Mass Effect 3 - 13: Bet you could really go for a bottle of cool, refreshing Tupari!

[Avilan the Grey]

Am I the only one only mildly interested in ME4 because Not Shepard?
Well that, and that it's Bioware. I don't trust them to deliver product anymore.

Seriously though, I finished my 2462352th playthrough of ME2 this morning and I realized that I wasn't feeling any kind of excitement about ME4, as I happily prepared to go through ME3 twice again (always go through at least one NG+ with my ME3 characters).

I mean DA3 gives me a "meh, I get it when it goes on sale" feeling. And that is after all the hype. Before that I was getting a "Absolutely NOT getting that" feeling. ME4 does better, I start at the "meh" point, but it really will have to be awesome or I will just not get it. Mostly because it feels absolutely wrong to play a character even remotely as awesome as Shepard.

[Psyren]

Am I the only one

*resists urge to link Critical Miss comic*

I mean DA3 gives me a "meh, I get it when it goes on sale" feeling. And that is after all the hype. Before that I was getting a "Absolutely NOT getting that" feeling. ME4 does better, I start at the "meh" point, but it really will have to be awesome or I will just not get it. Mostly because it feels absolutely wrong to play a character even remotely as awesome as Shepard.

Well that's understandable - even I'm not sure if I'll get ME4 (at least not right away.) If it's a non-reboot/retcon prequel I'd actually pass on it out of protest.

[Hyena]

I wonder if I'm the only one who liked the original Mass Effect and absolutely hated 2 and 3. First part just has this feeling that the sequels failed to replicate - this fantastic space opera. The characters were better (Mordin was the only new companion that I liked), the choices were better, Saren was much cooler of a villain that anything I have seen in the sequels, the Reapers were much more intimidating when they were unexplained, not to mention the horrible simplification of dialogue that occured in 3.

[Calemyr]

I wonder if I'm the only one who liked the original Mass Effect and absolutely hated 2 and 3. First part just has this feeling that the sequels failed to replicate - this fantastic space opera. The characters were better (Mordin was the only new companion that I liked), the choices were better, Saren was much cooler of a villain that anything I have seen in the sequels, the Reapers were much more intimidating when they were unexplained, not to mention the horrible simplification of dialogue that occured in 3.

Depends.

Are you talking about the plot and the banter and the snark? Then no. The later games never captured the wonder of it all the way the first game did, nor did they really put enough focus on the people. I really miss having the Council back in the day when they were the "generally reasonable but politically savvy and understandably but infuriatingly skeptical of completely unfounded predictions of Armageddon" group instead of the "stick our heads up our rumps, deny all unpleasant evidence, and denounce anyone that says differently" idiots they became. And Wrex, while always awesome, was just that much cooler when he was the isolated veteran with a strong personal ethic and a lot of stories to tell.

If you're talking about gameplay mechanics in any way, shape, or form, then yes, I think you might be. Mass Effect 1's story and presentation were awesome and probably the best the trilogy had to offer, but I hate the way it plays. It's slow, awkward, the cooldown mechanic made sniping a chore, and I despise whole "billions of guns with little to differentiate them" model. I hated it in both Dragon Age games and I hate it in ME1 even more. ME2's concept of "only a few upgradable weapons, each with their own distinct play style" appeals to me far more. I like high powered, high precision weapons, so I walked around with the Mantis and Carnifex - two early weapons that had suited my style - while other players could find their rapid fire pistols, spray&pray rifles, and room sweeper shotguns. Every weapon (except for explicit upgrades like Mantis and Widow) had a unique feel to them and I adored that touch. The value of a weapon should not be which one has the prettier numbers but which one feels right to use, in my book.

[Derthric]

I wonder if I'm the only one who liked the original Mass Effect and absolutely hated 2 and 3.

I don't entirely share this sentiment, but for me the first game is my favorite for its atmosphere and mystery. And I know I enjoyed landing on unknown worlds in the Mako and exploring. I wish they had kept that, but replaced the awkward Mako with the more quick and agile hammerhead.

[Zevox]

Am I the only one only mildly interested in ME4 because Not Shepard?
Well that, and that it's Bioware. I don't trust them to deliver product anymore.

Seriously though, I finished my 2462352th playthrough of ME2 this morning and I realized that I wasn't feeling any kind of excitement about ME4, as I happily prepared to go through ME3 twice again (always go through at least one NG+ with my ME3 characters).

