Mass Effect 3 Discussion Thread

[quote name='dualedge2']They did a wholesale rejection of the Indoctrination Hypothesis (Yes, it's "hypothesis", not theory because a theory has to be backed up by something called "evidence" and be a little something else called "repeatable") months ago. Remember that whole panel BioWare had? Not once did they address, discuss, or even acknowledge its existence.

The Indoctrination Hypothesis was out LONG ago. It was just that some refused to accept it.[/QUOTE]

Yes, I realize that Bioware pretty much snubbed the theory some time ago with their statements of "artistic vision". But as JasonTerminator eloquently stated, while it was far from perfect it had less plot holes and answered more questions than the original vision. The arguments made for it in the well-put together Youtube video had items that led more towards evidence than "magic star-child controls Reapers and the cycle". That was at no point foreshadowed. Sure, it may be "beyond comprehension", but then why try to explain all of your motivations and ask the player to make the decision on the ending?

[quote name='Spokker']It tells me they failed to stick to their artistic vision, but that shit was happening long before they decided to release The Extended Cut.

But that's sort of what the ending DLC was all about, continuing with the futile plan of trying to please everyone. Fans are inherently fickle, and you will never please anyone, but if you have a vision and stick to it, even the most cynical fan will respect you deep down.[/QUOTE]

Good point. It did smack of trying to literally add in community wishes instead of clarifying their vision. I did appreciate the additional exposition (for the most part), but a lot of it felt like "here you go, we're putting in what you want." And to be clear, that's not what we were most upset about. I didn't want "my" ending in the sense of exactly what I wanted to happen. A lot of people, including myself are happy to be told a story, but the original was like getting to the end and forgetting what happens. So you make general broad statements and end up painting yourself into a corner. Which leads to......

[quote name='Anexanhume']I wish they would have pandered on the ending. Despite all their accommodations, the story of most of the game was still great. It actually seems the opposite is true. One person had too much control over the end and no one told him he's retarded.[/QUOTE]

Yep. The story was magnificent through-out and it seems like one person's vision over-rode all of the themes and storytelling.
The new Control ending just flies in the face of the other 99% of the story, and it has the least downside. You don't kill synthetic life like in destroy, and you leave the rest of the galaxy free unlike the forced evolution of synthesis.

General additional ending thoughts:
The rejection ending actually felt like the ending that made the most sense with the story as told. If Shepard says "I won't make this choice for the galaxy", then the Crucible never fires and that cycle is wiped out. Sad, but left with hope that the Reapers will be defeated. Destroy was the closest after that, with unintended consequences of destroying all synthetic life. It's an imperfect ending, and fits the renegade Shepard most. A very "the ends justify the means" type scenario, where your synthetic buddies are offered up for sacrifice. Something a Paragon Shepard wouldn't choose lightly. Interestingly, the Renegade Shepard is the "default" canon Shepard for those late-comers to the game. Which felt like a punishment at the time, since it leads to more death and difficulty. Example: Wrex being dead from ME1, leaving Wreav to unite the Krogan and likely seek revenge against the other races.

Maybe this was the best we could get from them. You sacrifice, make all the Paragon choices, and the perfect ending just doesn't exist in this story. You aren't owed a happy ending in any sense. No one says just because you play by the hero's rules, that a somewhat bittersweet, imperfect human ending choice isn't the best that fate could deliver. I'm sorry, but I just have to reject Control and Synthesis. Those are just TOO "and they lived happily ever after". It doesn't fit. Say what you will about the theory, but it's proven that Saren was indoctrinated and desired synthesis. It only led to his manipulation and downfall as a puppet to a Reaper extinction event. The Illusive Man was also indoctrinated and sought control. The only difference between them and Shepard is that Shepard resisted them all the way through the end. Or maybe that was really the reason why Shepard could make the choice and change the laws of things. Because he/she did so of free will. I don't know. Maybe I was expecting more drawbacks from those choices because they did conflict with everything my Shepard stood for. It's almost insulting to just turn around and say "duh, we had to draw you map on what this ending means" when it is in such direct conflict with your central themes.

