inherit
3439
0
9,678
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
8,060
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Apr 21, 2020 16:16:53 GMT
Prove it. You've never posted anything positive about any game from Bioware, so prove it and share what you liked about it enough to say you love it. Why does the poster have to prove it? How about you proving you won't buy an ME game if it features Shepard? You did say you wouldn't buy a game if Shepard were to return, did you not? I find that hard to believe especially if the game turns out to be very good. For me, I'm not a fan of another game with Ryder, but I would still buy it once the price has dropped. It would be nice to know exactly what he loves about it, though. If we're going to talk reboots, we need to talk about what we're keeping. (Although why we actually need a reboot is something we need to settle first; I'd rather see a new IP than a reboot, if continuing isn't an option.)
|
|
inherit
✜ The Bunny Chaser
2824
0
Nov 26, 2024 12:59:06 GMT
7,728
Energizer Bunny 211
The world just opened up...l'm now hearing sounds that I haven't heard in quite some time!
6,480
Jan 15, 2017 18:43:23 GMT
January 2017
energizerbunny211
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
Rumbler1138
|
Post by Energizer Bunny 211 on Apr 21, 2020 16:32:56 GMT
Why does the poster have to prove it? How about you proving you won't buy an ME game if it features Shepard? You did say you wouldn't buy a game if Shepard were to return, did you not? I find that hard to believe especially if the game turns out to be very good. For me, I'm not a fan of another game with Ryder, but I would still buy it once the price has dropped. No, I said I wouldn’t buy a game with Shepard if they made Destroy the canon ending. I understand everyone has their own opinion, head-canon and preference for ending ( I am not disputing any of that)...But I am just curious....If Sheperd's goal was to destroy the Reapers right from the start even since ME 1...why would you choose anything else (other than for the sake of curiosity to see what happens and how each ending is different)? If the true goal of the story, right from the start was to destroy the Reapers, doesn't that ending make the most sense even in terms of 'actual Canon" ? For me, because I have grown so close to the characters over the decade that we have had the OT-- it is hard to see them die or have to sacrifice them and say 'good bye' by choosing the Destroy ending. And for characters like EDI (and considering the involvement of AI like SAM in Andromeda), I have a few times, chosen the Synthesis ending mainly because that keeps everyone alive and also ties interestingly into ME:A in some respects. But 99.5% of the time I have always chosen the Destroy Ending because for the course of the entire trilogy that was the goal, to destroy the Reapers and end the threat. It seems awkward to suddenly 'shift gears' and choose a different option just because of the closing choice presented in the last minutes of the final game. To me it made more sense to 'stick with the game plan' that had been building since the first installment. But that's just me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
946
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2020 16:56:22 GMT
The people who complain the most and the loudest don't know jack about the thing they're complaining about.
|
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
Nov 17, 2024 22:23:52 GMT
31,578
Hanako Ikezawa
22,991
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Apr 21, 2020 17:20:30 GMT
No, I said I wouldn’t buy a game with Shepard if they made Destroy the canon ending. I understand everyone has their own opinion, head-canon and preference for ending ( I am not disputing any of that)...But I am just curious....If Sheperd's goal was to destroy the Reapers right from the start even since ME 1...why would you choose anything else (other than for the sake of curiosity to see what happens and how each ending is different)? If the true goal of the story, right from the start was to destroy the Reapers, doesn't that ending make the most sense even in terms of 'actual Canon" ? For me, because I have grown so close to the characters over the decade that we have had the OT-- it is hard to see them die or have to sacrifice them and say 'good bye' by choosing the Destroy ending. And for characters like EDI (and considering the involvement of AI like SAM in Andromeda), I have a few times, chosen the Synthesis ending mainly because that keep everyone alive and also ties interestingly into ME:A in some respects. But 99.5% of the time I have always chosen the Destroy Ending because for the course of the entire trilogy that was the goal, to destroy the Reapers and end the threat. It seems awkward to suddenly 'shift gears' and choose a different option just because of the closing choice presented in the last minutes of the final game. To me it made more sense to 'stick with the game plan' that had been building since the first installment. But that's just me. The goal was the stop the Reapers. And my Shepard would never commit genocide like you do in the Destroy ending (and no I'm not interested in having that debate again to anyone thinking of replying with 'But killing AIs isn't genocide'). You say you've grown close to them, and I have too, which is another reason why I wouldn't want that ending since then the Shepard standing there is many things, but it is not the character I have developed and bonded with. And no, for a series that's all about choices no ending makes the most sense as canon.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
946
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2020 17:39:44 GMT
The two endings, control and synthesis give the Reapers what they want. Refusal to use the Crucible would also result in the Reapers completing the harvest, essentially allowing the Reapers to win.
