BioWare Hints at Big Things in Next Mass Effect 3 DLC

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Nihlus2:
Centered around the Citadel eh? Maybe we will finally get a (lore retconned) explanation as to why the Reapers did not just A-Roll over the Citadel forces, claimed it. Then shut down all relays in the universe. As. We. Were. Informed. In. ME1! And then proceeded to do what they did in all previous cycles... take out a system 1 by 1, with no loses, since they had no intel, no resources to transfer between worlds (isolated), and no reinforcements / alternate worlds to regroup at.
We only stopped them from calling in the Reaper Fleet... which they solved damn well themselves between ME2 and 3... which -should- have left us back at square one... but for some reason they decided to brawl with us... *facedesk*

Because they seem to be just fine about steamrolling over it in time for it to be a plot device on Earth...

...why did you not do this from the beginning again?

At this point in time I'm putting my money on the excuse that Harbinger accidently deleted that tactical folder along with his final boss script in order to make space on his harddrive for more surveilance footage of Shepard.

I've never seen this as a problem, honestly. Any attack from the Reapers on the Citadel will take long enough that the Citadel will have time to lock itself up, leaving the Reapers in a long-term siege situation. On top of that, the Citadel is probably the most heavily guarded system in the galaxy. There's just no immediate advantage to the Reapers in attacking. They probably were planning to hit the Citadel at some point but only after bleeding the allied fleets dry.

On top of all that, the Normandy still has a Reaper IFF, and that has, at the very least, been shared with Cerberus and probably the Alliance too. So even if the Reapers did lock down the Mass Relays, quite a few ships could still get through them.

Anyway, on topic: I really hope that this DLC focuses on the Reapers somehow. Not just the Reaper's background, but the actual Reapers. I want to hear Harbinger yelling at me. I want Shepard to blow another Reaper up - preferably an actual Sovereign sized one this time! And I'd quite like to go through the Citadel Relay to see what's in Dark Space.

Blind Sight:
My god Bioware, I mean, my god. You're really trying to hammer this series into the ground. I mean, the asinine ending aside, clipping in as much DLC as you can into your story-based game is not the best idea.

Thing is, they did the exact same thing with ME2. And even though most of the DLC for ME2 took place after the ending it was all pointless too. Kasumi gave you an extra squad member during the game so maybe that was worth it. Overlord was completely pointless and had no impact on the plot. Ditto Firewalker. Arrival would have progressed the plot... except in ME3 they were too scared that the people who hadn't played it would be confused, so they glossed over it. And LotSB, while very cool, didn't really affect much either.

So the fact that the DLC is all set pre-ending this time around doesn't actually change much at all in the grand scheme of things. It's pretty much exactly what they did last time.

Frostbyte666:

Blind Sight:
My god Bioware, I mean, my god. You're really trying to hammer this series into the ground. I mean, the asinine ending aside, clipping in as much DLC as you can into your story-based game is not the best idea. I'm actually interested to see the ratios between those who bought Mass Effect 3 and those who purchased the DLC. I get a feeling there's a pretty constant downward trend in their consumer base.

To quote Joss Whedon: "You have to know at what point mouth-to-mouth becomes necrophilia."

Considering Joss Whedon enjoyed vampire slayer - vampire (demonically animated corpse) romance I wouldn't trust his views on necrophilia.

OT: Yeah they just need to let the series die with what little dignity remains. I saw reviews of ME3 and was horrified so didn't get it. The dlc is doing little to encourage me to get ME3 either, maybe if they pulled a rimmer with the ending:
catalyst "make a choice"
shepard *kicks him in the balls* "Not today matey"
catalyst "gasp...thats never happened before, gasp"

actually, you should get it. it's great! just... you know, stop playing when you hit the liberation of earth, put your fingers in your ears and yell: and then the reapers got killed and everything was perfect forever!

Floppertje:

actually, you should get it. it's great! just... you know, stop playing when you hit the liberation of earth, put your fingers in your ears and yell: and then the reapers got killed and everything was perfect forever!

To be honest, the suck sets in some way before there.

If you get Mass Effect 3, just pretend it's a pretty good multiplayer horde mode game with an interesting but flawed progression mechanic, and ignore the horrible wart of a singleplayer campaign hanging off it.

Y'know, just like all those other EA games like Battlefield and Medal of Honour.

anthony87:
And yet....that ending.

I kid! I kid!......kinda. See even though the ending had it's issues that's not the problem regarding the DLC, the problem for me is that it was THE ending y'know? They can release DLC but in the end none of it affects the overall ending of the game that I've already seen. Makes it kinda hard for me to be that enthused about the DLC, as interesting as it sounds.

I think it depends on how it is done.

Bioware tend to prefer to create 2 hour long DLC's that directly tie in to the main story in some shape or form. This tends to mean that the DLC is essentially another mission, and by not having it you were missing out on some story. It also means that it is viewed as being a part of the story and so considering that we know how the game ends (nothing we do makes a difference anyway) it makes the DLC somewhat worthless.

If they did what Bethesda does, then it wouldn't be so much of an issue. 3-5 hours long, completely different setting, story not related to the main quest. These feel much more like optional extras, than they do missions that we are "missing out on" if we do not get them.

If you do not care about vampires, then missing out on Dawnguard isn't going to harm your game experience. If you care about stopping the Reapers, then missing out on missions that are supposed to help that, does. So when the Mass Effect ending renders those DLC all irrelevant (in terms of how much they help win the war) it isn't exactly a compelling purchase.

yes, we finally can eat virtual cornflakes and talk about it with garrus in the next DLC.

no, chance bioware. not a single damn chance.

Legion:

anthony87:
And yet....that ending.

I kid! I kid!......kinda. See even though the ending had it's issues that's not the problem regarding the DLC, the problem for me is that it was THE ending y'know? They can release DLC but in the end none of it affects the overall ending of the game that I've already seen. Makes it kinda hard for me to be that enthused about the DLC, as interesting as it sounds.

I think it depends on how it is done.

Bioware tend to prefer to create 2 hour long DLC's that directly tie in to the main story in some shape or form. This tends to mean that the DLC is essentially another mission, and by not having it you were missing out on some story. It also means that it is viewed as being a part of the story and so considering that we know how the game ends (nothing we do makes a difference anyway) it makes the DLC somewhat worthless.

If they did what Bethesda does, then it wouldn't be so much of an issue. 3-5 hours long, completely different setting, story not related to the main quest. These feel much more like optional extras, than they do missions that we are "missing out on" if we do not get them.

If you do not care about vampires, then missing out on Dawnguard isn't going to harm your game experience. If you care about stopping the Reapers, then missing out on missions that are supposed to help that, does. So when the Mass Effect ending renders those DLC all irrelevant (in terms of how much they help win the war) it isn't exactly a compelling purchase.

maybe. just maybe, they change the hidden ending and allow us to kick the catalyst in the balls.

Innegativeion:
I don't see why Bioware doesn't just make an alternate ending DLC at this point. They had THEIR shitty conclusion. I don't care if they even plaster "THIS. IS. NOT. CANON." All up and down the thing. If they made a quality conclusion and released it as DLC, of course there'd be a huge hissy fit over it.

Well, since it was all just a story from a granddad to his grandson, what the hell is canon.

Not gonna get it. I bought all the DLCs for ME2 because to me, this was the greatest series in the world. I don't even want to touch these games anymore, let alone buy more content for it.

I hope all of you are enjoying spewing your bile here, because I will be enjoying this DLC. :D

Big with bioware means its a good excuse to charge 20$ instead of 10$ simply because they say its big. Instead of an hour it will be an hour and a half and you will be 20$ poorer and realize no matter what you do the final outcome spits in your face and insults you for your time investment. Hell, for 20$ I bought 3 full price games on the black friday steam sale. Think that hour long dlc can compare to that?

And Nimcha, I've learned my lesson buying hour long dragon age / mass effect 2 content a dozen times from bioware. I've finally had enough, and what you say is bile I say is truth.

Wonder if they will use this dlc as a stepping point to add info for there next new ME game? Nothing major, just adding in characters or mention places or situations that you may be playing in the future.

Seems interesting, but I am probably not going to get it. Besides my time being more limited these days, it feels kind of weird having all these side stories placed in after Shepard died in the end. I know the game places you right before the charge on Cerberus when you start the game back up, but then it seems like "Alright everyone, we've got the military backing us on standby and we're all ready to charge! Team, let's... go find a leviathan and clear up Omega leaving the military here. They can wait"
Basically, I probably won't get the DLC's because of the ending, but not for the whole "It's a terrible ending and they owe me" stuff, I actually don't mind the ending (I kind of like parts of it, more so since the extended cut).

GloatingSwine:

Floppertje:

actually, you should get it. it's great! just... you know, stop playing when you hit the liberation of earth, put your fingers in your ears and yell: and then the reapers got killed and everything was perfect forever!

To be honest, the suck sets in some way before there.

If you get Mass Effect 3, just pretend it's a pretty good multiplayer horde mode game with an interesting but flawed progression mechanic, and ignore the horrible wart of a singleplayer campaign hanging off it.

Y'know, just like all those other EA games like Battlefield and Medal of Honour.

that's a little harsh. what was so bad about the rest of the SP? I liked it! It wasn't perfect, but calling it a horrible wart is a bit strong...

Nimcha:
I hope all of you are enjoying spewing your bile here, because I will be enjoying this DLC. :D

And I'll be holding onto my money instead of throwing it at a company that can't be trusted anymore. Guess that works for both of us, eh?

Deja Vu...

Commander Shepard's money arc may be money, but the Mass Effect 3 DLC train just money on rolling. Money launched last week, detailing the money to retake the money space station from the forces of money, and now it sounds like the next money will be even more money.

"It's all hands on money for this one. Pretty much every ME3 DLC writer here in money is involved. (which would include both cash AND money)," Money designer Money Hendriks wrote on the money forums. "If my math skills are correct, [that means] eight," he added in a later money.

BioWare money producer Caroline Livingstone, meanwhile, revealed on Twitter that Money, the voice of Joker, had returned for another money making session, his first since the game launched. Raphael Sbarge, the voice of money, tweeted all the way back in money that he was back in the studio as well and since no money appeared in Omega, the assumption is that the return was to work on the next money release.

More recently, composer Sam Hulick stated on his own money feed that he's also involved in the money. "What I'm up to lately: working on an unannounced Mass Effect 3 money! More money on this coming money on," he wrote yesterday. "High potential for money."

And speaking of "all money," composer Sascha Dikiciyan clarified earlier today that he and partner Money are working on the money too. "We and Money ard doing a 5050 split. It's more money than the usual dlcs," he wrote.

Neither Money nor EA have moneyed anything at this point but based on money gleaned from previous money money, the next Mass Effect 3 money is money to be money on the money.

Look, this has the same problem that I had with Omega, I don't care how good it might be, the ending still kinda ruins everything for me. Once there is an ending that kinda invalidates all of your previous decisions...everything else just seems kinda pointless.

DustyDrB:

And can we please make the end choice of Mass Effect 2 matter in some way other than changing the decor of a single room a little? Seriously, everyone just knew that choice would be a huge deal. There were tons of threads here about that single choice alone. And it really ended up amounting to next to nothing.

Wait a minute, you want your choices to matter in a Bioware game? I think you're expecting a bit too much from them, sorry.

Cid SilverWing:
No sane person can congratulate Casey Hudson after what he did to an otherwise excellent series.

Yeah, I can't believe that the same guy who worked on KOTOR, Jade Empire, and Mass Effect 1 also led Mass Effect 2&3. It blows my mind.

EA about Bioware:
I am milking a cash cow,
Every single day.
I am milking a cash cow,
Till her teats run dry...

Nimcha:
I hope all of you are enjoying spewing your bile here, because I will be enjoying this DLC. :D

And I'll be enjoying games in my Steam backlog not designed by pretentious, overblown, and incompetent hacks. First up, Saints Row the Third!

The_Darkness:

Nihlus2:
Centered around the Citadel eh? Maybe we will finally get a (lore retconned) explanation as to why the Reapers did not just A-Roll over the Citadel forces, claimed it. Then shut down all relays in the universe. As. We. Were. Informed. In. ME1! And then proceeded to do what they did in all previous cycles... take out a system 1 by 1, with no loses, since they had no intel, no resources to transfer between worlds (isolated), and no reinforcements / alternate worlds to regroup at.
We only stopped them from calling in the Reaper Fleet... which they solved damn well themselves between ME2 and 3... which -should- have left us back at square one... but for some reason they decided to brawl with us... *facedesk*

Because they seem to be just fine about steamrolling over it in time for it to be a plot device on Earth...

...why did you not do this from the beginning again?

At this point in time I'm putting my money on the excuse that Harbinger accidently deleted that tactical folder along with his final boss script in order to make space on his harddrive for more surveilance footage of Shepard.

I've never seen this as a problem, honestly. Any attack from the Reapers on the Citadel will take long enough that the Citadel will have time to lock itself up, leaving the Reapers in a long-term siege situation. On top of that, the Citadel is probably the most heavily guarded system in the galaxy. There's just no immediate advantage to the Reapers in attacking. They probably were planning to hit the Citadel at some point but only after bleeding the allied fleets dry.

The thing is... 1 reaper dreadnaught managed to get inside the Citadel before it locked up in ME1, with only a small Geth fleet... and no controls over the Citadel whatsoever. How would multitudes of them against the same citadel fleet that was steamrolled in ME1 fare any better in ME3, against heavier firepower and world darkening numbers? Sovereign barely even joined that battle and just passed by everything while the Geth Cruisers kept the Citadel Fleet at bay. Again, the thing is a defense is only good when the enemy cannot A-move through your forces like they do not care. And the Reapers could, so delaying them while The Citadel closed became an invalid strategy. Heck, they went through Arcturus Station to get to Earth, while also fighting there. Taking loses just to keep on moving without stopping. When you don't have to worry about the vacuum of space or actually losing stuff for other reasons than "effiency" (or "preservation" if we acknowledge the Starchild)... it still does not make sense not to do that. The Reapers are linebreakers, scary ones at that.

Most of the Citadel Space Fleets were in their own regions (like The Alliance had most at Arcturus Station (Alliance Navy HQ), and the rest at Earth), "The Citadel Fleet" was a seperate entity entirely, much smaller, meant to guard, but not be a monolith of a defense.

That's what bugged me, otherwise your points are fairly valid. The whole scary point in ME1 of The Reaper's Warfare, was that they could just go from system to system with their entire nearly endless fleet and harvest, since everything was isolated. Losing nearly nothing with that strategy as worlds could not, regroup, retreat, call for reinforcements, transport supplies. Nothing. That is the dream strategy in any war. Completely paralyzing your enemy in all but their natural brute strenght (the firepower they have per point (or world in this case)). Remember The Reapers are machines, timeless, they care not for how -long- the cycle is. Just how efficient it is. This seems the reversed... sacrifice hundreds of Reaper casualties to achieve the same goal as to instantly capture the Citadel and slowly drain the paralyzed galaxy.

You may be right on the point with the IFF though, they had 6 months, so it is doubtful it would have been mass produced in such a short time and distributed, but plausible. To be honest, I thought ME3 would take that route, the IFF enableling The Normandy to be the sole free vessel on our side able to travel across the galaxy, undoing that initial crippleling blow (how that would be done could have been an interesting diversion, compared "we found mass reaper kill switch").
Ah well, I ramble on... appologies. Just loved ME1, and it feels like it was mostly overlooked or skimmed over, like they had a whole new idea for the direction things were going with the third instalment.

I can at least hope it's better than Omega. Or as I'd like to call that DLC... "Industrial Corridors With Aria For 3 Hours And Nothing Reallly Happens". I'm trying to love you, BioWare. But you're making it hard these days.

Maybe it's time to let this turkey go.

I hope it involves the keeper tunnels.

If it really is a giant expansion, it could be a complete alternate ending allowing Shepard to be there for the illusive mans invasion of the citadel rather than attacking his headquarters.

It could also just be following Kai Lang and the rest of Cerberus into the keeper tunnels after Priority Citadel.

Unless the new DLC is 20 minutes of Shepard punching Casey Hudson in the balls, I'm not interested.

Nihlus2:
The thing is... 1 reaper dreadnaught managed to get inside the Citadel before it locked up in ME1, with only a small Geth fleet... and no controls over the Citadel whatsoever.

Nah, Sovereign had Saren keeping the arms on the Citadel open until he got in and then closing them after him.
That's why Saren needed the Conduit.

Regarding the DLC, I'm probably just wait until they are all released and on sale before bothering with ME3 again.
Unless it's really, really amazing. But that's not very likely.

deathbydeath:

Nimcha:
I hope all of you are enjoying spewing your bile here, because I will be enjoying this DLC. :D

And I'll be enjoying games in my Steam backlog not designed by pretentious, overblown, and incompetent hacks. First up, Saints Row the Third!

Yeah, because it's not like THQ gave you half a game only to DROWN you in DLC, right?

I've never been a fan of DLC and probably never will be. Walking into the citadel nightclub and talking to Aria and having her talk about losing omega to Cerberus made me as a player think I'd be doing that in the game and I got excited about it. However, not the case. Now they want to keep chugging along trying to patch things up to restore faith..and what? The choices/actions made when completing the DLC may have dialogue changes to that horrible ending?! BioEAre I don't want to sit through that tripe ever again.

I'm done. I loved KoToR <--- first ever RPG experience right there. Loved ME and loved DA.

But after DA2, SWTOR, and ME3 I've had enough. I am a Biodrone no longer.

**removes chip from back of head** **throws in a sewer**

trty00:

deathbydeath:

Nimcha:
I hope all of you are enjoying spewing your bile here, because I will be enjoying this DLC. :D

And I'll be enjoying games in my Steam backlog not designed by pretentious, overblown, and incompetent hacks. First up, Saints Row the Third!

Yeah, because it's not like THQ gave you half a game only to DROWN you in DLC, right?

I got it in the Humble THQ Bundle, which consisted of SR3, Darksiders, Metro 2033, and Company of Heroes and a few expansion packs (and some soundtracks) for $6.00 USD. And given that the dlc season pass is $20 (If I remember correctly), then I could get every scrap of content of the game for less than half of the launch price. I'm not complaining.

Besides, the game's a decent shooter, even if the checkpoint save system is fucked to the moon and back.

deathbydeath:

trty00:

deathbydeath:

And I'll be enjoying games in my Steam backlog not designed by pretentious, overblown, and incompetent hacks. First up, Saints Row the Third!

Yeah, because it's not like THQ gave you half a game only to DROWN you in DLC, right?

I got it in the Humble THQ Bundle, which consisted of SR3, Darksiders, Metro 2033, and Company of Heroes and a few expansion packs (and some soundtracks) for $6.00 USD. And given that the dlc season pass is $20 (If I remember correctly), then I could get every scrap of content of the game for less than half of the launch price. I'm not complaining.

Besides, the game's a decent shooter, even if the checkpoint save system is fucked to the moon and back.

All I'm saying is, Saints Row 3 isn't the best example of a developer not fucking with the player base.

trty00:

All I'm saying is, Saints Row 3 isn't the best example of a developer not fucking with the player base.

Point taken, and I probably should've used Hotline Miami, Darksiders, or some other game developed by talented people and not Bioware.

That's lovely, Bioware, truly it is. NOW GIVE ME JADE EMPIRE 2, GOD DAMN YOUR EYES!

Alright back to the citadel, even though we already know it dosn't matter who we save because it gets taken and everyone on board DIES HORRIBLY FOR THE ENDITRON 4000!

Nihlus2:
snip

While we are at plotholes, why did the reapers, after capturing the citadel, not just shut down the relays? Are they the kind of guys who are really commuted to a full on war once they start?
The whole idea of having a full on war was dumb since the reapers were build up to be those super badasses.

ME 3 - Awakening...

Or what I mean is a bridge to the next game in the series and creating a new hero, they did this with Dragon Age, why would they not do it with Mass Effect, it's genuinely a good idea

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here