On that note, the Normandy picking up injured crew members and being forced to retreat, great. The Normandy crash was way different, I don't see how that isn't a change instead of clarification. The ship isn't as damaged and the escape isn't as frenzied. If it "could be easily repaired" like starchild said, I still think supplies and replacement parts might be hard to find on a non-industrialized garden world. But that's nitpicking I suppose. The idea is that they can repair and move on, but that feels more like a change. Same with the Mass Relays. Again, nitpicking says "how long does it take to repair them, especially since no one understood how to create them? They were all existing structures, the current cycle didn't make them." But the size of the explosion and damage is without a doubt reduced. I don't see how Bioware could possibly say we interpreted that wrong. A much bigger explosion + my comment about "who knows HOW to fix them?" = bad times. The slideshow was ok, big time pandering on seeing Zaeed with his feet up, sitting on a dock. Generally, getting the idea across that everyone goes home including Krogan and Quarians.

On a funny note, I noted on Youtube it always seemed to be Shepard's LI who tearily puts up his/her name on the memorial wall of the Normandy. In my game, it was Kaiden. I had pissed off Liara by hooking up with Miranda while keeping her on the line. Didn't romance Tali, so they decided Kaiden would be the one. I was just trying to be Paragon, didn't mean for so much homo-erotic subtext. I turned him down at the Citadel. Guess he was still carrying a torch.

Overall, I guess this did it's job. I still want to see low EMS results, and how the slideshow can differ. All the ones I saw were Genophage cured, Quarians alive kind of thing. I want to know how it's different if you screwed over the Krogan or chose the Geth over the Quarians type of thing. Generally, I don't know if I like the endings any better know, but I think I'm ready to move on from this game. It hung over me like a bad breakup. Now I got a little closure, some stuff doesn't make sense, I have some questions unanswered. Just like a real life breakup. :)
 
AwYArlsCMAA3bcv.jpg


after the first round where he killed everything with a rocket I sat back and waited 11 min for the full clear on gold, you can guess who glitched
 
[quote name='chubbyninja1319']I , too, stayed up way too late. But it was "Bad Decision Tuesday". I just did one ending, my canon ending, and was very pleased. The extra content was really strong. It felt complete, but not tacked on or too wordy where it dragged on. Great job, Bioware![/QUOTE]

Haha this was me as well. I stayed up late going through the end last time, why should this time be any different lol.
I went with the
Synthesis Ending and enjoyed it this time since they explained the fusion of man and machine. I just couldn't destroy all the AI, since this was my P PT where the Quarians and the Geth put aside their war, nor did Controlling the Reapers as a Reaper made any sense. The moment when Ashley put up Commander Shepard's, it felt like mine, plaque up onto the memorial I broke out in tears (let's face it I've been invested in this world for some time).

Curious, since I only did one ending this time, did they explain or mention why the Paragon/Renegade colors were switched with the Control and Destroy paths?
Oh snap, I didn't even know about refusal because I was avoiding Spoiler tags before.

I think they might have added a few different camera angles in the cutscenes, hard to distinguish since it's been a while. I enjoyed getting a preview of the endings, after you see it you're like yeah that's a no brainier to have in there. Also nice to see Tali's face finally and yeah the Palaven, Tuchanka scenes were also heartwarming. I noticed they retconned the relay's explosions, looks a lot subdued this time as they slowed down the blast.

I also have to say why didn't they do this first along with the ending note that they revised. After you read it, you're like doh why wouldn't you write it that way instead of saying get ready for DLC. (They handled the ending poorly before, due to money and time constraints or control issues in Bioware who knows.)
After the credits rolled,
I thought they'd use a different child's voice because that was confusing before having the kid having the same voice as the starchild. Stupid scene, wished they edited that out lol.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I like that we can actually discuss the endings now, and debate which is the best choice or the most thematically appropriate or whatever, without it just being, Which color did you pick--What do you think happens after that color--?????
 
Hahaha, so true.

I'm happy that my girlfriend--despite her immense fandom--never got around to beating ME3. I won't have to escort her through the mourning phase that would have struck. I'll just have to warn her not to go around firing her gun willy-nilly like I'm prone to doing. She's an ultimate Paragon anyway, so I'm sure it'll be alright.
 