I mean DA3 gives me a "meh, I get it when it goes on sale" feeling. And that is after all the hype. Before that I was getting a "Absolutely NOT getting that" feeling. ME4 does better, I start at the "meh" point, but it really will have to be awesome or I will just not get it. Mostly because it feels absolutely wrong to play a character even remotely as awesome as Shepard.

I certainly don't feel that way. I can't say I'm excited for it, but that's because it's awfully hard to be excited for something you have little to no information on which is coming out in probably a couple of years. I am interested to see where they go with the franchise now that they're free of Shepard and the Reapers. Hopefully something more interesting than just pulling another galactic-scale threat from somewhere, but we'll see. I'm certainly not sad to see Shepard go, as I feel no more connection to her than any other random Bioware protagonist - which is to say, none at all.

I wonder if I'm the only one who liked the original Mass Effect and absolutely hated 2 and 3. First part just has this feeling that the sequels failed to replicate - this fantastic space opera. The characters were better (Mordin was the only new companion that I liked), the choices were better, Saren was much cooler of a villain that anything I have seen in the sequels, the Reapers were much more intimidating when they were unexplained, not to mention the horrible simplification of dialogue that occured in 3.

You're not, but I can't say it's an opinion I can wrap my head around. From where I'm sitting 2 and 3 blow 1 out of the water in basically every way - especially in terms of characters, where 2 is by far the strongest, including having made several characters from 1 actually interesting and enjoyable where they weren't before (Garrus and Tali especially), and 3 still comes out miles ahead of 1.

For me, ME1 got me interested in the franchise, but it wasn't until ME2 that I would say I became a fan of it.

[Avilan the Grey]

I wonder if I'm the only one who liked the original Mass Effect and absolutely hated 2 and 3. First part just has this feeling that the sequels failed to replicate - this fantastic space opera. The characters were better (Mordin was the only new companion that I liked), the choices were better, Saren was much cooler of a villain that anything I have seen in the sequels, the Reapers were much more intimidating when they were unexplained, not to mention the horrible simplification of dialogue that occured in 3.

You're definitely not. I know several people that refuses to play the second two games.
Personally I think the games rate (quality wise) best to worst: 3 - 2 - 1, but story wise they rate 3 - 1- 2. IMHO.

Oh and my "Paragon testing new things" play through... I have now started ME3, and for the first time picked Michel over Chakwas. Interesting dialogue.
Also, for the first time playing ME3 with the original council dead. And the Rachni (though not there yet).

[thirsting]

Is there a way to make all of the choices the game takes into account, without actually playing all the games? I mean, if I want to start from ME2, I'd still like to have some say in what happened in 1, or if I start with 3, it would be nice to be able to choose important things from 1&2.


I have PC versions of ME2 & ME3.

[Avilan the Grey]

Is there a way to make all of the choices the game takes into account, without actually playing all the games? I mean, if I want to start from ME2, I'd still like to have some say in what happened in 1, or if I start with 3, it would be nice to be able to choose important things from 1&2.


I have PC versions of ME2 & ME3.

Edit the save game (the first one you make) in a savegame editor.

[Morty]

ME1 was still made in the "Closed Fist/Dark Side" mindset that the evil choices had to be stupid evil. Stuff like "Oh yeah, you can blow Shiala's head off too if you want" or "Hey, you can tell Anoleis he's being investigated even though he's clearly guilty and the cop investigating him will get you the pass you need anyway" or "you can blow the Mindoir survivor's head off even though she's no threat to all your military hardware" etc.

It's not like the other two games are much better in that regard.

As far as the Genophage goes, it was basically a mathematical solution to a problem that can't be reduced to mathematics. Yes, Krogan population ended up "stable", statistically speaking, but the Krogan couldn't possibly be expected to see it that way. On the other hand, before it was used, the Krogan were poised to tear the galaxy into pieces, so it's not like the Council races had much of a choice. Genophage, at least, is something that can be possibly reversed. Wiping them out (provided they could even do that) isn't. It's an interesting conundrum, that the series ultimately simplified. BioWare just doesn't do ambiguity.

[Calemyr]

ME1 was still made in the "Closed Fist/Dark Side" mindset that the evil choices had to be stupid evil. Stuff like "Oh yeah, you can blow Shiala's head off too if you want" or "Hey, you can tell Anoleis he's being investigated even though he's clearly guilty and the cop investigating him will get you the pass you need anyway" or "you can blow the Mindoir survivor's head off even though she's no threat to all your military hardware" etc.

Don't take this as an argument that it was done well, because they still keep trying and failing with the concept of morality in these games, but Paragon/Renegade always struck me as a much more interesting split than Open Hand/Closed Fist or Light Side/Dark Side. And that's because it just accepts the fact that you're a hero rather than a villain and then moves on to how you do what you do.

All three of those choices work as renegade options without being "stupid evil'.

Shiala, for all her claims, is not only an enemy combatant but one that is/was subject to two different methods of mind control. She is a significant security risk and both forms of mind control used are not well understood. Do either of them have lingering effects? Do either just suddenly dissipate? Trusting her means investing a possible sleeper agent into a colony that is already suffering. This is a setting where sleeper agents can do an immense amount of damage. There are more (and possibly better) reasons for killing her than just being irritated by that tedious boss fight.

Anoleis, for all his sins, could be a valuable resource. He may not be the Illusive Man, but he swings around a level of capital and power that no potential ally you find in ME1 outside the council could rival. Given that by the time you meet the arrogant salarian you can easily be fed up with the Council's bullchips, it might be time to start courting outside assets. Of course you can't, because Anoleis is a grade A weasel, but contacts that are not beholden to the Council would be rather tempting at that point.

As for the Mindoir survivor, the only way you meet her is to have gone through the same thing and sufffered for it - though clearly not to the same level. It's really not hard to imagine that Shep might have believed you were doing her a favor by ending it quickly.

Really, the only reason Renegade is "evil" is because Paragon always works. If you do it right, it never bites you in the ass. Paragon Shep takes stupid risk after stupid risk but it always pans out. If the Rachni had proven a bad investment, or the Krogan overthrown Wrex immediately, or that accountant weasel from Feros found a way to make money by selling cheap materials that ultimately weakened the SR2, or Admiral Tali insisted on voting with the warhawks when an Exile Tali would have pleaded for the doves, or destroying the Collector base forced TIM down an even more psychotic path (possibly successfully killing Jacob and Miranda, for instance)... if the game ever punished you for being so incredibly, stupidly, naive and optimistic... well, then you'd have to think about things, wouldn't you?

[Jayngfet]

Am I the only one only mildly interested in ME4 because Not Shepard?
Well that, and that it's Bioware. I don't trust them to deliver product anymore.

Totally fair. As far as I'm concerned Bioware blew through any trust they had from me years ago, and it took a lifetime of good games to get that trust to begin with.

But as I want to remind people, we still no exactly nothing about ME4 anyway. I mean we see planet interfaces, but we saw those in the ME1 trailer in the same timeframe and those were heavily downgraded anyway. We saw a Krogan, but all that tells us is they didn't die off instantly. We saw a day/night cycle on the planets, but that came with a big asterisk and isn't a huge achievement anyway.

Really, the only reason Renegade is "evil" is because Paragon always works. If you do it right, it never bites you in the ass. Paragon Shep takes stupid risk after stupid risk but it always pans out. If the Rachni had proven a bad investment, or the Krogan overthrown Wrex immediately, or that accountant weasel from Feros found a way to make money by selling cheap materials that ultimately weakened the SR2, or Admiral Tali insisted on voting with the warhawks when an Exile Tali would have pleaded for the doves, or destroying the Collector base forced TIM down an even more psychotic path (possibly successfully killing Jacob and Miranda, for instance)... if the game ever punished you for being so incredibly, stupidly, naive and optimistic... well, then you'd have to think about things, wouldn't you?

All good points. I mean the closest thing to a flaw you get is the geth you reverse not sticking and killing a bunch of innocents, but from a stat standpoint that's negligible.

Renegade is often genuinely psychotic, so most of my actions are paragon, but I always try for a BIT of a renegade leaning. Mostly because of the fact that when you know it won't impact the story, Renegade feels more natural. I mean everyone says Terra Firma are "a pack of Jackals" but given that the council was willing to screw over the Quarians when they asked for help, and how far our recent Turian enemies were willing to go with the Krogan, it's perfectly reasonable to not trust the council in any way, shape or form. We know, objectivley, from moment one that every other race would screw us over if help cost them even a negligible amount, and that's exactly how it pans out with the collectors and reapers.

Paragon usually IS hopelessly naive, but you kind of have to take it since it's the only way you can act like a reasonable person when it's appropriate to do so. But sometimes you need to walk up to the alliance officer, shut up about diverse cultures, and tell him that your kickass ship can blow up anything that comes your way.

[Morty]

Really, the only reason Renegade is "evil" is because Paragon always works. If you do it right, it never bites you in the ass. Paragon Shep takes stupid risk after stupid risk but it always pans out. If the Rachni had proven a bad investment, or the Krogan overthrown Wrex immediately, or that accountant weasel from Feros found a way to make money by selling cheap materials that ultimately weakened the SR2, or Admiral Tali insisted on voting with the warhawks when an Exile Tali would have pleaded for the doves, or destroying the Collector base forced TIM down an even more psychotic path (possibly successfully killing Jacob and Miranda, for instance)... if the game ever punished you for being so incredibly, stupidly, naive and optimistic... well, then you'd have to think about things, wouldn't you?

Aye, definitely. Renegade is introduced as making tough choices and doing what it takes to win - but at the end of the day, the Paragon path's idealism and insistence on doing things right produces better, or at worst the same, results.

[SiuiS]

I too prefer me1. It was a different scope, a different feel. It didn't seem like the game was designed around Shepard specifically. It was about the world and exploring it, not about being Shepard.

This is only partially true. They evolved as prey, however they later became the apex predators on their planet due to firearms/splitting the atom. They did this even before first contact.

Shepard: "What were the ancient Krogan like?"
Eve: "Tuchanka wasn't always a wasteland. In the old times, the Krogan were a proud people. We had dreams... a future to look forward to."
Mordin: "Until Salarian interference."
Eve: "No. We destroyed Tuchanka ourselves. Technology changed us; it made life too easy. So we looked for new challenges, and found them in each other. Nuclear war was inevitable.

Once they had technology, nothing was left to challenge them on Tuchanka but each other; at that point, they were in fact the apex predators of the ecosystem.

But despite this "apex" assertion, they still lose 999 of every thousand young anyway.

It would only be a non-issue if they had stayed on those planets. Unfortunately, none of those colonies belonged to them and they were driven off. So the one planet they had left was the one where a static genophage actually meant decline.

Well, no. Because regardless of ownership of planets, krogans routinely bivouac in the field, on ships, on stations, on planets, other worlds, amongst the stars. Going back to Tuchanka is a vacation, a rare treat. Krogans have all of the galaxy at their neck and possibly call, they're just on duty when they're out there.

There is no actual limit to their breeding grounds. Just an assumed one.

It doesn't because it doesn't count in the psychological effect on the race as a whole.Children getting eaten/less pregnancies occuring doesn't have nowhere near the negative impact that "you may become pregnant, but you're going to lose the pregnancy" has.

The psychological effects of any individual do not have any bearing on the statistics. Just their ramifications.

This isn't up for debate, since it literally gets shown in the background conversations. Krogan men can't raise kids, and have no chance of doing anything unless they go mercenary and kill for the highest bidder. Even the ones that clearly just want a bit of peace and tranquility never get the shot, because their options are limited. I mean the most peaceful lifestyle you hear any Krogan living are the occasional snippets of a few on earth playing contact sports like Football and Rugby. Which kind of proves that they're more than willing to channel their aggression into something other than warfare, but there's no real chance.

Krogan were like that before uplift and before te genophage. The krogan were violent enough as a society that the nonviolent weren't statistically relevant. Any individual nonviolent krogan would become prey for violent krogan.

And this isn't arguable; every single krogan can and will fly into a berserker rage when wounded. What was once a pitiable mental condition is now a trait of every member of the species. They've already bred out passivity and nonviolence on a species level and cultural level. Wrex and Grunt simply channel their aggression into effective methods of social control.

[Jayngfet]

But despite this "apex" assertion, they still lose 999 of every thousand young anyway.

Probably not. Tuchanka is full of the ruins of VAST superstructures that are clearly meant to hold several times it's population, which is about 2 billion, which is stable from first contact. It was clearly a bigger population that did this, and bigger by several magnitudes.

Hell, humans took on the "Apex" role in our ecosystem about a thousand years ago at most recent, but since then our population has grown 20 times that into the early 20th century. By the time of ME1 it's doubled all over again. To presume a static population is ludicrous.

Krogan were like that before uplift and before te genophage. The krogan were violent enough as a society that the nonviolent weren't statistically relevant. Any individual nonviolent krogan would become prey for violent krogan.

And this isn't arguable; every single krogan can and will fly into a berserker rage when wounded. What was once a pitiable mental condition is now a trait of every member of the species. They've already bred out passivity and nonviolence on a species level and cultural level. Wrex and Grunt simply channel their aggression into effective methods of social control.

Which are events so far in the past that their changing is nothing but speculation. The Krogan now are better than that. I mean unless you just rush through the game like an idiot you see Krogan poets, athletes, and guys willing to talk about things that aren't violent basically everywhere by ME2. They're willing to earn doctorates and fund research to cure the Genophage on their own time in multiple cases. Wrex has a point with a lot of Krogan, but he's also notoriously jaded over the whole thing and direct evidence has shown that the Krogan know better.

If you cure the Genophage now, it's not the same Krogan who took it, or started the rebellion, it's a species with an entirely different set of values it needs to work from.

[Psyren]

But despite this "apex" assertion, they still lose 999 of every thousand young anyway.

Other predators are only one environmental factor causing those deaths. As many are killed by each other as by Tuchanka's wildlife itself.

"Easiest way to wipe out a clan. Targeting women and children removes their hope for the future."

Well, no. Because regardless of ownership of planets, krogans routinely bivouac in the field, on ships, on stations, on planets, other worlds, amongst the stars. Going back to Tuchanka is a vacation, a rare treat. Krogans have all of the galaxy at their neck and possibly call, they're just on duty when they're out there.

MALE Krogan do that. They can't breed alone. We don't even know what the population proportions are; for all you know there are 5 baby females in those 99 and the rest are male.

Whether they choose not to leave or are not allowed to leave, the fact remains that female krogan aren't out there, and the Salarians clearly didn't account for that in their math. Even during the rebellions, female warlords were so rare that the death of one caused a generations-long vendetta.

[Xondoure]

2 for me is the best in terms of characterization. 3 has the best gameplay. 1 really nails making the game feel like it takes place in space. Unfortunately, space is pretty bland and poorly lit.

[SiuiS]

Probably not. Tuchanka is full of the ruins of VAST superstructures that are clearly meant to hold several times it's population, which is about 2 billion, which is stable from first contact. It was clearly a bigger population that did this, and bigger by several magnitudes.

Hell, humans took on the "Apex" role in our ecosystem about a thousand years ago at most recent, but since then our population has grown 20 times that into the early 20th century. By the time of ME1 it's doubled all over again. To presume a static population is ludicrous.

Your reasoning here is that because there were more krogan before they destroyed themselves with planet wrecking nuclear assault, they cannot be losing that many young after this event when they've adapted to it?

Which are events so far in the past that their changing is nothing but speculation. The Krogan now are better than that. I mean unless you just rush through the game like an idiot you see Krogan poets, athletes, and guys willing to talk about things that aren't violent basically everywhere by ME2. They're willing to earn doctorates and fund research to cure the Genophage on their own time in multiple cases. Wrex has a point with a lot of Krogan, but he's also notoriously jaded over the whole thing and direct evidence has shown that the Krogan know better.

No, you don't understand. This is every single current contemporary member of the species. If you trip, and your drink goes flying and hits a krogan in the eye, there is a nonzero chance that said krogan will black out and begin to murder everything until he calms down. Every. Single. One.

Other predators are only one environmental factor causing those deaths. As many are killed by each other as by Tuchanka's wildlife itself.

"Easiest way to wipe out a clan. Targeting women and children removes their hope for the future."

You are severely downplaying the environment. The weather, the lack of resources, and even the plant life are hostile.

MALE Krogan do that. They can't breed alone. We don't even know what the population proportions are; for all you know there are 5 baby females in those 99 and the rest are male.

Shiagur would like to have a word with you.

The female clan created itself not because the dainty darlings need protecting or because the burly menfolk forced them to. They did what any krogan would do; assess their leverage and use it ruthlessly to better themselves and often at the expense of others. Their sex is immaterial. The stated purpose of the genophage and the purpose backed by the numbers is; to keep the population growth post-Tuchanka in line with population growth on Tuchanka. That the krogan decided to say "STERILITY PLAGUE OMG" and then throw themselves to their deaths out of obstinance isn't a factor in the numbers of what the genophage does or why it does it. It's highly possible that if the krogan didn't react like butt-hurt bullies they would have been fine. The problem is that there was no other possible way for them to act; they were just spanked by all the galaxy for the audacity of enjoying freedom from a literal hellhole.

2 for me is the best in terms of characterization. 3 has the best gameplay. 1 really nails making the game feel like it takes place in space. Unfortunately, space is pretty bland and poorly lit.

Heh. Yeah.

[Bit Fiend]

Aye, definitely. Renegade is introduced as making tough choices and doing what it takes to win - but at the end of the day, the Paragon path's idealism and insistence on doing things right produces better, or at worst the same, results.

You're right, but then again Mass Effect does not want to be Dragon Age. It's not a gritty deconstruction of space operas. It wants you to be able to play Jean-Luc Picard and be successful with it.

[Dienekes]

You're right, but then again Mass Effect does not want to be Dragon Age. It's not a gritty deconstruction of space operas. It wants you to be able to play Jean-Luc Picard and be successful with it.

I'm pretty sure even Jean-Luc had some of his decisions come back and bite him in the ass.

But you see, this design also works two ways. They wanted you to play Jean-Luc and also Riddick, but unlike Jean-Luc or even the Riddick from the movies a lot of the pragmatic choices are straight up worse.

Honestly, I would want both sides to be seen as useful and having pros and cons. And some of the paragon choices the world seems to bend over backwards in order to make it so no damage is done. Like that one girl from the merc band that join through killing people. Renegade Shep kills her, Paragon Shep lets her go. Then afterward you find out that she was a guilty murderer. But no worries for making the wrong choice Paragon Shep, she gets caught anyway.

Now, I'm not saying that I want even half of Paragons choices to be wrong. I would prefer a range of correct choices were the only once in awhile does the game take a hard stance that you screwed up. But for most choices, having Paragon and Renegade mostly balance out would have been nice.

[Calemyr]

You're right, but then again Mass Effect does not want to be Dragon Age. It's not a gritty deconstruction of space operas. It wants you to be able to play Jean-Luc Picard and be successful with it.

I think different people wanted both, which is why the trilogy is so inconsistent on that. Unfortunately you can't have "meaningful sacrifices to win the unwinnable" and "good guys win, end of story" at the same time. It doesn't work, as ME3 proves by trying to throw in pure "someone must die" gritty realism at the last second.

[Jayngfet]

No, you don't understand. This is every single current contemporary member of the species. If you trip, and your drink goes flying and hits a krogan in the eye, there is a nonzero chance that said krogan will black out and begin to murder everything until he calms down. Every. Single. One.

Supposition on your part, given we never actually see a Krogan in a barfight. Or if we do, it's in some part of the games I haven't played. The one instance of a Krogan in a barfight had the other party as the aggressor, and that was Kai Leng.

You can say what you will about that, but there aren't really any instances of a Krogan just randomly losing control and causing damage in a way that a Human wouldn't. Most of the time they're pretty direct and intentional with their damage.

[Avilan the Grey]

I'm pretty sure even Jean-Luc had some of his decisions come back and bite him in the ass.

You have a few. The one that potentially will harm you the most is rewriting the Geth.

[Psyren]

You are severely downplaying the environment. The weather, the lack of resources, and even the plant life are hostile.

Two of those have absolutely nothing to do with being an apex predator, and unless we're talking about actively carnivorous plants, neither does the third.

Shiagur would like to have a word with you.

...You DO realize she was the very one I was referring to, right? Or did you stop reading after the word "male?"

The female clan created itself not because the dainty darlings need protecting or because the burly menfolk forced them to. They did what any krogan would do; assess their leverage and use it ruthlessly to better themselves and often at the expense of others. Their sex is immaterial.

But numbers are material, and none of this empowering speech says anything about the proportion of male krogan to female ones.

[Bit Fiend]

You have a few. The one that potentially will harm you the most is rewriting the Geth.

Worked fine for me... but then again, I set Geth-Quarian-peace as one of my top priorities asearly as ME2, so I picked the not-really-Paragon option of saving Koris instead of the civilians... So yeah, that one can screw you hard...

[SiuiS]

Supposition on your part.

No, it's not. Go dive the codex.

Two of those have absolutely nothing to do with being an apex predator, and unless we're talking about actively carnivorous plants, neither does the third.

That's fair. I was contrasting the colloquial understanding of apex predator with the severe losses the krogan routinely recieved, because someone was using apex predator as an argument against the massive losses being relevant.

But numbers are material, and none of this empowering speech says anything about the proportion of male krogan to female ones.

I don't see how this applies to my argument?

[Rodin]

While I haven't played ME1 as much as most people here, I didn't particularly find it better in setting. The game was obviously designed to be more of an homage to the "golden age" of Sci-Fi back in the 60s and 70s, while the latter 2 games were much closer to the shows I grew up with - Next Gen and Bqabylon 5. I wanted to shoot out the speakers that were playing that weird techno music in the Citadel.

The result was very jarring. ME2 and 3 were very tight knit - you always knew where you were supposed to go and the next NPC was always just around the corner.

ME1 was big, sprawling, and aimless. The Citadel was a pain to navigate, and I got lost several times. The elevators were painfully slow. I did like what I saw of the characters, but since everything was so slow I didn't really engage that much (and didn't get that far into the game). I struggled to drive the Mako around for a while and it quickly became obvious why the Mako is the butt of all the jokes in the latter two games.

And the less that's said about the gameplay, the better.

Mass Effect 2 was my favorite in everything but gameplay, where 3 did a (mostly) better job but didn't totally surpass 2.

As for Shepard, she's easily my favorite RPG character but...her story's done. I hope she stays dead, because it's time for a new crop of people to come in. New stories to be told and all that.

[Zevox]

Personally I think the games rate (quality wise) best to worst: 3 - 2 - 1, but story wise they rate 3 - 1- 2. IMHO.

I can't quite pick between 2 and 3 overall, but story-wise I'd go 2 > 3 > 1. 3 is dragged down by the ending, and 2 has a lot going for it with the companion quests and even many recruitment missions. Tuchanka and Rannoch are great in 3, but they and maybe some reunions with companions from 2 (like Jack) are the only high points of it story-wise. Well, and Citadel, but that's DLC, and 2 has Lair of the Shadowbroker to compete there. And the first game isn't even in the same league as its sequels.

(The reason I can't pick between 2 and 3 overall is because 3 has better gameplay, having refined and added to 2's. Each one is better in one the two areas most important to me, but both are still good in both, which makes deciding between them very hard.)

[Anteros]

I think people are forgetting that just because paragon is trusting, it doesn't mean it's stupid. Shepard has a good reason behind his decisions for all the major paragon/renegade choices. I don't find it particularly unbelievable that his decisions end up being successful. Besides, there are a few "bad" paragon choices like losing Korris and being unable to bring the Geth/Quarians to peace, letting terrorists go, things like that.

The thing is that it's all fluff, because despite what Bioware claims...none of your decisions really ever make much difference either way.

[SiuiS]

While I haven't played ME1 as much as most people here, I didn't particularly find it better in setting. The game was obviously designed to be more of an homage to the "golden age" of Sci-Fi back in the 60s and 70s, while the latter 2 games were much closer to the shows I grew up with - Next Gen and Bqabylon 5. I wanted to shoot out the speakers that were playing that weird techno music in the Citadel.

The result was very jarring. ME2 and 3 were very tight knit - you always knew where you were supposed to go and the next NPC was always just around the corner.

ME1 was big, sprawling, and aimless. The Citadel was a pain to navigate, and I got lost several times. The elevators were painfully slow. I did like what I saw of the characters, but since everything was so slow I didn't really engage that much (and didn't get that far into the game). I struggled to drive the Mako around for a while and it quickly became obvious why the Mako is the butt of all the jokes in the latter two games.

And the less that's said about the gameplay, the better.

Mass Effect 2 was my favorite in everything but gameplay, where 3 did a (mostly) better job but didn't totally surpass 2.

As for Shepard, she's easily my favorite RPG character but...her story's done. I hope she stays dead, because it's time for a new crop of people to come in. New stories to be told and all that.

That's the thing though. The charm of one is that it lacked many game conceits. Enemies ****ed with your physics as much as you did with theirs. You could be gimped out of nowhere by a shield-bypass sniper. There was nowhere you could rely on the knowledge that this is a game to get ahead (ignoring physics glitches like the 15 second clear of Wrex's loyalty mission).

Number two was a better game by far, but the immersion suffered for it. Not enough to be damaging, but enough to let me be nostalgic for 1.

The thing is that it's all fluff, because despite what Bioware claims...none of your decisions really ever make much difference either way.

Heh.