the Milky Way. It's that it wasn't a good game.

  32. The protheans locked them out after they already left.

  33. So why don't they use their overwhelming strength and numbers to take the Citadel, the moment they reach the Milky Way and regain that advantage?

  34. The in-universe explanation could just be pure hubris and arrogance. They wanna play with their prey rather than be done with it. Give them false hope of maybe being able to win this war. They also have to make sure that they get the entire advanced population, which means they have to play a game of manipulation so that every group of technologically advanced meatbags has a traitor among them.

  35. Do you like hubris and arrogance, as an explanation? I find it difficult to accept that a super race of calculating robot death squids, would exhibit such organic traits, that are counterintuitive to their goal and programming. It is a very lazy way out, for a threat that has not shown such traits in all the previous cycles, up to this one. And this cycle has rattled the Reapers enough to result to personally addressing organics and shit talking to them, terribly, like they're on an XBOX live Modern Warfare lobby. I really dislike it as an explanation, and don't think it is justifiable, with everything we've seen over the past two games.

  36. Technically Andromeda takes place about six centuries later, but it’s completely tangential to ME3 because the Andromeda Initiative launched during ME2. So there’s no lore whatsoever about the post-ME3 Milky Way, at least to my knowledge.

  37. We are told that all communications attempts with the Milky Way have failed, and the Initiative comes to the conclusion that something catastrophic must have happened there. We later find a recording from Liara to Alec Ryder about how the Reapers have come, but she believes they can destroy them with the Crucible. Apparently, Liara doesn't care to inform Alec for anything, after that.

  38. There's still not a single line of good dialogue, in the entire game. So, for me, it's the same as it was before.

  39. But the way it is described by Drew is somehow you trick the Reapers into falling for a trap that needs the entire galaxy to coordinate with instead of funding a one thing that disables them.

  40. I don't think it makes sense, that past Cycles developed a crudely put together weapon, that nobody thought to make the "non-lethal UI" with which you could interact with it, that nobody ever managed to fire before, but each new cycle added more tech onto it, while ours could barely read it. In fact, getting the galaxy to coordinate, to defeat the Reapers, is exactly the thing we've been doing for the previous two games; finding comrades in arms, in unlikely places, forging alliances, and bringing everyone together. It would make unfathomably more sense.

  41. Yes some how tricking every single Reaper to enter into a Mass Relay and blowing it up with no Reaper getting suspicious is more likely to work. The Reapers are not a conventional threat to be taken out by conventional mean. Just because this galaxy was given more warning and are still have the Citadel at the start doesn't mean they are going to win conventional. The Crucible is just a necessary. And again the biggest issue is the set up which if done would have made it better.

  42. Which is why, as Drew puts it, you don't blow up a single Relay, but rather, they would blow up all the Relays, to take out the Reapers. And a synchronized plan, executed, across several relays, to take out a huge amount of Reapers, effectively thinning them enough, that the rest of the Reapers would either be easy pickings, or pose no real threat to the rest of the Milky Way. He doesn't mention luring all the Reapers into a single Relay. The Crucible is redundant, poorly implemented, and executed even worse.

  43. Unless you know how to game the system and do it properly, Miranda does not handle a break-up well and you'll have regrets.

  44. Yup. Had it been anyone else, in ME2, it would have been fine, and I would have argued for Liara, since she gets the most content, but oof, no can do now.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Author: admin