# Mass Effect 4 covered at Comic-Con 2014.



## Furious George (Jul 15, 2014)

> BioWare Edmonton and Montreal studios will be attending this year's Comic-Con 2014 to discuss the development of the upcoming☻Mass Effect☻release, it was confirmed in the schedule for the official Comic Con International.According to the event description, panelists including lead animator Carl Boulay, producers Fabrice Condominas and Mike Gamble, senior artist Noel Lukasewich and community manager Jessica Merizan will share their experiences of shaping the next game in the series.



*July 26th 2014*

Good stuff get hype.


----------



## RAGING BONER (Jul 15, 2014)

...we'll see how it goes...


----------



## Simon (Jul 16, 2014)

Mass Effect 4 is going to be the greatest dating sim ever.


----------



## Tragic (Jul 16, 2014)

Furious George said:


> *July 26th 2014*






Ya I know it's amazing, they still have one fan left.


----------



## Overwatch (Jul 16, 2014)

Simon said:


> Mass Effect 4 is going to be the greatest dating sim ever.



Who needs well thought-out plots when you've got explosions and space waifus?! 

I can already hear the nines rolling in.


----------



## Furious George (Jul 16, 2014)

People don't like Mass Effect anymore? 

The series may have said something's it didn't mean near the tail end but I thought we were passed that.


----------



## Deleted member 73050 (Jul 16, 2014)

Furious George said:


> People don't like Mass Effect anymore?
> 
> The series may have said something's it didn't mean near the tail end but I thought we were passed that.



They have ruined the entire franchise with the last game's ending.


----------



## Naruto (Jul 16, 2014)

Watch it become an MMO.


----------



## Simon (Jul 16, 2014)

For me it was never about the ending of ME3, it was the journey of ME3 being inferior to ME2, Also them wrapping up every single story too neatly.

I want another KOTOR, not another Mass Effect.


----------



## Bishamon (Jul 18, 2014)

ME2 was also pretty inferior to ME1, the story in that game was COMPLETELY pointless and gameplay wise it was little more than an over stylized Gears of War shooter. The characters were well developed enough, and the it's a fun game at the end of the day, but it's too much of a pop corn flick to really have any staying power. The most powerful thing about it was its lore, and even then much of it was needlessly retconned from ME1, which was disappointing.

I never even bothered finishing ME3, I don't remember why but I just couldn't be bothered, and I hadn't even heard about how bad the ending was before I just gave up on it, and when I did it just cemented by unwillingness to ever go back on it.

Could be interesting, maybe not, will reserve my judgement until I see something.


----------



## Furious George (Jul 19, 2014)

Gwynbleidd said:


> ME2 was also pretty inferior to ME1, the story in that game was COMPLETELY pointless and gameplay wise it was little more than an over stylized Gears of War shooter. The characters were well developed enough, and the it's a fun game at the end of the day, but it's too much of a pop corn flick to really have any staying power. The most powerful thing about it was its lore, and even then much of it was needlessly retconned from ME1, which was disappointing.
> 
> I never even bothered finishing ME3, I don't remember why but I just couldn't be bothered, and I hadn't even heard about how bad the ending was before I just gave up on it, and when I did it just cemented by unwillingness to ever go back on it.
> 
> Could be interesting, maybe not, will reserve my judgement until I see something.



I get that that ME2 had a mostly superfluous plot, but I never entertain people telling me that ME1 was a better game than 2. ME2 had better characterization, better gameplay, better pacing and no tedious off-roading missions on empty palette-swaps of the same planet.


----------



## Bishamon (Jul 19, 2014)

Mass Effect 2 was the better game, Mass Effect 1 is my favorite.

It's more engrossing; it feels more like a big universe, the heavy exploration around planets never bothered me. It's rough around the edges yes, it's a flawed gem, in my opinion, the kinda game that does enough good for me to forgive all the flaws. If you've ever played The first Witcher game or well, any game from Piranha Bites, you'll probably know what I mean. Those games have cult followings for a reason, because they do things other games don't and do it better than most other games that do, no matter how sketchy they are on the technical aspect and things like that.

