Mass Effect 3 SPOILER THREAD: LOTS OF SPECULATION FROM EVERYONE

Status
Not open for further replies.
They both took a Reaper lazer to the face in my save.

Gotta work on that readiness rating LOL
Anyway, going forward I really hope to see some kind of story with the remaining crew on the Normandy or a story that involves them somehow in the future. I don't think Shepard will have anything to do with it regardless of whether she breathes or not
 
Is there a summation of this?

I don't want to fish for this in such a big thread.




You were de-commissioned between ME2 and ME3.

I presume they took your armor. When you got back to combat in ME3 is not like you had time to request for that.
The basic premise of the theory is that bbrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
 
So, I'm coming around on this whole "maybe the writers meant Shepard to be hallucinating" thing, thanks to all those obnoxious teasing tweets from the writers.

Thing is, I don't think it makes them good writers, nor do I think it improves the slapdash ending. "Why" is still the biggest question in my mind. To me, it just shows that they think the ending is way cleverer than it actually is.
 
So, I'm coming around on this whole "maybe the writers meant Shepard to be hallucinating" thing, thanks to all those obnoxious teasing tweets from the writers.

Thing is, I don't think it makes them good writers, nor do I think it improves the slapdash ending. "Why" is still the biggest question in my mind. To me, it just shows that they think the ending is way cleverer than it actually is.

Yep. Even if they planned this from the start, it's still awful. They just earn the kudos for having planned it.
 
So did I have a good ending or a bad ending?
-let the geth go extinct
-shot illusive man before he shot Anderson (didn't have full paragon option)
-chose to destroy synthetics
-in the cutscene Normandy was being eaten up by the space matter
-Sheapard, I assume was being blasted away from the aactivation of the Crucible
-Normandy is on a green planet, door slightly opens and then credits roll (I didn't see any characters come out)
 
After I saw this one http://i910.photobucket.com/albums/ac305/Lifejumper/heh.jpg I was ready to agree with the theory, but to actually see those wheels you have to take a few steps back and turn its not like its part of the full shot. There's nothing in the environment that would really correspond to how the catalyst area looks except that. A lot of the theories correspond with things like game design choices or environments stuff that could just as easily be attributed to lazy enviroment design choices.
 
After I saw this one http://i910.photobucket.com/albums/ac305/Lifejumper/heh.jpg I was ready to agree with the theory, but to actually see those wheels you have to take a few steps back and turn its not like its part of the full shot. There's nothing in the environment that would really correspond to how the catalyst area looks except that. A lot of the theories correspond with things like game design choices or environments stuff that could just as easily be attributed to lazy enviroment design choices.

Besides, the beam on Earth runs through the Citadel, no?

Couldn't it be the same damn beam?
 
3 > 1 > 2

ME1 still has lots of jank but I admire the more ambitious scope, I miss the Mako, and I still feel it has by far the most concise and developed narrative of all three. ME3 really trims the fat and steers closer to being a shooter, but I feel that results in a more polished product. I love the combat environments, the upgrading system, and the scope of the adventure. The story and writing are quite good given the series and long standing plot arcs, only going truly to shit at the floating platform.

ME2 is ME2. I still love it, but it felt like a transitional phase. It has the direction of ME3, but is far to stripped back in most regards, and has the worst narrative of the three games (though I like all the mini stories). I wish ME3 had more subquesting in levels like ME2, but I can deal without.
 
Besides, the beam on Earth runs through the Citadel, no?

Couldn't it be the same damn beam?

I asked the same thing and was told "NO!" but I dunno. I think it is.


3 > 1 > 2

ME1 still has lots of jank but I admire the more ambitious scope, I miss the Mako, and I still feel it has by far the most concise and developed narrative of all three. ME3 really trims the fat and steers closer to being a shooter, but I feel that results in a more polished product. I love the combat environments, the upgrading system, and the scope of the adventure. The story and writing are quite good given the series and long standing plot arcs, only going truly to shit at the floating platform.

ME2 is ME2. I still love it, but it felt like a transitional phase. It has the direction of ME3, but is far to stripped back in most regards, and has the worst narrative of the three games (though I like all the mini stories). I wish ME3 had more subquesting in levels like ME2, but I can deal without.

I agree with pretty much all of this. 3 is still a really fun game.
 
Besides, the beam on Earth runs through the Citadel, no?

Couldn't it be the same damn beam?

This falls under the lazy category of glowy lights look similar we don't have to make different ones for what amounts to the same visual effect. I really do hate the end of the game and would love if that The Truth DLC is real it sounds cool, but its probably not.
 
3 > 1 > 2

ME1 still has lots of jank but I admire the more ambitious scope, I miss the Mako, and I still feel it has by far the most concise and developed narrative of all three. ME3 really trims the fat and steers closer to being a shooter, but I feel that results in a more polished product. I love the combat environments, the upgrading system, and the scope of the adventure. The story and writing are quite good given the series and long standing plot arcs, only going truly to shit at the floating platform.

ME2 is ME2. I still love it, but it felt like a transitional phase. It has the direction of ME3, but is far to stripped back in most regards, and has the worst narrative of the three games (though I like all the mini stories). I wish ME3 had more subquesting in levels like ME2, but I can deal without.

For me personally it goes:

Combat: ME3>ME2>ME1

Story: ME1>ME3>ME2

Characters: ME2>ME3>ME1

Overall: ME3=ME2>ME1

Sorry guys.
 
I watched the interview with the dude Casey on IGN, and he basically said the ending is the ending. He was like we are definitely getting sp dlc, but it is just "icing on the cake". For all intents and purposes, we are stuck with this putrid ending no matter how much we complain. Such a tragedy. I don't know if I can forgive Bioware for this one. At least they should give us some type of epilogue(?) where we can have some loose ends tied up. As it stands I feel like I have really accomplished nothing since embarking on this journey in 2008 up till now. I have absolutely no closure at this point.

Oh well, if he is telling the truth, I'm never buying another product from Bioware and their experiment with these games has been a giant failure. Look forward to hearing about their future 3rd rate shooters with RPG elements. Would this be my anger stage then?
 
3 > 1 > 2

ME1 still has lots of jank but I admire the more ambitious scope, I miss the Mako, and I still feel it has by far the most concise and developed narrative of all three. ME3 really trims the fat and steers closer to being a shooter, but I feel that results in a more polished product. I love the combat environments, the upgrading system, and the scope of the adventure. The story and writing are quite good given the series and long standing plot arcs, only going truly to shit at the floating platform.

ME2 is ME2. I still love it, but it felt like a transitional phase. It has the direction of ME3, but is far to stripped back in most regards, and has the worst narrative of the three games (though I like all the mini stories). I wish ME3 had more subquesting in levels like ME2, but I can deal without.

ME3 did really trim it down... I like how you can upgrade guns and the weight of the weapons matter
 
Did you bother to read the other stuff?

I'm just compiling everything posted in this thread. The Mako tire thing is probably the least compelling reason and is most likely a coincidence that fans are over analyzing. No harm in that though.

I can poke holes in everything else if you'd like. I just picked that one because well its the one that caused me to believe if even for a brief moment.
 
I just replayed the ending and noticed that the two squad mates that get off of the Normandy after it has crashed and join Joker are the two squad mates you bring with you to the final battle on Earth. I find that very strange.
 
I can poke holes in everything else if you'd like. I just picked that one because well its the one that caused me to believe if even for a brief moment.

You can poke holes in the entire ME plot, what's your point?


I just replayed the ending and noticed that the two squad mates that get off of the Normandy after it has crashed and join Joker are the two squad mates you bring with you to the final battle on Earth. I find that very strange.

The 2 squad mates that pop out at the end are the ones you had the highest "relationship" with.
Further evidence that it's just all in shepard's head.
 
ME2 above ME3 in characters? What the.... Why do you think this?

The introduction of every major interesting player?

Mordin
The Illusive Man
Miranda
Legion
Thane
Grunt

As well as an expansion on Wrex, Garrus and Tali's character.

The squad setup in ME2 is much better than 3.

ME1 had Wrex and Garrus and that's about it. Kaiden and Ashley were as boring as could be, ME2 expanded on it with a rogues gallery of colorful characters.
 
ME2 above ME3 in characters? What the.... Why do you think this?

I'd agree with that opinion the Character development in ME2 is very personal and the other two games for the most part are just stuff. I would probably just as easily argue for ME3 though. ME1 was ultimately about world build before anything else and you get to know the characters in far broader strokes.
 
I just replayed the ending and noticed that the two squad mates that get off of the Normandy after it has crashed and join Joker are the two squad mates you bring with you to the final battle on Earth. I find that very strange.

Following the Indoctrination theory, everything that happens on the citadel is a dream, and as part of that dream Shepard dreams about a best possible outcome that is actually impossible. The two people that get out of the ship in addition to Joker are always your two squadmates, that were with you in your charge to the beam.
 
ME2s story was about the characters. M3 is more about the war, which is why you have such a lame cast of characters (in comparison to 1 and 2) to take with you.

Yeah, but 3 did an amazing job with returning characters (Garrus became a god, Mordin was already a legend and got even higher, Thane got a wonderful tribute, etc...)
 
Following the Indoctrination theory, everything that happens on the citadel is a dream, and as part of that dream Shepard dreams about a best possible outcome that is actually impossible. The two people that get out of the ship in addition to Joker are always your two squadmates, that were with you in your charge to the beam.
No, it can be edi
 
ME2s story was about the characters. M3 is more about the war, which is why you have such a lame cast of characters (in comparison to 1 and 2) to take with you.

The characters being more tied to the story in 3 is why I would put it ahead of ME2. I just cannot and will not ever be able to care about all their family or friend problems. Even you Garrus, just put a cap in that asshole's head and lets get back to business.
 
PROVE - I HAVE FINALLY SEEN IT!

me33j.jpg


me34f.jpg

THIS SHOULD SHUT UP EVEN THE BIGGEST DOUBTERS!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom