I must be one of the only people solely interested in the sp dlc

#61whatnow12012Posted 2/23/2013 9:49:09 AM
Bioware stated in the past that none of the DLC would change or reshape the ending other than EC they said that was the only change they would make to the ending.

While some might add in refreces such as Levithan but that is only combined with EC dosent work with without EC done tried.

So to get the Levi mentioned in the ending you must have EC installed.


These DLCs are not after the ending this why you can play them as long as you do not make a Hard Save on Earth.

You can only make a save right before Chronos Station so no this DLC isnt after the End Game it is like Omega it is in between the games storyline.

Citadel is just in game story line just like Omega it expands, adds and brings new stories unfortunate that this is the final DLC.

Cant wait a new Conspiracy, get to rekindle old romances, + Shepard Apartment which I bet will not be given to you until after the DLC is completed.

I am more curious as to the Arena how do you fight, who do you fight are there going to be rewards for winning such as new Apartment Furnishings, new Weapons or a Special Armor for Shepard after they win it.

Cant wait this DLC has me pumped up, who care if it is in game or post game dosent matter to me. I am more curious is the characters, the storyline & how long the DLC lasts unfortunate people arent interested in these facts.
#62Damiand77Posted 2/23/2013 10:15:13 AM
whatnow12012 posted...
Bioware stated in the past that none of the DLC would change or reshape the ending other than EC they said that was the only change they would make to the ending.

While some might add in refreces such as Levithan but that is only combined with EC dosent work with without EC done tried.

So to get the Levi mentioned in the ending you must have EC installed.


These DLCs are not after the ending this why you can play them as long as you do not make a Hard Save on Earth.

You can only make a save right before Chronos Station so no this DLC isnt after the End Game it is like Omega it is in between the games storyline.

Citadel is just in game story line just like Omega it expands, adds and brings new stories unfortunate that this is the final DLC.

Cant wait a new Conspiracy, get to rekindle old romances, + Shepard Apartment which I bet will not be given to you until after the DLC is completed.

I am more curious as to the Arena how do you fight, who do you fight are there going to be rewards for winning such as new Apartment Furnishings, new Weapons or a Special Armor for Shepard after they win it.

Cant wait this DLC has me pumped up, who care if it is in game or post game dosent matter to me. I am more curious is the characters, the storyline & how long the DLC lasts unfortunate people arent interested in these facts.


Bioware has lied before, friend.
:D
#63OniLink96Posted 2/23/2013 3:29:50 PM
Spideyknight posted...
You need to learn how to compare apples to apples. The Mass Effect series is predicated on the fact that you make important choices and that those choices MATTER. Fallout 3 doesn't claim the same. Also you used a terrible example as Fallout 3 is one game where devs listened to fan feedback and changed the ending. Let's forgive inept analogies though and use Skyrim instead.


Extended Cut changed the ending too. Not in nearly as dramatic a way as Broken Steel changed FO3's ending, but my point wasn't that FO3's ending wasn't changed. It's that the ending wasn't changed by those pieces of DLC.

Also, one of Fallout's primary selling points is that you can make choices. Choices that matter. Fallout 3 in particular was bad at that, but Fallout, as a series, is as much a game about choices as Mass Effect is. There just isn't a save transfer feature.

If you'd like a different argument, none of the Fallout: New Vegas DLC changed the ending and I know loads of people ******* about the fact that there was no post game and that was never changed. However all four pieces of DLC were wonderful additions to an already wonderful game.
---
We need Dinozord power, now!!
#64biohazard151Posted 2/23/2013 3:45:13 PM
metopholus posted...
Lord of Nightmares posted...
Really? The official announcement thread on the BSN forums has tons of posters expressing their excitement over Citadel (and a handful still expressing their disappointment that it does nothing to change the ending).



It's somewhat annoying to me that people are still talking about the ending after like a year later. was it really that big a deal? at what point do you decide to move on? some just can't let go i guess.



I'll be getting the Citadel. it'll be the first DLC for ME3 ive purchased.


Im not one to complain for too long, but yeah, of all the uproars over the years on videogames and their stories, endings, and such, this was the biggest. I mesn to the point it forced a company to create new extended endings to quell the uproar, there were editorials everywhere....even i think the ending was a huge deal, abd personally think it deserved alot of the flak it got.

That aside, i may indulge on this dlc as i love the citadel and the direction of the dlc.
---
"What is great in man is that he is a bridge and not an end"
#65captpluto99Posted 2/23/2013 3:48:59 PM
OniLink96 posted...
Spideyknight posted...
None of them, what's the point? Nothing you do affects the outcome. Youtube the video if you must see it. Why pay 10-15 bucks for 1-2 hours of content you are only going to go through once? It's absurd. Nothing you do affects the outcome, that renders all choices preceding the outcome meaningless.


What's the point in ever buying DLC for any game then? Operation: Anchorage and The Pitt didn't change the ending of Fallout 3, but that doesn't change the fact that they were enjoyable pieces of the game and the goodies from each of them were quite nice.

It would be really nice if people quit their ******** about the ending. It's ridiculous. I can agree that a $15 price tag for a DLC is steep, but arguing that it's worthless because it doesn't change the ending is absurd.


I usually wait for half off deals anyway because $15 is rarely worthwhile for DLC. I get them because I want to enjoy the gameplay, characters, and story, and I don't care about them affecting the endings in any way. It's just more ME goodness for me. Let the whiners not play it.
#66SpideyknightPosted 2/25/2013 10:31:33 AM
OniLink96 posted...
Spideyknight posted...
You need to learn how to compare apples to apples. The Mass Effect series is predicated on the fact that you make important choices and that those choices MATTER. Fallout 3 doesn't claim the same. Also you used a terrible example as Fallout 3 is one game where devs listened to fan feedback and changed the ending. Let's forgive inept analogies though and use Skyrim instead.


Extended Cut changed the ending too. Not in nearly as dramatic a way as Broken Steel changed FO3's ending, but my point wasn't that FO3's ending wasn't changed. It's that the ending wasn't changed by those pieces of DLC.

Also, one of Fallout's primary selling points is that you can make choices. Choices that matter. Fallout 3 in particular was bad at that, but Fallout, as a series, is as much a game about choices as Mass Effect is. There just isn't a save transfer feature.

If you'd like a different argument, none of the Fallout: New Vegas DLC changed the ending and I know loads of people ******* about the fact that there was no post game and that was never changed. However all four pieces of DLC were wonderful additions to an already wonderful game.


No, one of Fallout 1 and 2's selling points was decision making. Fallout 3 was not billed the same way, in fact the devs even said there would be some significant changes from past iterations. There were many fancy buzz words, but the short of it is Fallout 3 was Oblivion with guns, and it succeeded at that admirably. You do have player-choice, it's just normally self-contained. In the vast majority of the cases, you see the affects immediately if it has an impact on anything at all.

"Even something like the Rachni has a large impact on the ending." - Mac Walters

"The endings aren't as simple as choosing A, B, or C." - Casey Hudson

These are outright lies, FO3 never claimed anything along these lines. Also the EC didn't change the ending, it "expanded and clarified" on what was already there. That's it's problem, you can dress a pig up to the nines, but it's still a pig, and in this case a particularly vile smelling pig.

The problem with your new "argument" is that it's worse than your previous one, honestly stop with the analogies, it's embarrassing. Fallout: New Vegas didn't have a crappy ending, and in fact had choices that made significant impacts. You don't need to make DLC to change the ending when your ending isn't an unmitigated disaster. There's no campaigns, no outrage, nothing, the ending was fine. Being able to play after completing it is a design decision. That decision doesn't affect the endings cohesion or legitimacy.

So let's recap, ME3's ending sucked because of a failure in the narrative. FO3:NV didn't have a failure in it's narrative, thusly it's DLC can just expand on what's there. You are trying to defend the indefensible, and honestly you should just stop, it's a fruitless and pointless endeavor.
---
For in much wisdom is much grief, and he that increaseth knowledge, increaseth sorrow.
#67OniLink96Posted 2/25/2013 11:33:07 PM
Spideyknight posted...
No, one of Fallout 1 and 2's selling points was decision making. Fallout 3 was not billed the same way, in fact the devs even said there would be some significant changes from past iterations. There were many fancy buzz words, but the short of it is Fallout 3 was Oblivion with guns, and it succeeded at that admirably. You do have player-choice, it's just normally self-contained. In the vast majority of the cases, you see the affects immediately if it has an impact on anything at all.


I will give you that I didn't play Fallout 3 until about a year after it came out. I'll also say that the only thing I ever heard about it from word of mouth was that there was so much player choice, so many decisions to make. Rather black and white decisions, but decisions.

"Even something like the Rachni has a large impact on the ending." - Mac Walters

"The endings aren't as simple as choosing A, B, or C." - Casey Hudson

These are outright lies, FO3 never claimed anything along these lines. Also the EC didn't change the ending, it "expanded and clarified" on what was already there. That's it's problem, you can dress a pig up to the nines, but it's still a pig, and in this case a particularly vile smelling pig.


Yes, they were full of **** in that regard. None of my choices had any affect whatsoever on how the game ended, and I was upset with that. But I enjoyed the ride and, honestly, that's what matters to me. I really do not understand how a fanbase can be so full of...whiners. It's insane. It's been almost a year now.

And by "expanding and clarifying" the ending has been changed. No matter what you want to call it, it changes the ending.

The problem with your new "argument" is that it's worse than your previous one, honestly stop with the analogies, it's embarrassing. Fallout: New Vegas didn't have a crappy ending, and in fact had choices that made significant impacts. You don't need to make DLC to change the ending when your ending isn't an unmitigated disaster. There's no campaigns, no outrage, nothing, the ending was fine. Being able to play after completing it is a design decision. That decision doesn't affect the endings cohesion or legitimacy.


You've missed my point. There were plans for post-game. There were demands for the game to have post-game. But that never happened and...**** it, my "argument" kind of fell apart there, fine.

So let's recap, ME3's ending sucked because of a failure in the narrative. FO3:NV didn't have a failure in it's narrative, thusly it's DLC can just expand on what's there. You are trying to defend the indefensible, and honestly you should just stop, it's a fruitless and pointless endeavor.


No, no, here is what I'm trying to defend.

OniLink96
It would be really nice if people quit their ******** about the ending. It's ridiculous. I can agree that a $15 price tag for a DLC is steep, but arguing that it's worthless because it doesn't change the ending is absurd.


It was a bad ending to a series I otherwise enjoyed immensely. I didn't let twenty minutes ruin hundreds of hours of my time. Until BioWare hands me something I am utterly disgusted with, I don't see or feel the need to turn my back on the series.
---
We need Dinozord power, now!!