Mass Effect 2, objectively speaking, does more good things and it's more carefully crafted, but some of the charm was lost in the transition.


----------



## Naruto (Jul 19, 2014)

Mass Effect 1 was better.


It introduced the ME universe, which in and of itself is more than either of its sequels could possibly hope to accomplish.

It had better pacing (ridiculous that you would even suggest otherwise when ME2 is literally all about gathering a crew to do a mission whereas ME1 feels more like an adventure).

It was more of an RPG than a shooter (inventory management, vastly superior equipment choices, more dialog, more side missions).

The adept class was fucking awesome in 1 (you could actually choose to go full jedi mode and forgo guns).

The music was leagues better (more scifi, less action).

The story was better (the beacons, the reapers, the proteans are all far more interesting than the collectors).

ME2 wasn't garbage, but it most certainly wasn't better.


----------



## Furious George (Jul 19, 2014)

Naruto said:


> Mass Effect 1 was better.
> 
> 
> It introduced the ME universe, which in and of itself is more than either of its sequels could possibly hope to accomplish.





Are you seriously listing ME being the first in the series as a reason for it being a better game than 2? What?



> [*]It had better pacing (ridiculous that you would even suggest otherwise when ME2 is literally all about gathering a crew to do a mission whereas ME1 feels more like an adventure).



What a game is about has little to do with pacing. Its hours into the Citadel before you feel like you're doing anything at all in 1. I don't even know how you can argue this one.



> It was more of an RPG than a shooter (inventory management, vastly superior equipment choices, more dialog, more side missions).



Yeah, you'll have to run the "not RPG" bit on someone who gives a shit. at the end of the day, combat was much more fun in ME2, unhindered from a cluttered inventory system filled with enhancement bullets that almost never made a difference.

I'll give you better moral choices.

More side missions don't mean much if the side missions suck.



> [*]The music was leagues better (more scifi, less action).



I'd say they were about equals here.



> *]The story was better (the beacons, the reapers, the proteans are all far more interesting than the collectors).




Its the better story on paper. Better characters went along way for making ME2's plot on-par, apart from it being rather filler.



> ME2 wasn't garbage, but it most certainly wasn't better.



A lot of your post comes off like "ME2 was very different than 1, therefore its worse."


----------



## Naruto (Jul 19, 2014)

Furious George said:


> A lot of your post comes off like "ME2 was very different than 1, therefore its worse."



It was different in shitty ways, therefore by definition worse. Considering I've already stated *why *it would be kind of stupid to break down your post to repeat myself using slightly different verbiage.

We'll agree to disagree.


----------



## Furious George (Jul 19, 2014)

I'll agree to smack you in public.


----------



## Zen-aku (Jul 19, 2014)

Furious George said:


> People don't like Mass Effect anymore?
> 
> The series may have said something's it didn't mean near the tail end but I thought we were passed that.



Mass Effect IS still Very popular Some people Are just still bitter it Didn't End the way they would of liked.


----------



## Wan (Jul 19, 2014)

Furious George said:


> People don't like Mass Effect anymore?
> 
> The series may have said something's it didn't mean near the tail end but I thought we were passed that.



I still love Mass Effect, and I loved Mass Effect 3 on whole.  After ME3's mess of an ending I am a little cautious about getting my hopes up _too_ high for the next Mass Effect game, but I'm still excited.



Naruto said:


> Mass Effect 1 was better.
> 
> It introduced the ME universe, which in and of itself is more than either of its sequels could possibly hope to accomplish.



A New Hope introduced the Star Wars universe, but that doesn't mean it was better than The Empire Strikes Back.



> It had better pacing (ridiculous that you would even suggest otherwise when ME2 is literally all about gathering a crew to do a mission whereas ME1 feels more like an adventure).
> 
> It was more of an RPG than a shooter (inventory management, vastly superior equipment choices, more dialog, more side missions).



"Commander Shepard, we must find Saren!"

"Let's stop at this planet and go looking for some crashed satellites and stuff"

"...why?"