|
|
inherit
975
0
1,681
cloud9
3,876
Aug 14, 2016 11:41:22 GMT
August 2016
cloud9
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2
sicklyhour015
|
Post by cloud9 on Apr 21, 2020 18:10:15 GMT
If you watch the video for yourself, it pretty explains why I've been pushing a complete reboot of the Mass Effect Trilogy. And the video (hilariously) breaks down inconsistencies of the story like why does Shepard destroy or spared the Collector Base where it doesn't change or affect ME3 in any way, contradictions, and most important of all: the catalyst idiotic logic of creating Reapers to preserve organic life, by melting them and transforming them into Reapers to "save" organics. Which it is one of the worst endings that BioWare has ever done. The italed is false, for low-EMS states. And you know it and you know we know it, so why lie about it? *deep sigh* Let me explain why Mass Effect 2 is pointless as clear and simple as I can, and why the EMS doesn't even count. Cerberus brought back Shepard from the dead to bring down the collectors and defeat a human reaper, right? Shepard could either spare the base intact or to destroy it, which does nothing to benefit the effort to prepare for the Reaper invasion. And even if it's valuable to add a number to the EMS, it doesn't change or affect the final battle nor the ending in any way. And let's not forget the Arrival DLC where Shepard destroyed a Mass Relay to prevent Reapers from invading (which is also a pointless DLC), and that did not affect Mass Effect 3 as a WHOLE, because the Reapers are going to invade the galaxy anyway, without any explanation how they made it into the galaxy without the Citadel, or the Mass Relay in Arrival DLC. That is why Mass Effect 2 is completely pointless because of that. |
|
inherit
975
0
1,681
cloud9
3,876
Aug 14, 2016 11:41:22 GMT
August 2016
cloud9
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2
sicklyhour015
|
Post by cloud9 on Apr 21, 2020 18:16:28 GMT
Prove it. You've never posted anything positive about any game from Bioware, so prove it and share what you liked about it enough to say you love it. Why does the poster have to prove it? How about you proving you won't buy an ME game if it features Shepard? You did say you wouldn't buy a game if Shepard were to return, did you not? I find that hard to believe especially if the game turns out to be very good. For me, I'm not a fan of another game with Ryder, but I would still buy it once the price has dropped. To .79 cents. 🤣🤣🤣 |
|
inherit
975
0
1,681
cloud9
3,876
Aug 14, 2016 11:41:22 GMT
August 2016
cloud9
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2
sicklyhour015
|
Post by cloud9 on Apr 21, 2020 18:22:42 GMT
As many of you can find it hard to believe, I love Mass Effect Trilogy Prove it. You've never posted anything positive about any game from Bioware, so prove it and share what you liked about it enough to say you love it. I don't have to prove anything to you, and I don't care that you believe what I said or you don't. I'm not here for your approval or your validation. |
|
inherit
975
0
1,681
cloud9
3,876
Aug 14, 2016 11:41:22 GMT
August 2016
cloud9
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2
sicklyhour015
|
Post by cloud9 on Apr 21, 2020 18:28:31 GMT
Why does the poster have to prove it? How about you proving you won't buy an ME game if it features Shepard? You did say you wouldn't buy a game if Shepard were to return, did you not? I find that hard to believe especially if the game turns out to be very good. For me, I'm not a fan of another game with Ryder, but I would still buy it once the price has dropped. It would be nice to know exactly what he loves about it, though. If we're going to talk reboots, we need to talk about what we're keeping. (Although why we actually need a reboot is something we need to settle first; I'd rather see a new IP than a reboot, if continuing isn't an option.) There's posts already for that and that is fine if you don't want a reboot. But if BioWare wants to redeem themselves, and to pull themselves out the predicament that they're in, they should at least create a reboot to have new generation of players to play Mass Effect franchise. Hell, look at DOOM and Resident Evil for example that reboots can be very successful, if they're done right. |
|
inherit
3439
0
9,678
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
8,060
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Apr 21, 2020 18:39:35 GMT
No, I said I wouldn’t buy a game with Shepard if they made Destroy the canon ending. I understand everyone has their own opinion, head-canon and preference for ending ( I am not disputing any of that)...But I am just curious....If Sheperd's goal was to destroy the Reapers right from the start even since ME 1...why would you choose anything else This makes no sense to me. I don't let my past intentions control my current actions. I act according to the current situation and my current knowledge of it. What do you do? Edit: I'm only talking about non-trivial stuff, though. For trivial stuff it's often not worthwhile to think about what you're doing. Reevaluating your toothpaste brand preference typically won't be a productive use of time.