I still don't understand how
Control is Paragon and Destroy is Renegade.
Aside from the colors of the signal matching up with the Paragon and Destroy bars, it seems like the opposite would hold true. Doesn't Shepard's destruction completely connect to the whole trilogy of trying to find a way to stop and eliminate the Reapers? Doesn't control conflict with everything Paragon Shepard stood for? And it seems wrong with the men who are represented; Admiral Anderson, a respected, loyal soldier, who always assisted you and largely helped you defend the galaxy, is the wrong person to follow? Illusive Man, who completely manipulates everyone, and at no point hesitates to expend even human life by merging them with Reaper technology, is the person who was actually making the good choice?

The Reapers seem so menacing and chaotic, that I don't understand how we are to feel sympathy for them in their destruction. It's like at the end of the Matrix sequels how the audience was supposed to feel satisfaction in seeing humans and machines united, even though these very machines had mercilessly slaughtered humans and enslaved them. But, hey, both sides agreed that Agent Smith was an asshole, so all is forgiven.

I completely disagree with the previous mention that working with a group for creativity and listening to fan input is what destroyed this, and any series. There are major problems with that belief.
George Lucas, the Star Wars Prequels; the Wachowski Brothers, the Matrix Sequels; Steven Spielberg and George Lucas, the Indiana Jones series. These films were ruined by the very people who made them. They believed they knew exactly how to make it, and were adamant that their vision was the right one.

Likewise, creativity is greatly harmed when non-creative people give orders and influence. This was what that recent article about the demise of Free Radical was about. Studio influence in books, movies, TV, games and music frequently hurts the quality of media, as the people who lack creativity can in no way aid it with bland ideas, or ideas that do not fit in the story being presented.

But the biggest issue with any series in media has nothing to do with later influences, and more to do with initial influence. Unfortunately, the best way to make a series 'work' is to have it defined before it is made. You can make variations to it, I suppose, but the lack of having almost everything established hurts the story, as there is no real foreshadowing, reflection, irony or even logical progression.

Mass Effect 3 pits you against an unstoppable enemy, who has succeeded repeatedly in eradicating life. How does a weaker group stop them. And, more importantly, how do they do it plausibly?

Video games, like books, have much more time to build than a movie. They are not limited by effects and sets like a movie or TV are. And they are not limited by audience creativity and comprehension like books are. Video games truly should be the greatest step in story telling, where you get to both experience and affect the story. This is where Mass Effect has a great setup. The choices made carry through to the next game, where this will have major and minor influence.

A planned trilogy, meaning 3 games to establish and reveal how to stop the Reapers, would be outstanding. A truly revolutionary way at looking at how to get through a game. But the series is disappointing because it's no different than any other apocalyptic, end of the world, unstoppable Goliath game. Much like the ending of Gears of War 3, the solution to the enemy? A contrived beam, that wipes them out...and uh, every other enemy. Yeah...that's the ticket. Or lets you control them. Or lets you merge with them.

No grand plan. No climatic fight. No real urgency or slick writing that convinces you that this cycle will defeat the Reapers, succeeding where every previous cycle failed, but overcoming that one obstacle...whatever it is. No, it's just some super awesome machine that every cycle has added to...somehow 'knowing' that it will beat the Reapers...somehow...in the future...by future cycles...who will know how to use it...somehow.

I enjoyed Mass Effect 2 as a game, but as a story it's atrocious. You die, only to come back from the dead, which is horrible in sci-fi writing. It invalidates everything in story (sic), as enemies and friends who will be killed during the game could feasibly be brought back from the dead using this space magic. But, for contrived reasons, they won't be. Only you can experience this, for equally contrived reasons.

Nothing important is learned in 2, either. Yes, we learn what happened to the Protheans, about the Collectors, and that humans are being used to make another Reaper, but how do we stop them? How is the galaxy supposed to stop them. Shepard seems to easily defeat a proto-Reaper, but will all the Reapers be like this?

If Mass Effect is a trilogy, and as a trilogy it would be like larger acts in a story, then part one would introduce the characters. Part two would introduce the attempt at solving the problem. Part three would bring about the climax and potential resolution. But Mass Effect 2 really introduces no way at resolving the problem. It's very much like the Matrix Reloaded. It throws a lot of action at you, and you get to do a lot of adventure, but it adds very little to move the story. Adding to that, most of your allies in Mass Effect 2 contribute little in Mass Effect 3, showing how worthless the previous title to be, narrative wise.