""

The side missions didn't make a lot of sense in the pacing of ME1.  You could literally dick around the galaxy as long as you wanted at the point in the story where you had to go to Ilos.  In ME2 at least the side missions fit in with the goal of preparing as much as you can for the final mission, and when the story moves forward, it either has you directly do it (Horizon and the Collector Ship), or have consequences if you decide to just dick around (losing your crew if you don't go on the final mission soon enough).

And the side missions were more unique in ME2.  In ME1, it was land on planet, drive to destination, clear out enemies, do a little story fluff, rinse, repeat.  Each side mission in ME2 was a unique scenario.

I will grant that ME2 stripped some of the RPG elements out, but the RPG elements in ME1 were poorly executed to begin with.  ME1's inventory management was annoying and its leveling up was needlessly obtuse.  I did wish that ME2 could have fixed ME1's RPG elements rather than just severely stripping them down, and I felt that ME3 found the happy medium.



> The adept class was fucking awesome in 1 (you could actually choose to go full jedi mode and forgo guns).



Yeah the adept was underwhelming in ME2, better in ME3.  You could still forgo guns in ME2, you just had to be the sentinel class rather than the adept class.


> The music was leagues better (more scifi, less action).



[YOUTUBE]UBLOvSb56Vc[/YOUTUBE]
[YOUTUBE]k2qCmmYifg8[/YOUTUBE]
[YOUTUBE]aXCM0lZxh4U[/YOUTUBE]

This isn't science fiction?  I won't knock ME1's soundtrack, I love the soundtracks for all the games, but I would be hard pressed to pick a favorite.



> The story was better (the beacons, the reapers, the proteans are all far more interesting than the collectors).



The Reapers _were_ part of the story.  They're the ones controlling the Collectors, and the Illusive Man suspects it all along.  It's a great moment when Shepard discovers that the Collectors are actually extensively modified Protheans.


----------



## Krory (Jul 20, 2014)

>MFW ME1's story was no less trivial, derivative, and banal than any other in the series, let alone in BioWare's repertoire but I still don't give a darn because I'd rather enjoy games than bitch about stupid shit


----------



## Kind of a big deal (Jul 22, 2014)

Mass effect 3 was the best. Graphically amazing, even better than ME2, more focused cast of sidekicks, ME2 had too many for the amount of content in the game. I did feel like there was less exploration in ME3, and that it was as a whole, quite linear. That was maybe a bit of a let down. From a gameplay perspective, the shooting in this one is the most satisfying and varied.

Not even sure why people disliked the ending,  how else could it have ended? Super happily ever after would be an insult to storytelling, and anything more in-depth for the individual characters would have meant that the ending would have taken as long as the rest of the game. The revised ending that they patched in is fine. The choices you had to make at the end were thought-provoking and I personally liked the big F- you to the star child and forego any choice. I felt like that was the most honest ending. As for the other two (or three?) endings, well what did you think the story was going to culminate to? Since ME1 the whole theme was advancement of lifeforms being halted at certain intervals. There was never going to be any kind of different ending.

And about the ME hate, I don't get it, for me it's either this series or the dark souls series that were the best of the last console cycle.

As for ME4 my best case scenario would be a game that sort of works like AC4:black flag, or wind waker, instead of sail boats and islands, you get spaceships and planets to explore, and you directly control your spaceship. Kinda like no mans sky but not procedurally generated. From a plot point of view, it could be in the timeline where the mass relays are destroyed and the galaxy is no longer connected. You could play a bunch of mercenaries in the attican traverse or something, and have a few star systems to play around in.


----------



## Wan (Jul 23, 2014)

Kind of a big deal said:


> Not even sure why people disliked the ending,  how else could it have ended?



Well to start, they could have avoided leaving the whole Sword Fleet stranded in the Sol System with no mass relay, meaning that Tali and all the quarians who came with you would never see Rannoch again.

That's just the _tip of the iceberg._

[youtube]6M0Cf864P7E[/youtube]


----------



## Bishamon (Jul 23, 2014)

I think this video would be the better explanation. It's long (Though funny at spots, which eases the length) and rambly, but it lays down the points fantastically.

[YOUTUBE]7MlatxLP-xs[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Gilgamesh (Jul 24, 2014)

ME3's ending was shit because it devalued the Reapers and was full of plot holes


----------



## Wan (Jul 24, 2014)

Gwynbleidd said:


> I think this video would be the better explanation. It's long (Though funny at spots, which eases the length) and rambly, but it lays down the points fantastically.
> 
> [YOUTUBE]7MlatxLP-xs[/YOUTUBE]



Point is that you don't have to look far to find criticism of ME3's ending online.



krory said:


> >People still thinking space travel impossible without Mass Relays



It's impossible to get across the galaxy in any reasonable amount of time without the mass relays, yes.



> >People still thinking they couldn't rebuild them or build something similar even after the writers said it was perfectly possible and it would/could happen



It was established in the actual story that mass relays were far beyond the Council races' technology level.  Even the Protheans had only managed to make a small, one-way relay.    Plus the galaxy is freshly war-torn and devastated, so you can't expect any scientific breakthroughs to be made following the ending.  If they had written in the story that mass relays could be built, then maybe it would have been better.  But saying "the writers say they could" isn't an excuse.  If you have to rely on something the writers said in order for a story to make sense and be emotionally satisfying, _that story had shit writing._



> >People still probably preferring the original author's "Reapers are bad because black holes made them evil" story



Yeah that story was even more lame in concept, and a rip-off of the Xeelee Sequence to boot.


----------



## Bishamon (Jul 25, 2014)

What the writers said doesn't matter if it was already established on the original source that what they say is false, esp since they probably just said it so they wouldn't get shat upon more than they already were

that'd be like legit taking The Room as a black comedy instead of a super shitty drama just because Tommy Wiseau was like oh yah you think i be for real??? no no it was a comedy all along nigguhs what drug you on!! right after seeing everyone thinking it was hilariously awful, man that's convenient aint it


----------



## dream (Jul 25, 2014)

I miss the Bioware that made the _Baldur's Gate_ series and _Neverwinter Nights_. 

Couldn't care less about current Bioware's future games.


----------



## Dream Brother (Jul 25, 2014)

I actually liked all the _Mass Effect_ games. I wouldn't say the ending to the third game was great or anything, but I didn't really connect with all the outrage that people displayed over it.

I suppose I didn't have a similar reaction because I was always much more interested in the characters of the games rather than the plot. I have the same reaction to the first _Dragon Age_ -- I found the general plot to be mainly flat and generic, but I really enjoyed the character material, so it wasn't a big issue for me. The only time I was impressed with the plot in a BioWare game was probably _Knights of the Old Republic_. The twist, and the way it was set up throughout the game, was surprisingly good. It felt very meaningful for the characters. 

I only played the demo for _Dragon Age II_, and I didn't play _The Old Republic_ MMO, but I heard that both games were disappointing, especially the former. That's a shame, but I'm very interested to see what BioWare come up with in _Dragon Age: Inquisition_. When they're at their best, they make very good games, and they usually emphasise storytelling and character interaction (even if they don't always do it as well as people would like), which are two things that I love in games, so I'm definitely going to keep an eye on them.


----------



## Wan (Jul 26, 2014)

Dream Brother said:


> I actually liked all the _Mass Effect_ games. I wouldn't say the ending to the third game was great or anything, but I didn't really connect with all the outrage that people displayed over it.
> 
> I suppose I didn't have a similar reaction because I was always much more interested in the characters of the games rather than the plot. I have the same reaction to the first _Dragon Age_ -- I found the general plot to be mainly flat and generic, but I really enjoyed the character material, so it wasn't a big issue for me. The only time I was impressed with the plot in a BioWare game was probably _Knights of the Old Republic_. The twist, and the way it was set up throughout the game, was surprisingly good. It felt very meaningful for the characters.
> 
> I only played the demo for _Dragon Age II_, and I didn't play _The Old Republic_ MMO, but I heard that both games were disappointing, especially the former. That's a shame, but I'm very interested to see what BioWare come up with in _Dragon Age: Inquisition_. When they're at their best, they make very good games, and they usually emphasise storytelling and character interaction (even if they don't always do it as well as people would like), which are two things that I love in games, so I'm definitely going to keep an eye on them.



Characters were a big part of the reason that people reacted so badly to the ending of the game.  If you think it through, the ending as it was originally written leaves all your companions from all the games screwed over and stranded in the Sol System.  And what happened to your squad that was with you in the final charge to the Citadel beam?  Did they die?  Oh wait, no, they're' shown coming out of the Normandy at the end...how the fuck did they get on the Normandy?  And what the hell was Joker doing running away from the battle far enough that he got to this whole other solar system with a random inhabitable planet?  Even if you set those details aside, there was no real closure to all the characters, just some final words before the battle (which, according to writer Patrick Weekes, game director Casey Hudson and head writer Mac Walters had to be persuaded to allow in the game).


----------



## Dream Brother (Jul 26, 2014)

Wan said:


> Characters were a big part of the reason that people reacted so badly to the ending of the game.  If you think it through, the ending as it was originally written leaves all your companions from all the games screwed over and stranded in the Sol System.  And what happened to your squad that was with you in the final charge to the Citadel beam?  Did they die?  Oh wait, no, they're' shown coming out of the Normandy at the end...how the fuck did they get on the Normandy?  And what the hell was Joker doing running away from the battle far enough that he got to this whole other solar system with a random inhabitable planet?  Even if you set those details aside, there was no real closure to all the characters, just some final words before the battle (which, according to writer Patrick Weekes, game director Casey Hudson and head writer Mac Walters had to be persuaded to allow in the game).



I know what you mean about the strange/incoherent ending, and how it impacts the characters -- I guess I just separate the ending stuff from my appreciation for the rest of the game in my mind. Even if the ending has silly repercussions, I just focus on all the stuff I liked before that. I can understand why people complain that the ending ruined everything for them, but I don't share that mentality. I agree with your second point -- the 'closure' did feel a bit flimsy, but again, I don't mind so much because of the material that came before. Even though I like the character work in BioWare games, I can still see the flaws that pop up, but in comparison to most games I've seen, I think they do a pretty good job on the whole.


----------



## Furious George (Jul 26, 2014)

So far, what we have is pics of the Mako and new N7 armor. Our hero isn't Shepherd but they atleast seem to have N7 in common.... more info should come.


----------



## Snakety69 (Jul 26, 2014)

Furious George said:


> So far, what we have is pics of the Mako and new N7 armor. Our hero isn't Shepherd but they atleast seem to have N7 in common.... more info should come.




Well, guess that kills the hope of being able to pick different races. Not that I was pining for it that bad, but a shame nonetheless. Here's hoping exploration is a lot better this time around, seeing as how you have a Mako again. Though looking at DA:I and the fact that we have much more powerful technology this time around, I'm confident it will be.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jul 26, 2014)

krory said:


> >MFW ME1's story was no less trivial, derivative, and banal than any other in the series, let alone in BioWare's repertoire but I still don't give a darn because I'd rather enjoy games than bitch about stupid shit



No korky go to your room and bitch about stupid shit. Now.


----------



## Overwatch (Jul 27, 2014)

>says the protagonist won't be Shepard 2.0
>makes him/her another N7 shitbird

That's right, put that imagination into overdrive, Bioware!

And don't forget to include alien STD collectables this time!


----------



## Hunted by sister (Jul 27, 2014)

krory said:


> >People still thinking space travel impossible without Mass Relays


It is, it's just really fucking slow. Commerce and trading is dead regardless. 


krory said:


> >People still thinking they couldn't rebuild them or build something similar even after the writers said it was perfectly possible and it would/could happen


Well then writers are full of shit and they are contradicting what was stated in the game, which was "Mass Relay technology is far beyond the capability o Council races". Even if it wasn't, it would still be a massive undertaking. The galaxy is fresh out of resources after the war. The races are divided and separated.

Also, all technology is dead (Red Ending for canon ending!). They have to start over from creating the wheel and getting fire to burn, mate. I doubt there were any non-electronic blueprints. Bilions are dead, and besides them, Quarians, the little fat guys (over-reliance on tech keeping them alive), and Geth are all extinct.

Rebuilding them fast is possible only in the Purple Ending. 

tl;dr writers can say Shepard was an alien, but if in game he's human then he's fucking human. When someone who worked on a game says something that is conflicting what the game said, then he's full of shit.


krory said:


> >People still probably preferring the original author's "Reapers are bad because black holes made them evil" story


Like "our reasons for doing this are infinitely complex, but really it's just killing people before they make deadly rebelling robots, instead of destroying said robots" is any better

//HbS


----------



## Wan (Jul 27, 2014)

Hunted by sister said:


> Also, all technology is dead (Red Ending for canon ending!). They have to start over from creating the wheel and getting fire to burn, mate. I doubt there were any non-electronic blueprints. Bilions are dead, and besides them, Quarians, the little fat guys (over-reliance on tech keeping them alive), and Geth are all extinct.



Yeah, the original ending is vague enough to imply that _all_ technology would be destroyed by the Red Colored Shockwaves, not just artificial intelligence.  The Catalyst says to Shepard that "even you are partly synthetic", as if that synthetic side of him would be destroyed.  The extended cut makes it clear that no, not all technology is destroyed.


----------



## Hunted by sister (Jul 27, 2014)

Wan said:


> Yeah, the original ending is vague enough to imply that _all_ technology would be destroyed by the Red Colored Shockwaves, not just artificial intelligence.  The Catalyst says to Shepard that "even you are partly synthetic", as if that synthetic side of him would be destroyed.  The extended cut makes it clear that no, not all technology is destroyed.


Ah, my bad. I thought all of it was destroyed. I mean, wasn't there a bit where all fleets were shown dead in the water, without power, life support, etc etc? 

//HbS


----------



## Wan (Jul 27, 2014)

Hunted by sister said:


> Ah, my bad. I thought all of it was destroyed. I mean, wasn't there a bit where all fleets were shown dead in the water, without power, life support, etc etc?
> 
> //HbS



Nope.  The ending montage with the extended cut makes it clear that technology was still working across the galaxy.  It even shows the Normandy taking off from whatever random planet it crashed on.


----------



## Hunted by sister (Jul 27, 2014)

Ah. I wonder why I forgot that. Still. My others points stand.

//HbS


----------



## Patchouli (Jul 27, 2014)

I want to play as a krogan medic.


----------



## Krory (Jul 28, 2014)

>People surprised by writers contradicting themselves

It's almost like you never played a video game, watched a movie or television show, or read a book or comic.


----------



## Hunted by sister (Jul 28, 2014)

When a contradiction happens, you believe the original source, and not the people who change their minds when (because) an opportunity for milking the franchise further rears it's ugly head

//HbS


----------



## Furious George (Jul 28, 2014)

krory said:


> >People surprised by writers contradicting themselves
> 
> It's almost like you never played a video game, watched a movie or television show, or read a book or comic.



Uh, just because it happens doesn't mean we should be okay with it.


----------



## Krory (Jul 28, 2014)

By your logic, you should not enjoy anything - ever.


----------



## Overwatch (Jul 29, 2014)

If the inconsistencies are subtle enough to pass under the radar of all but the most critical fans, I won't make a fuss. But when they strain or outright shatter the suspension of disbelief of so many people at once, shit needs to be addressed. 

Case in point:

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LypmoChfvgU[/YOUTUBE]

This is a problem encountered throughout the entire trilogy.


----------



## Zen-aku (Jul 29, 2014)

Overwatch said:


> If the inconsistencies are subtle enough to pass under the radar of all but the most critical fans, I won't make a fuss. But when they strain or outright shatter the suspension of disbelief of so many people at once, shit needs to be addressed.
> 
> Case in point:
> 
> ...



Took the Entire Quarian Fleet To take down a Drone. How's this an inconsistency?

Also about the N7 thing, The Allied universe Special forces (Turian jumpers, asari huntresses and Justicars, Korgan battle masters Ect.) all started referring to them selves as N7 with the Alliance's Blessing, So just  cause  they showed of N7 armor doesn't mean human only necessarily.


----------



## Overwatch (Jul 29, 2014)

Pretty amazing how the Destroyer can shoot down fighters and orbital targets with remarkable precision, but can't hit a single guy that's moving in a confined space on foot and without any effective countermeasures, eh? 

Shepard also miraculously survives an entire fleet unloading on a target that's barely a hundred meters away from him, since he never really paid attention to that one guy on the Citadel who presents us with a lengthy analysis of the mass driver's destructive potential. 

Despite constantly deepthroating themselves about what an amazingly deep and mature sci-fi universe they've built, the Rule of Cool always trumps any previously established lore.


----------



## Wan (Jul 29, 2014)

Overwatch said:


> Pretty amazing how the Destroyer can shoot down fighters and orbital targets with remarkable precision, but can't hit a single guy that's moving in a confined space on foot and without any effective countermeasures, eh?



The very reason that Shepard was tracing the destroyer for bombardment was because geth jamming was messing with quarian targeting.  The same thing could have been effecting the destroyer.



> Shepard also miraculously survives an entire fleet unloading on a target that's barely a hundred meters away from him, since he never really paid attention to that one guy on the Citadel who presents us with a lengthy analysis of the mass driver's destructive potential.



The cutscene shows the quarian ships using their _broadside_ guns, which are much weaker than a ship's main spinal cannons.  And they're all cruisers and frigates, much weaker than the dreadnought cannon that the sergeant was talking about.  _And_ they're still fighting the geth fleet up there, meaning they can only divert so much firepower towards the ground without letting the geth tear them up out there.

Shepard's also pretty dang superhuman himself, wearing futuristic power armor; he can take what might knock other humans on their asses or worse.


----------



## Overwatch (Jul 29, 2014)

Wan said:


> The very reason that Shepard was tracing the destroyer for bombardment was because geth jamming was messing with quarian targeting.  The same thing could have been effecting the destroyer.



The key word here is "could". No hard evidence is ever presented, so it's up to the player to make a wild guess. Reaper technology is millions of years ahead of that of contemporary civilizations, so I'm going to assume that it wouldn't be particularly fazed.



Wan said:


> The cutscene shows the quarian ships using their _broadside_ guns, which are much weaker than a ship's main spinal cannons.  And they're all cruisers and frigates, much weaker than the dreadnought cannon that the sergeant was talking about.  _And_ they're still fighting the geth fleet up there, meaning they can only divert so much firepower towards the ground without letting the geth tear them up out there.



They're still powerful enough destroy everything in the general area and the Destroyer is about to shoot Shepard at near point blank range as the final salvo hits. 



Wan said:


> Shepard's also pretty dang superhuman himself, wearing futuristic power armor; he can take what might knock other humans on their asses or worse.



Shepard is not Captain America. Nor is his armor that much more sophisticated than the one worn by the millions of other soldiers fighting throughout the Galaxy.


----------



## Wan (Jul 29, 2014)

Overwatch said:


> The key word here is "could". No hard evidence is ever presented, so it's up to the player to make a wild guess. Reaper technology is millions of years ahead of that of contemporary civilizations, so I'm going to assume that it wouldn't be particularly fazed.



We _know_ that the destroyer seems to be having a hard time targeting Shepard.  We _know_ that there is a jamming field in effect.  Use your brain and put 2 and 2 together, it's not hard.



> They're still powerful enough destroy everything in the general area and the Destroyer is about to shoot Shepard at near point blank range as the final salvo hits.



Judging by what?  Do you have another example of quarian cruiser broadside cannon power?



> Shepard is not Captain America. Nor is his armor that much more sophisticated than the one worn by the millions of other soldiers fighting throughout the Galaxy.



Shepard wears top-of-the-line N7 armor, along with various customizable upgrades that he purchases.  He's not just wearing standard issue armor.  And Shepard was rebuilt by Cerberus with plenty of implants, and a lot of the upgrades in ME2 involve Shepard improving his bones, muscle, and even his skin.  He practically is Captain America.


