Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details?

Pastebin has what are said to be details on plans for new Mass Effect 3 DLC found in the new extended cut of BioWare's action/RPG sequel. The spoilery post includes details on a plot involving a Reaper named Leviathan, and supporting the idea that more content for the game us coming is a new tweet by Mike Gamble noticed by Eurogamer which reads: "As I've said before, we do this for you! EC was our gift to the fans. Hope you enjoyed. Also...keep your ears open over the next little while." Thanks BioWare Social Network.

View
67 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >

67. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jul 5, 2012, 18:15 Quinn
 
Whatever happened.. Bioware managed to time-travel back into the past and destroy a saga that was once one of the greatest ever created, with that fucking ending. It's like they sat at a table together and asked "How shall we fuck this saga so hard in the face it'll end up FUBAR?"

1. We include a smart-ass Deus Ex Machina that somehow manages to contradict itself in the few pathetic lines we give it;
2. Shepard will accept the donky shit coming out of said deus ex machina's mouth;
3. Shepard will die, no matter the fuck what. Gamers will hate this because it spits in the entire series' face that the gamer can't do anything about his death, but we'll just claim that every grand hero should just.. well, fucking die?;
4. Once we've officially turned the saga into crap by following the above 3 ideas, we'll release a nonsubstantial bullshit DLC that'll smear said shit out on the saga's raped face some more.

Yeah! Lets do that!

Bioware
 
Avatar 57334
 
"Moo," she said.
And I trembled.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
66. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jul 5, 2012, 12:38 avianflu
 
I think the opposite occurred. There was plenty of reason to believe the poster on PA was indeed a writer from ME3. Believing everything he said is another story of course.



Creston wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 11:13:
Verno wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 10:48:
I think he was referring to internal dissent about the writing team being precluded from working on the ending.

I'm pretty sure that was debunked, actually. The post that made such claims was simply fake.

Creston
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
65. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jul 1, 2012, 18:01 Quinn
 
I tried so very, very hard to replay that last portion of the game to see this EC.. but I just couldn't. I truly hate Mass Effect now. This is a feeling I cannot help.

I ended up alt-F4'ing out of the game and look the endings up on youtube. But I didn't get past the first one I checked: Synthesis. I checked that one first because I thought it was the worst of all endings, with Shepard basically doing what Saren and the Reapers wanted all along. Instead, I watched an ending that made me want to point at my screen and laugh. It was so fucking ridiculous! EDI was narrating it, basically explaining how perfect Shep's decision was to merge robots with organics. Suddenly all living beings had green glowing eyes and were playing golf with the Reapers. What. The. Fuck?!

I didn't bother watching the other endings.

Mass Effect is dead to me.
Bioware is dead to me.
This EC was insult to injury.
 
Avatar 57334
 
"Moo," she said.
And I trembled.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
64. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 29, 2012, 17:58 SimplyMonk
 
Creston wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 17:14:
SimplyMonk wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 16:48:
I look at it this way. Three possible endings that really aren't that different from one another make it a lot easier to make Mass Effect 4 or whatever else that want to do to milk the universe for cash. Horrible way to end a space opera, but good way to insure you don't make the next game that complicated for your development team/writers.

Lazy and greedy.

Bioware said any new Mass Effect games would be set either prior or during the Shepard Era. There are no plans for post-Shepard games. (or at least, there weren't. Now that they've fixed their universe, maybe they've changed their minds.)

Creston

Bioware says a lot of "things". This experience has taught me not to believe a single one of them.
 
Avatar 55902
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
63. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 28, 2012, 09:06 Verno
 
Also, one of my gripes about the EC is that it rapes canon some more. I was under the distinct impression that nobody could build, let alone fix, a Mass Effect Relay. They just... Were. We thought the Protheans built them, but the Reapers did apparently. With the synthesis or control endings I can see rebuilding the relay, but with the destroy? How do we get that kind of tech? If we can build Mass Effect relays big enough to move dreadnaughts, why not make a Relay cannon, where you aim at some point "not in the galaxy" and ME shoot them out of this supercluster?

Yeah that's a great point. Honestly I thought the Mass Relays were always poorly explained which is ironic given how much of the series lore stands on its shoulders.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Dragon Age Inquisition, Far Cry 4, This War of Mine
Watching: The Fall, The Walking Dead, Leon
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
62. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 28, 2012, 03:37 Flatline
 
Creston wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 17:12:
Flatline wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 15:41:
I always thought it would be funny to have the mega weapon actually function as a massive, epic version of a mass effect relay, and you get the entire goddamn galaxy of intelligent beings together in Sol system, and everyone is there fighting the Reapers, and Shepard blows the weapon, and it evacs all non-reapers to another galaxy. BAM!. Non Servium. We choose to get off this goddamn merry-go-round. Keep the damn galaxy. There's a hundred billion others to inhabit.

Hahaha, that would have been fantastic.

It made more sense than the whole "oh look, we found a Mcguffin JUST as the Reapers invade, except it doesn't work without a Catalyst, that nobody has EVER met (the catalyst says so himself), yet somehow we know is required for the Crucible to function, even though the Crucible is basically just a BIG FUCKING BATTERY."

But eh, whatever. Mass Effect is fantastic for ~ 119 hours and 40 minutes, and turns a bit stupid for the last 20 minutes. At least the endings are no longer vomit inducing.

Creston

It would have made more sense to be sure. I mean, you spend 100+ hours doing shit that people say was impossible, so thematically giving a giant finger to the Reapers and just getting off the cycle would have been thematically appropriate.

However, think of it. The Protheans *knew* that they couldn't defeat the Reapers, and they basically were one single pan-galactic civilization. They knew that they were doomed if they stayed in the Galaxy, so why not leave it? The Protheans apparently were more advanced than any species currently being Reaped (which leads to questions but whatever), so it's possible. It also would have been a "BWHAAAAA?" moment without it being total Deus Ex Machina.

Also, one of my gripes about the EC is that it rapes canon some more. I was under the distinct impression that nobody could build, let alone fix, a Mass Effect Relay. They just... Were. We thought the Protheans built them, but the Reapers did apparently. With the synthesis or control endings I can see rebuilding the relay, but with the destroy? How do we get that kind of tech? If we can build Mass Effect relays big enough to move dreadnaughts, why not make a Relay cannon, where you aim at some point "not in the galaxy" and ME shoot them out of this supercluster?

I dunno. The more they try, the less happy I am. For me, the game ends with Anderson saying to Shepard "I'm proud of you son, I really am". Then, in my mind, the Crucible fires, Anderson and Shepard bleed out, and die watching the Reapers get blown to hell and back. Roll credits.

In the end, I think what disappointed me the most is how similar the endings are. Going through all those choices only to pull the End-o-Tron 3000's three levers blows. There's room for a metric assload of wildly varying endings here. I mean, an Exodus ending, the Indoctrination theory, yeah the three fucking fireworks ending, the utter loss ending, the bleed out & fade to black ending, all of these endings *could* co-exist at the same time. If Bioware had balls, and I mean real balls, the Crucible would have done different things depending on how you played the game up to that point. Imagine how fucking badass it would have been to have 4 different final acts, even with similar shit (Illusive man, yadda yadda yadda) but with *wildly* different endings. People would have gone ape shit even if the endings weren't perfect, they would have heralded Bioware as master of the RPG, and it'd have been something discussed by video game grognards for years to come.

Ah well. Someday right?

This comment was edited on Jun 28, 2012, 03:45.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
61. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 28, 2012, 02:22 Bhruic
 
Creston wrote on Jun 28, 2012, 02:10:
Nah, I don't really agree. The Rachni Wars alone could easily handle an "epic" game, and there's plenty of back story available that can lead to great games. The Alliance war vs the Batarians, the Krogan Rebellions, and those are just ones we know about. They could also go waaaay back in time and deal with completely different civilizations, though I'm not sure they'd want to, as that would require them setting up basically a completely new universe.

Like I said, maybe they've changed their minds. Maybe EA realizes that a lot of people want more stories with Shepard / Shepard's crew, and they'll do that. I dunno.

But there's plenty of stuff that can go before.

Creston

Yes, but the problem with prequels is that you already know how they are going to end. Sure, you could go back and do the Rachni war, but you already know how the Rachni war turned out. Unless they are willing to do some idiotic Star Trek-style "alternate universe", you don't have the ability to make any major decisions, because the history has already been all laid out. That's the same for any of the "pre-Shepard era" stuff.

Not to mention the fact that it's extremely unlikely they'd go with a non-Human main character, which precludes even more of the available options.

On the other hand, the chances of them coming up with something on a "grander" scale than the Reapers is extremely small, so they might decide to try for something less "epic".
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
60. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 28, 2012, 02:12 Creston
 
SlimRam wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 23:13:
Hmmmm...didn't Bioware tell people NOT to delete they're saved games from ME3? That tells me maybe that the "new" ME game will somehow use the choices you made?

Nah, they just said that because people need the Legend save in order to be able to play the DLC.

They didn't want people to finish the game, go "that was great" and uninstall it / delete their saves, because then nobody would buy the DLC.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
59. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 28, 2012, 02:10 Creston
 
Bhruic wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 20:18:
Bioware said any new Mass Effect games would be set either prior or during the Shepard Era.

That's really unbelievable tho'. You can't make an epic-scale game, which is all they'd be interested in making, when you've already set the stage. There isn't room for another hero in the Shepard timeline, and if they set it beforehand, well, we've already got all the backstory which explains what happened then, so there's no room for "epicness" there either.

Nah, I don't really agree. The Rachni Wars alone could easily handle an "epic" game, and there's plenty of back story available that can lead to great games. The Alliance war vs the Batarians, the Krogan Rebellions, and those are just ones we know about. They could also go waaaay back in time and deal with completely different civilizations, though I'm not sure they'd want to, as that would require them setting up basically a completely new universe.

Like I said, maybe they've changed their minds. Maybe EA realizes that a lot of people want more stories with Shepard / Shepard's crew, and they'll do that. I dunno.

But there's plenty of stuff that can go before.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
58. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 28, 2012, 00:42 finga
 
Scheherazade wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 13:13:
and they break some established canon (destroying a relay wipes out entire solar systems in ME2, but in ME3 that's no longer the case).
But, uh, look at the way they were destroyed.

I can destroy a stick of dynamite without it actually exploding. Or, I can destroy it by using it the way it was intended, as a weapon, causing an explosion that destroys much more than just the dynamite itself.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
57. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 28, 2012, 00:40 finga
 
Axis wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 13:42:
Never bought a DLC, never will.

1/20th of an expansion for 1/3 the price. Yea, no thanks. Keep it to console players - they're the dumb ones hungry for content.
You're the one who thinks all DLC costs money. /shrug
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
56. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 27, 2012, 23:13 SlimRam
 
Bhruic wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 20:18:
Bioware said any new Mass Effect games would be set either prior or during the Shepard Era.

That's really unbelievable tho'. You can't make an epic-scale game, which is all they'd be interested in making, when you've already set the stage. There isn't room for another hero in the Shepard timeline, and if they set it beforehand, well, we've already got all the backstory which explains what happened then, so there's no room for "epicness" there either.

Hmmmm...didn't Bioware tell people NOT to delete they're saved games from ME3? That tells me maybe that the "new" ME game will somehow use the choices you made? Maybe they will just use the very last decision you made of the three endings, and if that was the case and they make a game post ME3.....well then they would have to basically make a new game with the scenario of all 3 different endings built into the game and the player only playing the result of what they chose....then again Bioware would have to make 3 different versions of the new game, and that would be a HELLUVA lot of content *shakes head* eek
 
Avatar 57335
 
I saw a hearse driving in the carpool lane the other day and I thought to myself, "That's cheating"
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
55. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 27, 2012, 23:09 RollinThundr
 
Bhruic wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 20:18:
Bioware said any new Mass Effect games would be set either prior or during the Shepard Era.

That's really unbelievable tho'. You can't make an epic-scale game, which is all they'd be interested in making, when you've already set the stage. There isn't room for another hero in the Shepard timeline, and if they set it beforehand, well, we've already got all the backstory which explains what happened then, so there's no room for "epicness" there either.

If I'm remembering correctly and in my old age I may not be, Bioware mentioned all ME 3 DLC would be set either during or prior to ME3's ending. I'm 99.9% positive they never mention future titles. And with how irrelevant they made every player choice throughout the trilogy with their pos ending, I can't see very many aside from the die hard fanbois even wanting a ME4 at this point.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
54. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 27, 2012, 20:18 Bhruic
 
Bioware said any new Mass Effect games would be set either prior or during the Shepard Era.

That's really unbelievable tho'. You can't make an epic-scale game, which is all they'd be interested in making, when you've already set the stage. There isn't room for another hero in the Shepard timeline, and if they set it beforehand, well, we've already got all the backstory which explains what happened then, so there's no room for "epicness" there either.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
53. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 27, 2012, 18:19 Cabezone
 
Creston wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 17:07:
Some people say that yes it was, and some say no it wasn't. Without knowing who to believe, I'd say that that post really was something that a lot of people WANTED to hear right at that moment (as it gave them a culprit for the shitty ending), and I somehow doubt that a guy with a good job is going to be fucking dumb enough to post such disparaging remark on a forum as widely visited as PA's...

Creston

Well most of his posts are still up, the one about the blame falling squarely on those two guys for the end still is. Some of his more inflammatory posts are gone now. Takyris is verified to be the ME writer, that's not in question.
 
"Pants! Pants! Pants!"
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
52. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 27, 2012, 17:14 Creston
 
SimplyMonk wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 16:48:
I look at it this way. Three possible endings that really aren't that different from one another make it a lot easier to make Mass Effect 4 or whatever else that want to do to milk the universe for cash. Horrible way to end a space opera, but good way to insure you don't make the next game that complicated for your development team/writers.

Lazy and greedy.

Bioware said any new Mass Effect games would be set either prior or during the Shepard Era. There are no plans for post-Shepard games. (or at least, there weren't. Now that they've fixed their universe, maybe they've changed their minds.)

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
51. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 27, 2012, 17:12 Creston
 
Flatline wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 15:41:
I always thought it would be funny to have the mega weapon actually function as a massive, epic version of a mass effect relay, and you get the entire goddamn galaxy of intelligent beings together in Sol system, and everyone is there fighting the Reapers, and Shepard blows the weapon, and it evacs all non-reapers to another galaxy. BAM!. Non Servium. We choose to get off this goddamn merry-go-round. Keep the damn galaxy. There's a hundred billion others to inhabit.

Hahaha, that would have been fantastic.

It made more sense than the whole "oh look, we found a Mcguffin JUST as the Reapers invade, except it doesn't work without a Catalyst, that nobody has EVER met (the catalyst says so himself), yet somehow we know is required for the Crucible to function, even though the Crucible is basically just a BIG FUCKING BATTERY."

But eh, whatever. Mass Effect is fantastic for ~ 119 hours and 40 minutes, and turns a bit stupid for the last 20 minutes. At least the endings are no longer vomit inducing.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
50. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 27, 2012, 17:09 Creston
 
m00t wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 15:31:
Creston wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 14:07:
m00t wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 13:59:
And in 2 minutes NagaDeath comes up with a vastly more plausible reason for the existence of the Reapers.

The EC is better than the original lazy crap they pulled, but the endings, the reason for the Reapers, and the story for ME3 are all pretty crappy in context of the first two games.

Errr, what NegaDeath posted IS the exact explanation that's given to you by the Catalyst in the Extended Cut. It's not like he made it up on the spot. The only difference is that the Catalyst isn't happy about the Crucible at all, and in fact they've tried to destroy the design several cycles back.

Creston


No? The WunderKind says that the ones who created the WunderKind created the first Reapers themselves, not that the AI came up with it on its own. Rogue and buggy software makes more sense than the crap WunderKind spews.

Also, in EC it says Synthesis can't be forced. But just Shephard choosing isn't forcing it on to others? It's still a shitty nonsense ending.

That's not what the Catalyst says.

As for the "force" thing, yeah, it's a bit naff. I took it to mean that he tried it through forceful conversion and it didn't work, and they didn't use something like the Crucible + Catalyst to do it.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
49. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 27, 2012, 17:07 Creston
 
Cabezone wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 15:09:
Creston wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 11:13:
Verno wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 10:48:
I think he was referring to internal dissent about the writing team being precluded from working on the ending.

I'm pretty sure that was debunked, actually. The post that made such claims was simply fake.

Creston

Actually it was a real post from one of the ME writers. He was a long time poster on the Penny Arcade forums. Shortly after posting that he stopped posting entirely on PA. Bioware says it was fake, but I read it right after the dude posted it and he never claimed that his account was hacked.

EDIT: some of the stuff in that article may have been bullshit added later but the aprts about Mac and Casey writing the end solo and shoving it out to the rest of the writers after it was done is absolutely something he said.

Some people say that yes it was, and some say no it wasn't. Without knowing who to believe, I'd say that that post really was something that a lot of people WANTED to hear right at that moment (as it gave them a culprit for the shitty ending), and I somehow doubt that a guy with a good job is going to be fucking dumb enough to post such disparaging remark on a forum as widely visited as PA's...

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
48. Re: More Mass Effect 3 DLC Details? Jun 27, 2012, 16:48 SimplyMonk
 
Flatline wrote on Jun 27, 2012, 15:41:
I always thought it would be funny to have the mega weapon actually function as a massive, epic version of a mass effect relay, and you get the entire goddamn galaxy of intelligent beings together in Sol system, and everyone is there fighting the Reapers, and Shepard blows the weapon, and it evacs all non-reapers to another galaxy. BAM!. Non Servium. We choose to get off this goddamn merry-go-round. Keep the damn galaxy. There's a hundred billion others to inhabit.

I would of like that a lot more, because the resulting galaxy you went to would be a culmination of the allies and resources you amassed. I could imagine The "Bad" ending would be you make the leap but don't have enough allies or resources to play "Garden of Eden" so you just die out after a few failed generations. Multiple other scenarios could play out based on what geniuses and races you brought with you. Pay some concept artists to draw up some static images for some of them, maybe do a cinematic for a few, write out some scenarios. Far better.

I look at it this way. Three possible endings that really aren't that different from one another make it a lot easier to make Mass Effect 4 or whatever else that want to do to milk the universe for cash. Horrible way to end a space opera, but good way to insure you don't make the next game that complicated for your development team/writers.

Lazy and greedy.
 
Avatar 55902
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
67 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo