You should play Mass Effect Cred Forums

I'd buy the trilogy, but the dlcs aren't included and are are pretty much mandatory for 3. On top of that they're still expensive as fuck.

Getting to it. Just as soon I get Windows reinstalled.

>3 is good and worth it for mordin story alone.

No.

Opinions.

Yeah fuck EA honestly. They have never included the dlcs in any bundle and you have to buy them with bioware points lmao. Some dlcs like the shadow broker are essential to the story.

>A game with literally over TWENTY TWO DLC PACKS is on sale

Well whoop-de fucking doo

3's Multiplayer was pretty good, only thing that kept me coming back.

>and are are pretty much mandatory for 3.

Yes, the character that's ridiculously out of place, yet nobody in game (our outside) gives a shit about is really necessary.
Or that completely unfitting chase-your-clone bullshit. Absolutely can't miss that.

Good god, no wonder Bioware is still in business.

>Some dlcs like the shadow broker are essential to the story.

>Some dlcs, like the shadow broker, are essentially the only story.

Fixed.

I meant shit like Leviathan, Shadow Broker, Arrival

>That image
Wait, were the Reapers fucking suicide bombing from outerspace? Because those aren't regular landings.

>Leviathan
That which only elaborated the stupid of Star Child? Wonderful.

>Shadow Broker
Is for ME2 and ultimately irrelevant for 3, since it doesn't do anything for that game. Not even a "EMS point", if I remember correctly

>Arrival
Which broke most of the lore, more than anything else in the franchise, and was also completely pointless. And genuinely stupid (as in making no sense in the given universe, as well as characters and their motivations)
Also ME2. And not connected to 3, outside of the intro. Which also was stupid.

Amazing shit you shouldn't miss.

>Leviathan
Shit that should've been in the main game

>Shadow Broker, Arrival
These are for ME2

Pshaw, fuck physics, logic and plain common sense. We need spider reapers!

FUCK YOU CASEY HUDSON YOU STUPID CUNT

But you can have those without needing to go to Earth at top speed. Those fire trails imply they're accelerating still.
Also, Shepard would probably not survive a full sized Reaper landing that close to him from orbit. That city would be effectively nuked.

It's a promo pic. It needs to look "cool".

>That which only elaborated the stupid of Star Child? Wonderful.
Yeah, something that gives a bit of story to the main antagonist of the game? I mean, who really cares? :/
>Is for ME2 and ultimately irrelevant for 3, since it doesn't do anything for that game. Not even a "EMS point", if I remember correctly
Yeah, something that explains what happened to one of the main characters of 1, and shows how she got where she was in 3? I mean, I'd skip this even if it was included :/
>Which broke most of the lore, more than anything else in the franchise, and was also completely pointless. And genuinely stupid (as in making no sense in the given universe, as well as characters and their motivations)
Also ME2. And not connected to 3, outside of the intro. Which also was stupid.
I mean, who gives a shit about the story at all? I'm fine with completely missing the first act of the game :/

Are you okay user?

But it should also make sort of sense in game? You can't just promote the game with shit that never remotely happens. That's literally false advertising.

The good thing about mass effect is the character arcs not the main story you fucking retard. SO yeah I would say some of them like the shadow broker are essential if you care about liara.

...

It's space magic, they don't gotta explain shit.

>Yeah, something that gives a bit of story to the main antagonist of the game? I mean, who really cares? :/

When the antagonist is beyond stupid and I can't deal with it in a logical manner, I don't.

>Yeah, something that explains what happened to one of the main characters of 1, and shows how she got where she was in 3?

ME2 Liara was already fucked, even before we went into Shadow Broker. Partially because it had a connecting comic. Which is a huge no-no, especially in this type of game.
Then we get her to be the Shadow Broker. For no gain. So the story element was pointless. Therefore it doesn't matter that that's how we know how she ended up where she is. It has no impact on anything.

>I mean, who gives a shit about the story at all?
You make no argument. Arrival is fundamentally broken. It destroys most of the logical connections built up to that point (which were already severely damaged by ME2 itself).
And then, when ME3 starts, the big event it tried to set up fell flat. Completely.

>But it should also make sort of sense in game?

Why should it, when barely anything in the actual game does?

>You can't just promote the game with shit that never remotely happens.

Aw, you're cute.

Liara becomes the shadow broker regardless of whether or not you play the DLC and is the only reason you find out about the crucible which helps you defeat the reapers :3

nice advertisement op

>The good thing about mass effect is the character arcs not the main story you fucking retard.

Oh, so it's fine for the main story to be offensively stupid? Just because the characters are okay, at times? So I'm not allowed to criticize?
Liara's arc in Shadow Broker makes no sense from a trilogy standpoint. Contained in itself, as solely Shadow Broker DLC story, it's good, though, yes.

>When the antagonist is beyond stupid and I can't deal with it in a logical manner, I don't.
"i don't like the story so important story sections should just be removed altogether"
>ME2 Liara was already fucked, even before we went into Shadow Broker. Partially because it had a connecting comic. Which is a huge no-no, especially in this type of game.
Then we get her to be the Shadow Broker. For no gain. So the story element was pointless. Therefore it doesn't matter that that's how we know how she ended up where she is. It has no impact on anything.
"i don't like the story so important story sections should be removed altogether"
>You make no argument. Arrival is fundamentally broken. It destroys most of the logical connections built up to that point (which were already severely damaged by ME2 itself).
And then, when ME3 starts, the big event it tried to set up fell flat. Completely.
"i don't like the..."
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's a piece of the story you can just discard. Arrival leads into the intro of 3, and it's worse and even more confusing having not played it.
Why are you even arguing against the addition of optional content into the game?

>EA gives you enough rope to hang yourself with.

Bioware became a victim of their own marketing. They've been praising the branching story for years and in the end they did deliver but without going into much detail with anything or you only get a reskin of the exact same situation.

They basically wrote themselves into a corner. Three games with hundreds of small and a couple dozen big decisions that in the end didn't make much of a difference while trailers and interviews were promising the exact opposite. Technically they all did have some consequences but nowhere near the level people were lead to believe.

A game that would deliver exactly what was promised or maybe even more while still staying on budget and released on time would be 10 hours long with radically different scenarios depending on your choices. A game of average RPG playtime(50 hours) while delivering that same focus on choices with meaningful consequences would take at least twice the budget and development time.

>there are people who think indoc theory wasn't legit

ME3 was done masterfully if you don't just take everything at face value.

I still can't believe control and synthesis were valid options after everything we learned from the previous 2 games

>Mass Effect Trilogy
>Trilogy
That doesn't make sense; Bioware was destroyed by an errant piece of space debris shortly after shipping off the final code for Dragon Age Origins.

3 is a lot worse than people make it out to be desu

because they weren't. The star child was a reaper AI trying to trick shephard into dooming humanity. If you ask him about anything about trying to destroy the reapers, he gets irritable and redirects you to synthesis or control.

>implying those are still considered canon
With that many writers going from game to game, old ones dropping out, new ones coming in, writing styles changing over the years, i think that anything that is just flat out lore breaking is just something they hadn't considered when they wrote this part of the story or something they didn't like anymore and decided to change without telling anyone.

they were actually planning to do an ending where shepard is indoctrinated or fighting indoctrination but removed it because of complications

would of made a lot more sense

>there are still people trying to cover up their buyers remorse with the indoc "theory"

biodrones plz

but they were, extended cut confirmed everything was fine and dandy

not an argument

extended cut actually adds a lot more to indoc theory than it removed friendo. You should do some more looking into it.

oily shadows alone basically prove thats its indoc.

Fun fact

The Trilogy Edition does not include all the DLC

Does the ME PC collection have ALL the DLC in it? otherwise no buy.

then why don't the devs confirm it

no buy

because it would ruin the point of actually having some fucking subtlety in writing for once.

People who play video games tend to be really stupid and only think about things at face value.

The fact that they always describe indoctrination as oily shadows, and in all of his dreams shepard has oily shadows, and at the end when he's running in to meet the star child there are oily shadows should be more than enough evidence for somebody to be convinced.

>"i don't like the story so important story sections should just be removed altogether"
You're absolutely retarded, the guy never even said that. He just said that writers who are aware of a widely criticized and hated part of the game (Star Child is/was largely disliked at the time, this isn't something that can be argued against) shouldn't try to fix a turd by adding more shit to it.
Not to mention that unleashing the Leviathans on the galaxy would realistically have a huge effect on not only the Reapers, but on the Civilizations after the conflict is over. Sure, it's a great idea to let loose these God-like squids who see other civilizations as tools instead of people and have the ability to control their minds. What could go wrong?
Oh wait nothing can go wrong because all they really amount up to is some points that decide which color ending you get.

but that happens for the extended cut

do the control and synthesis endings have oily shadows in them?

You indoc theorists are literally cancer in fiction, trying to see things that aren't there and taking apart every tiny detail to feed your confirmation bias even though the official authors will never ever confirm or deny your theory because they know letting you retards fume in your own little echo chamber makes them more money.

Fuckers like you exist in every single genre of fiction and you're cancer each and every single goddamn time

I have 3 installed but cant play because of how bad the writing is. This is leagues worse than 2

Cant play 1 because I played it too many times, only based game in this shitty trilogy

while i use to be a supporter I dropped it after the extended cut

the worst part is it still makes more sense than what the devs gave us

how about you refute the theory rather than just talk shit? I didn't even buy ME3 and I dont plan on buying andromeda. sorry that I don't fit into your bubble because I actually paid attention to the games and shepard exhibited many signs of indoc that THE GAMES THEMSELVES ACKNOWLEDGE.

No, but everything leading up to meeting the star child does. Which is more than enough.

No. Cinematic RPGs are homosex.
Cinematic RPGs with 3 linear stories depending what arbitrary mix of "good" or "bad" choices you make are interracial gangbang homosex.

>No, but everything leading up to meeting the star child does. Which is more than enough.

not really. indoctrination was the original idea which was removed due to "gameplay limitations" or something similar. all it means is that shit has been left over from the original script and they didn't bother to remove it, similar to why some people still think MGS2 was all VR

don't get me wrong if the idoc theory was true I'd say ME was 9/10 or 10/10 series, but I don't think it is, and the shit mess they left made it a 6/10 at best. it still hurts

do you have a source on that? I'd be willing to change my view if that's legit.

Otherwise I'm sticking to it, and I consider it amazingly written by video game standards.

this is all i can find at the moment, it's not much to go on but i've read more about it in the past

"And even in November the gameplay team was still experimenting with an endgame sequence where players would suddenly lose control of Shepard's movements and fall under full Reaper control. (This sequence was ultimately dropped because the gameplay mechanic proved too troublesome to implement alongside dialogue choices.)"

masseffectindoctrination.com/2012/05/4-evidence-from-outside-game.html

>masseffectindoctrination.com/2012/05/4-evidence-from-outside-game.html

that's not convincing enough for me to think that they completely trashed the idea in favour of the new ending. Could be totally plausible that they wanted it to be something you had to pay close attention to (like I posted earlier).

still, nice link, thanks boss.

I guess we'll see what Andromida has to say

for me the synthesis and control endings would have such a such huge effect on the galaxy/universe, especially compared to destroy, that there's no where it could be completely ignored

I don't think so. As far as I'm concerned, Andromeda is a reboot.

The synthesis and control endings were the opposite of what you're fighting for throughout the entire story.

Saren tried to control the reapers, and ended up dying/killing himself. Same with TIM but with synthesis. Unless you specifically sided with the Geth, you're fighting for organisms over synthetics.

The only person who's not been corrupted during the war with the reapers in terms of major characters was Anderson, who maintained that they had to be destroyed at all costs.

I can't reiterate enough how weird it is that the star child keeps redirecting Shepard towards control or synthesis. That shit was straight creepy.

well if it is a reboot then sure we can ignore what happened, but if it's a sequel?

why wouldn't control or synthesised reapers follow you into the new galaxy as they are near indestructible weapons with immense fire-power?

wouldn't having reapers on side give humans and the others species incredibly knowledge from all the past species? wouldn't having such machines controlled by shepard but an end to any in fighting or space civil wars given how powerful they are?

wouldn't organisms being merged with synthetics give them a completely different view on life making them think logically instead of emotionally? making the entire social structure completely different?

am i over thinking this shit?

a sequel would be meaningless if those options were actually canon. Organics would be unstoppable.

so has it actually been confirmed that it's a reboot or what?

I don't know. I'm just stating what's logical to me. I'm sure bioware could find an asspull to make anything work though