----------



## Hunted by sister (Jul 29, 2014)

I'm pretty sure post-Cerberus Shepard would hand Captain America's ass to him, strenght and endurance/durability-wise.

//HbS


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Jul 30, 2014)

Can we all boycott this game?


----------



## Nep Nep (Jul 30, 2014)

krory said:


> By your logic, you should not enjoy anything - ever.



I just came in here to say, you're drunk Kror, go take a nap and hit us up tomorrow.


----------



## Overwatch (Aug 1, 2014)

Wan said:


> We _know_ that the destroyer seems to be having a hard time targeting Shepard.  We _know_ that there is a jamming field in effect.  Use your brain and put 2 and 2 together, it's not hard.



I just watched a walkthrough of the mission. There is NO PROOF WHATSOEVER that the Reaper is being affected by the Geth jamming. In fact, after the mission Traynor will tell you that *it almost shot down the Normandy several times*, with Joker having to pull of some "crazy maneuvers" in order to stay clear of the line of fire.



Wan said:


> Judging by what?  Do you have another example of quarian cruiser broadside cannon power?



No, I don't, but even if it's not as powerful as the spinal gun, it's still a very heavy weapon that damages everything within a certain radius and Shepard is standing ridiculously close to the target during the final shelling. 



Wan said:


> Shepard wears top-of-the-line N7 armor, along with various customizable upgrades that he purchases.  He's not just wearing standard issue armor.  And Shepard was rebuilt by Cerberus with plenty of implants, and a lot of the upgrades in ME2 involve Shepard improving his bones, muscle, and even his skin.  He practically is Captain America.



TIM wanted Shepard to be EXACTLY as he was before he got wasted. Any augmentation he receives after his resurrection is purely *optional* and never brought up in any way during the actual story segments. The same goes for the N7 armor. It's still susceptible to things like small arms fire and radiation, so I'm pretty sure it can't withstand starship ordnance.


----------



## Magnum Miracles (Aug 1, 2014)

Kinda sucks that it's taking place during Shepard's time. Was really hoping that it'd take place in the same verse, just with a completely new story, kinda like what Gundam does once in a while.

But I'll hold my full opinion until more is revealed.


----------



## Wan (Aug 3, 2014)

Overwatch said:


> I just watched a walkthrough of the mission. There is NO PROOF WHATSOEVER that the Reaper is being affected by the Geth jamming. In fact, after the mission Traynor will tell you that *it almost shot down the Normandy several times*, with Joker having to pull of some "crazy maneuvers" in order to stay clear of the line of fire.



The proof is the very thing you keep banging on about.  If you can ignore it, does that mean it's fine for me to ignore it too?



> No, I don't, but even if it's not as powerful as the spinal gun, it's still a very heavy weapon that damages everything within a certain radius and Shepard is standing ridiculously close to the target during the final shelling.



Based on _what_?



> TIM wanted Shepard to be EXACTLY as he was before he got wasted. Any augmentation he receives after his resurrection is purely *optional* and never brought up in any way during the actual story segments. The same goes for the N7 armor. It's still susceptible to things like small arms fire and radiation, so I'm pretty sure it can't withstand starship ordnance.



Optional in the game mechanics, but it's clearly possible and serves to make the situation more plausible.  N7 armor is susceptible to "small arms fire" from _futuristic handheld railguns_, not exactly a mark against it.  And I'm not claiming it can withstand starship ordinance.  Any shockwaves from the slugs exploding on the destroyer are certainly not the full starship ordinance firepower, and if Shepard is hit by the destroyer's beam, he's dead.  Incinerated, even.


----------



## Zen-aku (Aug 7, 2014)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> Can we all boycott this game?


----------



## Jake CENA (Aug 7, 2014)

Last time i played Me i let Mordin, Tali and Miranda die. I dont want that to happen again not before i get to fuck Miranda


----------



## Zen-aku (Aug 7, 2014)

Miranda Dies Every play through in my game


----------