|
|
inherit
975
0
1,681
cloud9
3,876
Aug 14, 2016 11:41:22 GMT
August 2016
cloud9
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2
sicklyhour015
|
Post by cloud9 on Apr 21, 2020 20:53:24 GMT
Ok, here's my point of questioning inconsistencies, and plot holes that makes ME2 very problematic, and how it affects ME3.
1: Why the Council didn't study the wreckage of Sovereign to investigate about the Reapers, or to be prepared for the the invasion?
2: Why the Collectors suddenly want to destroy the Normandy? Is it because of the Reapers wanted Shepard dead? Why do they want him/her dead?
3:Shepard's death doesn't make any sense on the beginning of ME2. Why they didn't set it up for Shepard's death on the end of ME1, when a debris crashed on Shepard? (It would made sense to bring him/her back to life from there, because Shepard has the Prothean Cipher that can be used) And how his/her body survived crashing into the planet's atmosphere? And how does Shepard's resurrection benefitted Cerberus, other than hero worship and a reference of Space Jesus?
4: Why the Council denied the Reapers after Sovereign invaded the Citadel? Why didn't the Asari Councillor just read Shepard's mind to find evidence of the Reaper's existence?
5: Why Cerberus wanted to send Shepard on a suicide mission to stop the Collectors, if it has absolutely nothing to do to stop, or to be prepared for the Reapers?
6: Why would the Reapers wanted the Collectors to build a Reaper-Human hybrid?
7: How did Cerberus salvaged the Hybrid without the IFF?
8: Why Shepard didn't informed The Alliance or the Council that they have discovered a 30 million year old Reaper to confirm their existence?
9: What was the point of the Arrival DLC where Shepard destroyed a Mass Relay, to prevent Reapers from entering the Galaxy? And the Reapers invaded the entire galaxy anyway, despite the fact that Shepard and Crew stopped Saren and Sovereign from overriding the Citadel. And it never explained or hinted how Reapers invaded the entire galaxy.
So therefore, what was the point of Mass Effect 1 and 2?
|
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
Nov 17, 2024 22:23:52 GMT
31,578
Hanako Ikezawa
22,991
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Apr 21, 2020 21:05:17 GMT
Ok, here's my point of questioning inconsistencies, and plot holes that makes ME2 very problematic, and how it affects ME3. 1: Why the Council didn't study the wreckage of Sovereign to investigate about the Reapers, or to be prepared for the the invasion? 2: Why the Collectors suddenly want to destroy the Normandy? Is it because of the Reapers wanted Shepard dead? Why do they want him/her dead? 3:Shepard's death doesn't make any sense on the beginning of ME2. Why they didn't set it up for Shepard's death on the end of ME1, when a debris crashed on Shepard? (It would made sense to bring him/her back to life from there, because Shepard has the Prothean Cipher that can be used) And how his/her body survived crashing into the planet's atmosphere? And how does Shepard's resurrection benefitted Cerberus, other than hero worship and a reference of Space Jesus? 4: Why the Council denied the Reapers after Sovereign invaded the Citadel? Why didn't the Asari Councillor just read Shepard's mind to find evidence of the Reaper's existence? 5: Why Cerberus wanted to send Shepard on a suicide mission to stop the Collectors, if it has absolutely nothing to do to stop, or to be prepared for the Reapers? 6: Why would the Reapers wanted the Collectors to build a Reaper-Human hybrid? 7: How did Cerberus salvaged the Hybrid without the IFF? 8: Why Shepard didn't informed The Alliance or the Council that they have discovered a 30 million year old Reaper to confirm their existence? 9: What was the point of the Arrival DLC where Shepard destroyed a Mass Relay, to prevent Reapers from entering the Galaxy? And the Reapers invaded the entire galaxy anyway, despite the fact that Shepard and Crew stopped Saren and Sovereign from overriding the Citadel. And it never explained or hinted how Reapers invaded the entire galaxy. So therefore, what was the point of Mass Effect 1 and 2? 1. They did study the wreckage. As did every other group who got a piece of it. Denying their existence was only publicly. 2. Because Shepard was on it, and they wanted to either have them harvested for their new Reaper or eliminated since they have shown to be an obstacle to their plan. 3. Because they wanted ME1 to have a happy ending, as well as them not having all the details in mind yet for the sequels. As for Shepard's body surviving and Project Lazarus, yeah those are Deus Ex Machinas. As for benefiting Cerberus, they are a pro-human group who now has the most influential human working for them. 4. Again, the denial was only publicly to avoid mass panic. 5. It did help them prepare for the Reapers. They wanted the base since that gave them the technology to know how to stop them. 6. They do that with all the Reapers, serving as the core while in the typical shell. 7. They still had access to the Normandy when it was used, so got it from there before EDI locked them out. 8. Once again, only publicly denied. Also the dead Reaper was destroyed so they had no evidence. 9. The destruction of the Mass Relay delayed the Reaper's attack for a few months, giving the galaxy a little more time to prepare. As for how they invaded, they flew there. The Citadel trap only let them get there faster and wipe out galactic leadership, making the harvest more efficient. Once they flew into the galaxy, they used the Mass Relays like they planned to with the one in the Arrival DLC.
|
|
inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Apr 21, 2020 22:40:00 GMT
So... you'll let this video guy take the heat instead of you? What were those combat videos in the above post supposed to prove, anyway? If you watch the video for yourself, it pretty explains why I've been pushing a complete reboot of the Mass Effect Trilogy. And the video (hilariously) breaks down inconsistencies of the story like why does Shepard destroy or spared the Collector Base where it doesn't change or affect ME3 in any way, contradictions, and most important of all: the catalyst idiotic logic of creating Reapers to preserve organic life, by melting them and transforming them into Reapers to "save" organics. Which it is one of the worst endings that BioWare has ever done. Personally I think having the choice at all for the Collector base was kind of a mistake, but realistically, there was no way the third game could diverge dramatically based on this decision. It affects what’s available at the end based on the score, but any more than that just isn’t really feasible.
|
|
inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on Apr 21, 2020 22:44:35 GMT
I understand everyone has their own opinion, head-canon and preference for ending ( I am not disputing any of that)...But I am just curious....If Sheperd's goal was to destroy the Reapers right from the start even since ME 1...why would you choose anything else (other than for the sake of curiosity to see what happens and how each ending is different)? If the true goal of the story, right from the start was to destroy the Reapers, doesn't that ending make the most sense even in terms of 'actual Canon" ? For me, because I have grown so close to the characters over the decade that we have had the OT-- it is hard to see them die or have to sacrifice them and say 'good bye' by choosing the Destroy ending. And for characters like EDI (and considering the involvement of AI like SAM in Andromeda), I have a few times, chosen the Synthesis ending mainly because that keep everyone alive and also ties interestingly into ME:A in some respects. But 99.5% of the time I have always chosen the Destroy Ending because for the course of the entire trilogy that was the goal, to destroy the Reapers and end the threat. It seems awkward to suddenly 'shift gears' and choose a different option just because of the closing choice presented in the last minutes of the final game. To me it made more sense to 'stick with the game plan' that had been building since the first installment. But that's just me. The goal was the stop the Reapers. And my Shepard would never commit genocide like you do in the Destroy ending (and no I'm not interested in having that debate again to anyone thinking of replying with 'But killing AIs isn't genocide'). You say you've grown close to them, and I have too, which is another reason why I wouldn't want that ending since then the Shepard standing there is many things, but it is not the character I have developed and bonded with. And no, for a series that's all about choices no ending makes the most sense as canon. This is why canonization is such a bad idea. Its value now is to leave it to us to determine which one suits us best. BioWare could always just determine what to run with by popular demand and just let the fans left out to their disappointment, but I think the franchise would be all the lesser for it. It’s why the very thought of even a Shepard reprise just doesn’t intrigue me. Even as one who picked Destroy, it’s a fair bet that if they did something like toss Shepard back in combat and essentially have me go back to recreate my SAME character again, I’d be pretty disappointed.
|
|
Sanunes
N6
Just a flip of the coin.
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Prime Posts: 4392
Prime Likes: 882
Posts: 6,004 Likes: 9,088
inherit
1561
0
Nov 26, 2024 22:18:50 GMT
9,088
Sanunes
Just a flip of the coin.
6,004
Sept 13, 2016 11:51:12 GMT
September 2016
sanunes
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
4392
882
|
Post by Sanunes on Apr 21, 2020 22:46:42 GMT
If you watch the video for yourself, it pretty explains why I've been pushing a complete reboot of the Mass Effect Trilogy. And the video (hilariously) breaks down inconsistencies of the story like why does Shepard destroy or spared the Collector Base where it doesn't change or affect ME3 in any way, contradictions, and most important of all: the catalyst idiotic logic of creating Reapers to preserve organic life, by melting them and transforming them into Reapers to "save" organics. Which it is one of the worst endings that BioWare has ever done. Personally I think having the choice at all for the Collector base was kind of a mistake, but realistically, there was no way the third game could diverge dramatically based on this decision. It affects what’s available at the end based on the score, but any more than that just isn’t really feasible. I don't think they could have any real divergence to their games and that is mostly due to the amount of content that would be altered to make it have any kind of consequence and then of course you would have people posting videos about how disrespectful BioWare was to them as a paying customer that they locked content behind choices made in a different game and it was "only 12 hours long". Just like how people complained about Inquisition when the critical path "only" took 20 hours to complete while there was many more hours of additional content that was optional and they didn't feel like they had to do it.
|
|
inherit
4588
0
Nov 25, 2024 20:19:45 GMT
3,170
therevanchist25
1,826
Mar 15, 2017 23:07:06 GMT
March 2017
therevanchist25
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
|
Post by therevanchist25 on Apr 21, 2020 23:00:29 GMT
The goal was the stop the Reapers. And my Shepard would never commit genocide like you do in the Destroy ending (and no I'm not interested in having that debate again to anyone thinking of replying with 'But killing AIs isn't genocide'). You say you've grown close to them, and I have too, which is another reason why I wouldn't want that ending since then the Shepard standing there is many things, but it is not the character I have developed and bonded with. And no, for a series that's all about choices no ending makes the most sense as canon. This is why canonization is such a bad idea. Its value now is to leave it to us to determine which one suits us best. BioWare could always just determine what to run with by popular demand and just let the fans left out to their disappointment, but I think the franchise would be all the lesser for it. It’s why the very thought of even a Shepard reprise just doesn’t intrigue me. Even as one who picked Destroy, it’s a fair bet that if they did something like toss Shepard back in combat and essentially have me go back to recreate my SAME character again, I’d be pretty disappointed. Bioware fans have been left in the dust of bitter disappointment for decades, over the years there are always bioware fans left in bitter disappointment. Who cares if a couple more get disappointed? They can take a number and get in line with all the others. No one cares about disappointed fans until "you" are the one who might actually get disappointed for once.
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
Member is Online
26,305
themikefest
15,636
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Apr 21, 2020 23:03:03 GMT
If you watch the video for yourself, it pretty explains why I've been pushing a complete reboot of the Mass Effect Trilogy. And the video (hilariously) breaks down inconsistencies of the story like why does Shepard destroy or spared the Collector Base where it doesn't change or affect ME3 in any way, contradictions, and most important of all: the catalyst idiotic logic of creating Reapers to preserve organic life, by melting them and transforming them into Reapers to "save" organics. Which it is one of the worst endings that BioWare has ever done. Personally I think having the choice at all for the Collector base was kind of a mistake, but realistically, there was no way the third game could diverge dramatically based on this decision. It affects what’s available at the end based on the score, but any more than that just isn’t really feasible. I believe I created a thread on old BSN about that. If a player chooses to save the base, destroy will not be available when using the crucible. And if the base is destroyed, control will not be available. Green will still be an option though.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,678
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
8,060
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Apr 21, 2020 23:23:26 GMT
1: Why the Council didn't study the wreckage of Sovereign to investigate about the Reapers, or to be prepared for the the invasion? Didn't they? The Thanix Cannon was reverse-engineered from the wreckage, and the Citadel Archives make it plaing that Sovereign was not actually believe to be a geth warship; that was merely a cover story. The latter is arguably a retcon, though. Well, crashing into the atmosphere isn't necessarily going to do that much damage to Shepard's corpse. The SR-1's velocity relative to Alchera is anything Bio wants it to be, and a freefall from that altitude wouldn't burn Shepard up or anything; the reason orbital spacecraft need heat shields is that they have to move fast relative to the planet. Hitting the ground at 100 MPH or thereabouts can be handwaved away as another triumph of mass effect engineering. Note that the SR-1 doesn't langd on Eden PRim, and nobody's wearing a parachute when they exit the ship. Still a dopey idea,though.
|
|
Cyberstrike
N4
is wanting to have some fun!
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
XBL Gamertag: cyberstrike nTo
PSN: cyberstrike-nTo
Prime Posts: 1,732
Prime Likes: 467
Posts: 1,940 Likes: 3,177
inherit
634
0
May 14, 2017 17:50:43 GMT
3,177
Cyberstrike
is wanting to have some fun!
1,940
August 2016
cyberstrike
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
cyberstrike nTo
cyberstrike-nTo
1,732
467
|
Post by Cyberstrike on Apr 22, 2020 0:05:27 GMT
A video nitpicking The Witcher 3 now that would be fun.
I wish more people would criticize the combat. God I hate it lol
I played The Witcher 2 and yeah the combat in it sucked.
Now I haven't played The Witcher 3 (and I have no plans too) but I just so damn sick and tied of every video game Youtube channel saying it's great and it's got no flaws and it's perfect. I just wish someone would take the piss out of it instead of being still being butt hurt over the endings to ME3 and the so-called "flaws" of MEA.
|
|
ahglock
N5
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Shattered Steel, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem
Origin: ShinobiKillfist
Posts: 2,887 Likes: 3,546
inherit
9886
0
3,546
ahglock
2,887
Feb 21, 2018 17:57:17 GMT
February 2018
ahglock
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Shattered Steel, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem
ShinobiKillfist
|
Post by ahglock on Apr 22, 2020 2:29:52 GMT
I wish more people would criticize the combat. God I hate it lol
I played The Witcher 2 and yeah the combat in it sucked.
Now I haven't played The Witcher 3 (and I have no plans too) but I just so damn sick and tied of every video game Youtube channel saying it's great and it's got no flaws and it's perfect. I just wish someone would take the piss out of it instead of being still being butt hurt over the endings to ME3 and the so-called "flaws" of MEA.
The combat is better than 2 but yeah its still a bit awkward. I always felt it was overrated, its a good game but the side quests and open world design weren't that amazing.
|
|
inherit
4588
0
Nov 25, 2024 20:19:45 GMT
3,170
therevanchist25
1,826
Mar 15, 2017 23:07:06 GMT
March 2017
therevanchist25
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
|
Post by therevanchist25 on Apr 22, 2020 3:10:44 GMT
I wish more people would criticize the combat. God I hate it lol
I played The Witcher 2 and yeah the combat in it sucked.
Now I haven't played The Witcher 3 (and I have no plans too) but I just so damn sick and tied of every video game Youtube channel saying it's great and it's got no flaws and it's perfect. I just wish someone would take the piss out of it instead of being still being butt hurt over the endings to ME3 and the so-called "flaws" of MEA.
lol, said as if the game is flawless....hilarious.
|
|
inherit
975
0
1,681
cloud9
3,876
Aug 14, 2016 11:41:22 GMT
August 2016
cloud9
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2
sicklyhour015
|
Post by cloud9 on Apr 22, 2020 5:41:50 GMT
I wish more people would criticize the combat. God I hate it lol
I played The Witcher 2 and yeah the combat in it sucked.
Now I haven't played The Witcher 3 (and I have no plans too) but I just so damn sick and tied of every video game Youtube channel saying it's great and it's got no flaws and it's perfect. I just wish someone would take the piss out of it instead of being still being butt hurt over the endings to ME3 and the so-called "flaws" of MEA.
Then why are you even here? |
|
inherit
975
0
1,681
cloud9
3,876
Aug 14, 2016 11:41:22 GMT
August 2016
cloud9
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2
sicklyhour015
|
Post by cloud9 on Apr 22, 2020 6:02:53 GMT
1: Why the Council didn't study the wreckage of Sovereign to investigate about the Reapers, or to be prepared for the the invasion? Didn't they? The Thanix Cannon was reverse-engineered from the wreckage, and the Citadel Archives make it plaing that Sovereign was not actually believe to be a geth warship; that was merely a cover story. The latter is arguably a retcon, though. Well, crashing into the atmosphere isn't necessarily going to do that much damage to Shepard's corpse. The SR-1's velocity relative to Alchera is anything Bio wants it to be, and a freefall from that altitude wouldn't burn Shepard up or anything; the reason orbital spacecraft need heat shields is that they have to move fast relative to the planet. Hitting the ground at 100 MPH or thereabouts can be handwaved away as another triumph of mass effect engineering. Note that the SR-1 doesn't langd on Eden PRim, and nobody's wearing a parachute when they exit the ship. Still a dopey idea,though. If they created Thanix Cannons from the debris from Sovereign, why they haven't used those cannons AGAINST the Reapers, instead of building a crucible with a Deus Ex Machina plot device in the first place? They could be used that against them, and they don't even have to build the Crucible if they could use the cannons. And it doesn't officially confirm by writers how Shepard's body survived from impact. And you realize that the body will disintegrate when crashing into a planet from outer space, right? Come on, man. Use your critical thinking skills. |
|
inherit
975
0
1,681
cloud9
3,876
Aug 14, 2016 11:41:22 GMT
August 2016
cloud9
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2
sicklyhour015
|
Post by cloud9 on Apr 22, 2020 6:08:08 GMT
I played The Witcher 2 and yeah the combat in it sucked.
Now I haven't played The Witcher 3 (and I have no plans too) but I just so damn sick and tied of every video game Youtube channel saying it's great and it's got no flaws and it's perfect. I just wish someone would take the piss out of it instead of being still being butt hurt over the endings to ME3 and the so-called "flaws" of MEA.
lol, said as if the game is flawless....hilarious. I know, right? |
|
inherit
975
0
1,681
cloud9
3,876
Aug 14, 2016 11:41:22 GMT
August 2016
cloud9
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2
sicklyhour015
|
Post by cloud9 on Apr 22, 2020 6:15:38 GMT
The people who complain the most and the loudest don't know jack about the thing they're complaining about. Or you just don't like when someone doesn't tolerate poor written stories, and not accepting mediocrity. If you into that kind of shit, more power to you. But I on the other hand am not. |
|