That's why the Crucible feels so forced. There's no justification for it, but there's no time to logically setup an anti-Reaper weapon, as that would have been done in the previous game, leading into the third game, where alliances would have to be used to support this weapon, and defeat the enemy.

The problem with this series is not outsider influence, but insider influence, or really the lack of it. If you're going to make a narrative heavy game, you absolutely need to know exactly what the narrative is, how it starts, where it leads, and how it ends. Without that, the narrative has no point. This game, like most trilogies where the first movie is great, or TV shows where the first season or episodes are great, or books where the first book is great, falters because is has a great setup, but absolutely no substance to follow up with it.

It's crazy that a game series with multiple endings doesn't even have one that feels like it fits with the series, but that's because of what I stated above. Without a defined progression (for each pathway), none of them will feel satisfying.
 
THere was a tweet from Mike Gamble today that cleared up something big that even the EC didn't answer definitively....
in his tweet he referenced a glitch where Shepard LIVES and did not romance Jack/Miranda, you don't see an epilogue video. The key here is that we have someone from Bioware confirming that the "best" ending does in fact have Shepard surviving. That breath isn't a death rattle, it's him coming back. That's badass.
That hasnt been flat out confirmed before, has it?
 
[quote name='Ryuukishi']I like that we can actually discuss the endings now, and debate which is the best choice or the most thematically appropriate or whatever, without it just being, Which color did you pick--What do you think happens after that color--?????[/QUOTE]

Amen! I can't wait to try a few more tonight. I'll play onemormtwo more and go to YouTube for the rest.
 
[quote name='usickenme']I didn't think it took a genius to assume joker got the Normandy the hell out of there before the relays blew ....[/QUOTE]
Only a genius would also believe that the Normandy would just swoop down and pick up your squadmates while you are doing a fucken suicide run into Hrabinger's ray. Did Shep call a time out and Harby was like "kk gunna check fb brb" ? The EC was sooo lazy can't believe fans waited 2 months for this
 
I swear George Lucas was the writer behind this series, awesome start and then.....( I see someone else beat me to this post)

I don't think I will trust BioWare again. It's not that the new endings are horrible, it all the combined crap they have pulled, now this ending where they said nothing would change, Only explain..... and then a ton of scenes changed.

Admit your wrong or stick to your blank firing guns, pick one and move on. This whole mess is a crapstom.
 
[quote name='HornyPony']
Only a genius would also believe that the Normandy would just swoop down and pick up your squadmates while you are doing a fucken suicide run into Hrabinger's ray. Did Shep call a time out and Harby was like "kk gunna check fb brb" ? The EC was sooo lazy can't believe fans waited 2 months for this
[/QUOTE]

This was a thorn in my side as well and probably the reason they felt they needed to cut it initially.

If they didn't show the added cutscenes though I think you'd get confused fans, oh wait that's what happened before lol.
 
[quote name='HornyPony']
Only a genius would also believe that the Normandy would just swoop down and pick up your squadmates while you are doing a fucken suicide run into Hrabinger's ray. Did Shep call a time out and Harby was like "kk gunna check fb brb" ? The EC was sooo lazy can't believe fans waited 2 months for this
[/QUOTE]

You are talking about Harbinger who decided to peace out and stop guarding the beam for no reason so that sounds plausible.
 
[quote name='HornyPony']
Only a genius would also believe that the Normandy would just swoop down and pick up your squadmates while you are doing a fucken suicide run into Hrabinger's ray. Did Shep call a time out and Harby was like "kk gunna check fb brb" ? The EC was sooo lazy can't believe fans waited 2 months for this
[/QUOTE]

dude don't get all mad at me because I wasn't crying for a new ending. I personally think the EC was way too hand-holdy and if that is what people needed explained, well that's just fucking sad, bro. Sometimes a little mystery is good.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']There's a big difference between a little mystery and 'what the fuck just happened?'[/QUOTE]

My thoughts exactly. Science Fiction tends to stray into the unknown areas and it's often a theme that leaves things open but to retcon your own universe, yeah that was too much.
 
*checks calendar* "Boy, I haven't trolled the ME3 thread lately" - mystery poster.

-------

Today was the first day that I could truly enjoy since March 6th. It's a great feeling.
 
Ok so I finally started playing as a male Shepard and I've played all games with a female Shep and I have to say. Compared to the female Shep the voice acting of the guy version sucks so badly. The female Shep is convincing and not robotic at all either. So crazy how much better the missions were compared to now where it just feels stale thanks to the voice actor saying a robotic "you bet." I mean he's good compared to the majority of game voice acting no doubt. But wow. Never noticed it until now.
 
[quote name='The Ebbtide']I still don't understand how
Control is Paragon and Destroy is Renegade.
Aside from the colors of the signal matching up with the Paragon and Destroy bars, it seems like the opposite would hold true. Doesn't Shepard's destruction completely connect to the whole trilogy of trying to find a way to stop and eliminate the Reapers? Doesn't control conflict with everything Paragon Shepard stood for? And it seems wrong with the men who are represented; Admiral Anderson, a respected, loyal soldier, who always assisted you and largely helped you defend the galaxy, is the wrong person to follow? Illusive Man, who completely manipulates everyone, and at no point hesitates to expend even human life by merging them with Reaper technology, is the person who was actually making the good choice?

The Reapers seem so menacing and chaotic, that I don't understand how we are to feel sympathy for them in their destruction. It's like at the end of the Matrix sequels how the audience was supposed to feel satisfaction in seeing humans and machines united, even though these very machines had mercilessly slaughtered humans and enslaved them. But, hey, both sides agreed that Agent Smith was an asshole, so all is forgiven.

I completely disagree with the previous mention that working with a group for creativity and listening to fan input is what destroyed this, and any series. There are major problems with that belief.
George Lucas, the Star Wars Prequels; the Wachowski Brothers, the Matrix Sequels; Steven Spielberg and George Lucas, the Indiana Jones series. These films were ruined by the very people who made them. They believed they knew exactly how to make it, and were adamant that their vision was the right one.

Likewise, creativity is greatly harmed when non-creative people give orders and influence. This was what that recent article about the demise of Free Radical was about. Studio influence in books, movies, TV, games and music frequently hurts the quality of media, as the people who lack creativity can in no way aid it with bland ideas, or ideas that do not fit in the story being presented.

But the biggest issue with any series in media has nothing to do with later influences, and more to do with initial influence. Unfortunately, the best way to make a series 'work' is to have it defined before it is made. You can make variations to it, I suppose, but the lack of having almost everything established hurts the story, as there is no real foreshadowing, reflection, irony or even logical progression.

Mass Effect 3 pits you against an unstoppable enemy, who has succeeded repeatedly in eradicating life. How does a weaker group stop them. And, more importantly, how do they do it plausibly?

Video games, like books, have much more time to build than a movie. They are not limited by effects and sets like a movie or TV are. And they are not limited by audience creativity and comprehension like books are. Video games truly should be the greatest step in story telling, where you get to both experience and affect the story. This is where Mass Effect has a great setup. The choices made carry through to the next game, where this will have major and minor influence.

A planned trilogy, meaning 3 games to establish and reveal how to stop the Reapers, would be outstanding. A truly revolutionary way at looking at how to get through a game. But the series is disappointing because it's no different than any other apocalyptic, end of the world, unstoppable Goliath game. Much like the ending of Gears of War 3, the solution to the enemy? A contrived beam, that wipes them out...and uh, every other enemy. Yeah...that's the ticket. Or lets you control them. Or lets you merge with them.

No grand plan. No climatic fight. No real urgency or slick writing that convinces you that this cycle will defeat the Reapers, succeeding where every previous cycle failed, but overcoming that one obstacle...whatever it is. No, it's just some super awesome machine that every cycle has added to...somehow 'knowing' that it will beat the Reapers...somehow...in the future...by future cycles...who will know how to use it...somehow.

I enjoyed Mass Effect 2 as a game, but as a story it's atrocious. You die, only to come back from the dead, which is horrible in sci-fi writing. It invalidates everything in story (sic), as enemies and friends who will be killed during the game could feasibly be brought back from the dead using this space magic. But, for contrived reasons, they won't be. Only you can experience this, for equally contrived reasons.

Nothing important is learned in 2, either. Yes, we learn what happened to the Protheans, about the Collectors, and that humans are being used to make another Reaper, but how do we stop them? How is the galaxy supposed to stop them. Shepard seems to easily defeat a proto-Reaper, but will all the Reapers be like this?

If Mass Effect is a trilogy, and as a trilogy it would be like larger acts in a story, then part one would introduce the characters. Part two would introduce the attempt at solving the problem. Part three would bring about the climax and potential resolution. But Mass Effect 2 really introduces no way at resolving the problem. It's very much like the Matrix Reloaded. It throws a lot of action at you, and you get to do a lot of adventure, but it adds very little to move the story. Adding to that, most of your allies in Mass Effect 2 contribute little in Mass Effect 3, showing how worthless the previous title to be, narrative wise.

That's why the Crucible feels so forced. There's no justification for it, but there's no time to logically setup an anti-Reaper weapon, as that would have been done in the previous game, leading into the third game, where alliances would have to be used to support this weapon, and defeat the enemy.

The problem with this series is not outsider influence, but insider influence, or really the lack of it. If you're going to make a narrative heavy game, you absolutely need to know exactly what the narrative is, how it starts, where it leads, and how it ends. Without that, the narrative has no point. This game, like most trilogies where the first movie is great, or TV shows where the first season or episodes are great, or books where the first book is great, falters because is has a great setup, but absolutely no substance to follow up with it.

It's crazy that a game series with multiple endings doesn't even have one that feels like it fits with the series, but that's because of what I stated above. Without a defined progression (for each pathway), none of them will feel satisfying.
[/QUOTE]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I enjoyed and agreed with them.
 
[quote name='chubbyninja1319']What's a female Shepard? I've never played one of those before. ;) #manshepftw![/QUOTE]Tha X will go join you over in the "Boys Only!" corner of the site. ;)
 
[quote name='100xp']feisty blonde asian w/blue eyes.[/QUOTE]

Haha I was thinking it, just didn't post it. :applause:

Gotta go with maleshep to keep the fantasy that it's me, nah I don't cross dress but do enjoy role playing at times. ;)
 
The Meer vs. Hale debate again? Okay, I'll throw my hat into the ring.

Hale is waaaaay overrated as FemShep. She's one of the best voice actresses out there for sure, but as Shepard, I think she's just either way too over the top or underselling on most of her lines. Just sounds like she phones it in often.

Meer has gotten consistently better as the series has gone on. Compare his work from the first game to the third and the improvement is obvious. I think he absolutely killed with his new Extended Cut dialog, especially during the conversation with
the Catalyst.
 
Yeah, Meer's talent really shines in the Mass Effect 2, especially the latter half of the game (including the extended cut).

My main gripe with Jennifer Hale is that she sounds the same in EVERY role she has, with the lone exception being Phoenix in Marvel 3. At least other voice actors, female ones, tend to try different things with their voices in other roles. With Hale, I have yet to see that. And FemShep is no different in this case. It's hard to take it seriously when it is phoned in 99% of the time.

But the debate, as most debates go, always ends up with a battle of preferences. Some people just prefer playing a female over a dude. I can go both ways (huh huh huh), but I cannot play a FemShep because of the voice alone.
 
[quote name='Arikado']The Meer vs. Hale debate again? Okay, I'll throw my hat into the ring.

Hale is waaaaay overrated as FemShep. She's one of the best voice actresses out there for sure, but as Shepard, I think she's just either way too over the top or underselling on most of her lines. Just sounds like she phones it in often.

Meer has gotten consistently better as the series has gone on. Compare his work from the first game to the third and the improvement is obvious. I think he absolutely killed with his new Extended Cut dialog, especially during the conversation with
the Catalyst.
[/QUOTE]

I couldn't agree more. I love Hale's work as much as the next fan, but thought 90% of her content in ME3 was 50% Phoned In/50% Overacting. Meer on the other hand stepped his game up like crazy over the last two games.

If I had to make a decision based on the trilogy:

ME1 - