Mass Effect Megathread: DING DONG BANNU edition - Games

[QUOTE=TheLolrus;35463227]I am Reaper. Hear me BRRRRRRRRRRRT[/QUOTE] "How 'bout some more beans Mr. Harbringer?" "I reckon you had 'nuff!"

Finally beat this game. I have to ask though, why is there so much hate on the ending? It wasn't perfect, but was no worse than the ending of the recent deus ex. The [sp]choice actually felt like the choice in the original Deus Ex. You can destroy, control, or merge, same with Deus Ex. I agree there should be more of an epilogue. I also felt the catalyst thing was too mystical, I wish it was actually a simple death ray and not some all powerful spiritual device. Besides those two things I didn't have any problems with the ending or the game as a whole.[/sp]

[QUOTE=ZF911;35463261]Finally beat this game. I have to ask though, why is there so much hate on the ending? It wasn't perfect, but was no worse than the ending of the recent deus ex. The [sp]choice actually felt like the choice in the original Deus Ex. You can destroy, control, or merge, same with Deus Ex. I agree there should be more of an epilogue. I also felt the catalyst thing was too mystical, I wish it was actually a simple death ray and not some all powerful spiritual device. Besides those two things I didn't have any problems with the ending or the game as a whole.[/sp][/QUOTE] To sum it up in a single sentence, the ending sucked because it provided no closure, made no sense in context with the rest of the story, and destroyed many established themes and characters all in the span of about five minutes.

[QUOTE=ZF911;35463261]Finally beat this game. I have to ask though, why is there so much hate on the ending? It wasn't perfect, but was no worse than the ending of the recent deus ex. The [sp]choice actually felt like the choice in the original Deus Ex. You can destroy, control, or merge, same with Deus Ex. I agree there should be more of an epilogue. I also felt the catalyst thing was too mystical, I wish it was actually a simple death ray and not some all powerful spiritual device. Besides those two things I didn't have any problems with the ending or the game as a whole.[/sp][/QUOTE] the game is good, very few say it is not. The issue people have is that the end comes so far out of left field and conflicts heavily with the established feel of the franchise. Also, the [sp]implied holocaust with everyone stranded on earth and potentially starving/being exploded by the mass relays[/sp] does not help at all.

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;35463317]To sum it up in a single sentence, the ending sucked because it provided no closure, made no sense in context with the rest of the story, and destroyed many established themes and characters all in the span of about five minutes.[/QUOTE] I agree with the closure thing, which will hopefully be addressed. The last point you'll have to explain.

[QUOTE=Sector 7;35463194]"Tell me another story about the Bitches, grandpa!"[/QUOTE] well one time they met bruce campbell and accidentally fucked up his sweet space car [editline]6th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=ZF911;35463261]Finally beat this game. I have to ask though, why is there so much hate on the ending? It wasn't perfect, but was no worse than the ending of the recent deus ex. The [sp]choice actually felt like the choice in the original Deus Ex. You can destroy, control, or merge, same with Deus Ex. I agree there should be more of an epilogue. I also felt the catalyst thing was too mystical, I wish it was actually a simple death ray and not some all powerful spiritual device. Besides those two things I didn't have any problems with the ending or the game as a whole.[/sp][/QUOTE] yeah this isnt deus ex deus ex's endings were not well received, either. dont take that the wrong way i am a big fan of your work mr. levi

[QUOTE=ZF911;35463261]Finally beat this game. I have to ask though, why is there so much hate on the ending? It wasn't perfect, but was no worse than the ending of the recent deus ex. The [sp]choice actually felt like the choice in the original Deus Ex. You can destroy, control, or merge, same with Deus Ex. I agree there should be more of an epilogue. I also felt the catalyst thing was too mystical, I wish it was actually a simple death ray and not some all powerful spiritual device. Besides those two things I didn't have any problems with the ending or the game as a whole.[/sp][/QUOTE] I dislike it because, at best, it is a very mediocre ending to an amazing series. That is truly disappointing. At worst, it felt rushed. It didn't provide closure. It didn't really provide any choice. It also didn't make a lot of sense. That is downright infuriating when it's the ending to such a great series that otherwise was very immersive and captivating.

[QUOTE=ZF911;35463353]I agree with the closure thing, which will hopefully be addressed. The last point you'll have to explain.[/QUOTE] This could span a long list, but I'll stick with the most essential ones. The idea that organics will always be wiped out by synthetics is a theme that the series has repeatedly disproven (the geth and EDI being the two biggest examples), but the entire crux of the ending is that we cannot co-exist. So all that shit we did getting the quarians and geth working together was apparently for naught. Additionally, one of the major themes of the series is "Strength Through Diversity," and the Synthesis ending pisses all over this by homogenizing the entire freakin' galaxy into a synthetic/organic hybrid. As just about every character in the series has said, it's our differences that make us stronger. Even JAVIK says this. Another theme that gets tossed out the window is the "Success Against All Odds," which we have seen brilliantly displayed in Mass Effect 1, 2, and large parts of 3. Shepard and his team consistently did the impossible, but now we can't do that in the most important decision in the entire franchise? Someone dropped the ball here! And that leads into Shepard him/herself. When has Shepard [B]ever[/B] blindly accepted what was told to him? Never, that's when! Which makes it all the more staggering that Shepard doesn't even [I]question[/I] the StarChild's logic or point out how devastatingly flawed it is. I don't care if you're a Renegade/Paragon/Neutral, [B]EVERY SINGLE SHEPARD[/B] would have grabbed that little bastard and told him "Fuck you, you're wrong. Want proof? Look outside. Get out of my galaxy." Instead, Shepard turns into a gigantic wuss and just accepts whatever the StarChild has to say. Also, Joker and the other companions abandoning Shepard and the battle at large? Would never happen. Ever. Those are the big ones.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;35462245]What part of "all of this comes down to the Crucible" do you not understand? It's stated [b]numerous[/b] times in the game that the Crucible is needed. If the Protheans were able to gather their forces, it wouldn't have meant ANYTHING because they didn't have the fucking Crucible! [editline]7th April 2012[/editline] The games first mission introduces the fucking Crucible. It's literally your goal from the start of the game. Everything else was to buy time and make sure the Crucible had the chance to be used.[/QUOTE] I like how you absolutely refuse to believe that in any form, traditional warfare is impossible. Reapers can be destroyed. Four Dreadnoughts can destroy one Reaper. If there are 300 Reapers, you'd need 1200 Dreadnoughts, give or take a couple hundred due for losses. It's honestly not at all impossible for that to be accomplished, especially if the next cycle would have known from the start, thanks to Liara's Box. Bioware can say what they want, but they provided a shitload of evidence to the contrary. The Crucible isn't needed to destroy the Reapers. A shitload of Dreadnoughts is.

Just finished the game. [sp]Took the synthesis option. God fucking DAMN IT. I was expecting the ending to be shit. I was surprised.[/sp]

[QUOTE=Grim Joker;35463465]I like how you absolutely refuse to believe that in any form, traditional warfare is impossible. Reapers can be destroyed. Four Dreadnoughts can destroy one Reaper. If there are 300 Reapers, you'd need 1200 Dreadnoughts, give or take a couple hundred due for losses. It's honestly not at all impossible for that to be accomplished, especially if the next cycle would have known from the start, thanks to Liara's Box. Bioware can say what they want, but they provided a shitload of evidence to the contrary. The Crucible isn't needed to destroy the Reapers. A shitload of Dreadnoughts is.[/QUOTE] Hell, the final battle showed a -single- Cruiser blowing two legs off a Reaper and sub sequentially destroying it before being destroyed themselves. Wouldn't the Geth and Quarians [I]alone[/I] have tens of thousands of combat-ready ships ready to kick ass? Forget what Hackett says, we could have taken those bastards out without the Crucible.

300 new posts. wtf check the POSTS HOLY SHIT [B]GETH INFILTRATOR MY DREAM IS COMPLETE[/B]

How long do Gold matches typically take to finish?

[QUOTE=Novangel;35463512]300 new posts. wtf check the POSTS HOLY SHIT [B]GETH INFILTRATOR MY DREAM IS COMPLETE[/B][/QUOTE] Someone on Reddit had the amusing idea of coloring the Geth Infiltrators in pure black with red lights and decloaking next to your allies. Thank god there's no friendly fire in this game. [editline]7th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Zabe Aeiger;35463524]How long do Gold matches typically take to finish?[/QUOTE] 25-35 minutes if you've got a good team.

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;35463487]Hell, the final battle showed a -single- Cruiser blowing two legs off a Reaper and sub sequentially destroying it before being destroyed themselves. Wouldn't the Geth and Quarians [I]alone[/I] have tens of thousands of combat-ready ships ready to kick ass? Forget what Hackett says, we could have taken those bastards out without the Crucible.[/QUOTE] Exactly. The Macguffin isn't even needed to beat The Reapers, I don't see why everyone says that. The Codex and the final Space Battle demonstrate otherwise.

Maybe if 90% of the shots weren't headed for Earth instead of the Reapers they could have beaten them. [t]http://i.imgur.com/Q9h3F.jpg[/t]

[QUOTE=GetBent;35463551]Maybe if 90% of the shots weren't headed for Earth instead of the Reapers they could have. [t]http://i.imgur.com/Q9h3F.jpg[/t][/QUOTE] I think we can just chalk that one up to "Rule of Cool."

I don't know I think it would have been "cooler" to see hundreds of shots hitting Reapers. Would make me think the races of the galaxy are a bit more competent when the first thing you see in the Citadel in ME2 is "USE YOUR DAMN TARGETING COMPUTER".

[QUOTE=GetBent;35463551]Maybe if 90% of the shots weren't headed for Earth instead of the Reapers they could have beaten them.[/QUOTE] [video=youtube;LcqgJTD7tEE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcqgJTD7tEE[/video] gg bioware

[QUOTE=GetBent;35463551]Maybe if 90% of the shots weren't headed for Earth instead of the Reapers they could have beaten them. [t]http://i.imgur.com/Q9h3F.jpg[/t][/QUOTE] deadliest son of a bitch in spaaaaaaace

[QUOTE=GetBent;35463579]I don't know I think it would have been "cooler" to see hundreds of shots hitting Reapers.[/QUOTE] True. That said, given what we know about Reaper durability the fight likely would have been over in a matter of two or three salvos at that point. Sadly, I think they once again had to sacrifice a little logic for the sake of cinematic glory.

god DAMN it kommodore

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;35463609]True. That said, given what we know about Reaper durability the fight likely would have been over in a matter of two or three salvos at that point. Sadly, I think they once again had to sacrifice a little logic for the sake of cinematic glory.[/QUOTE] I know, but they could have shown a bit more destruction by the Reapers to balance it out. Because one shot from a Reaper apparently means destroyed ship no matter what. We hardly see the Combined Fleet take any casualties in the cinematic.

[QUOTE=Grim Joker;35463465] Reapers can be destroyed. Four Dreadnoughts can destroy one Reaper. If there are 300 Reapers, you'd need 1200 Dreadnoughts, [/QUOTE] You would need many times more to defeat a Reaper Armada. If there are 1200 Dreadnoughts, then the Reapers destroying a single Dreadnought would completely cripple the coalition in the battle. If there are 3 Dreadnoughts against a single Reaper, and a Reaper destroys 1, the remaining 2 do not have sufficient firepower to defeat it. The Reapers have the ability to destroy multiple Dreadnoughts at once. Therefore, any numerical superiority can be quickly lost. Another thing is combat width, you can only put so many Dreadnoughts in one area. At a certain density the Dreadnoughts would be firing into each other and colliding with each other. Also, I think 3 Dreadnoughts take up more volume than a single Reaper Dreadnought. That means a coalition formation would have to be packed together over 3 times more densely than an equivalent force of Reapers. This is incredibly advantageous for the Reapers. If they pack themselves more densely, the coalition fleet will become 1 giant target that the Reapers can quickly massacre through concentrated fire. This doesn't even take into account the Reaper Destroyers that are accompanying the Reaper Armada. These ships can serve as excellent screens considering they aren't very vulnerable unless their frontal plates expose their main cannon. You put these in front of the Reaper Dreadnoughts and they can absorb most of the incoming fire while the "Capitals" fire from behind the line. None of this even matters because there wouldn't be enough Dreadnoughts to destroy 300 Reapers anyways. "The Treaty of Farixen stipulates the amount of dreadnoughts a navy may own, with the turian peacekeeping fleet being allowed the most. As of 2183, the turians had 37 dreadnoughts, the asari had 21, the salarians had 16, and the Alliance had 6 with another under construction. As of 2185, the dreadnought count was 39 turian, 20 asari, 16 salarian, and 8 human. By 2186, humans construct a ninth dreadnought, and the volus have built a single dreadnought of their own. " [url]http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Dreadnought#Dreadnoughts[/url] 85 Dreadnoughts is FAR short of the (very generous) 1200 Dreadnoughts needed in the first place. [editline]7th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=JeanLuc761;35463487]Hell, the final battle showed a -single- Cruiser blowing two legs off a Reaper and sub sequentially destroying it before being destroyed themselves. Wouldn't the Geth and Quarians [I]alone[/I] have tens of thousands of combat-ready ships ready to kick ass? Forget what Hackett says, we could have taken those bastards out without the Crucible.[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure that was a Destroyer. A weaker sibling of the Reaper Dreadnought. There is absolutely no way a Cruiser could take down a Reaper Dreadnought when it took an entire fleet to take down Sovereign.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;35463634]You would need many times more to defeat a Reaper Armada. If there are 1200 Dreadnoughts, then the Reapers destroying a single Dreadnought would completely cripple the coalition in the battle. If there are 3 Dreadnoughts against a single Reaper, and a Reaper destroys 1, the remaining 2 do not have sufficient firepower to defeat it. The Reapers have the ability to destroy multiple Dreadnoughts at once. Therefore, any numerical superiority can be quickly lost. Another thing is combat width, you can only put so many Dreadnoughts in one area. At a certain density the Dreadnoughts would be firing into each other and colliding with each other. Also, I think 3 Dreadnoughts take up more volume than a single Reaper Dreadnought. That means a coalition formation would have to be packed together over 3 times more densely than an equivalent force of Reapers. This is incredibly advantageous for the Reapers. If they pack themselves more densely, the coalition fleet will become 1 giant target that the Reapers can quickly massacre through concentrated fire. This doesn't even take into account the Reaper Destroyers that are accompanying the Reaper Armada. These ships can serve as excellent screens considering they aren't very vulnerable unless their frontal plates expose their main cannon. You put these in front of the Reaper Dreadnoughts and they can absorb most of the incoming fire while the "Capitals" fire from behind the line. None of this even matters because there wouldn't be enough Dreadnoughts to destroy 300 Reapers anyways. "The Treaty of Farixen stipulates the amount of dreadnoughts a navy may own, with the turian peacekeeping fleet being allowed the most. As of 2183, the turians had 37 dreadnoughts, the asari had 21, the salarians had 16, and the Alliance had 6 with another under construction. As of 2185, the dreadnought count was 39 turian, 20 asari, 16 salarian, and 8 human. By 2186, humans construct a ninth dreadnought, and the volus have built a single dreadnought of their own. " [URL]http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Dreadnought#Dreadnoughts[/URL] 85 Dreadnoughts is FAR short of the (very generous) 1200 Dreadnoughts needed in the first place.[/QUOTE] Are you deliberately misunderstanding me? I'm not saying in the battle for Earth they would have won. I said if the Cycle would have known that the Reapers were coming, they could have won. Conventional warfare is a possibility. Shit, add a couple hundred more Dreadnoughts to compensate for losses and you're good. Reapers are not the invincible god machines that everyone makes them out to be. As a poster said up above, a standard cruiser did heavy damage to a Reaper alone. Defeating the Reapers is absolutely possible without a superweapon.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;35463634] I'm pretty sure that was a Destroyer. A weaker sibling of the Reaper Dreadnought. There is absolutely no way a Cruiser could take down a Reaper Dreadnought when it took an entire fleet to take down Sovereign.[/QUOTE] 3:50 [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlhaDUmL9Ac[/media] That is a Sovereign class Reaper. And those are Cruisers firing at it.

[QUOTE=Lankist;35463606]deadliest son of a bitch in spaaaaaaace[/QUOTE] Stupid fleet. They aren't cowboys shooting from the hip. They're really gonna ruin someone's day.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;35463634]I'm pretty sure that was a Destroyer. A weaker sibling of the Reaper Dreadnought. There is absolutely no way a Cruiser could take down a Reaper Dreadnought when it took an entire fleet to take down Sovereign.[/QUOTE] Plot holes! It was in fact a regular Reaper, as far as I could tell. Like we've been saying almost the entire thread, Bioware fucked up their own canon and continuity all over the place during that final battle.

[QUOTE=Turnips5;35463485]Just finished the game. [sp]Took the synthesis option. God fucking DAMN IT. I was expecting the ending to be shit. I was surprised.[/sp][/QUOTE] Surprised it was far shittier than you imagined, right?

[QUOTE=Goldenboy;35462740][b]Pretty major spoilers for the 'Destroy' ending in the Extended Cut:[/b] [sp]@JessicaMerizan 0_o. So...there is hope for that "golden ending" after all? I did my very best to try to have shepard and crew survive.[/sp] [sp]@MrBlazenGlazen yes but with some sacrifices depending on the end you chose. Ending is never perfect [u]but Shep/crew reunited is possible[/u] :)[/sp] [[url='https://twitter.com/#!/JessicaMerizan/status/187955957643481088']Source[/url]][/QUOTE] [sp]Destorying the Geth? Fuck that.[/sp]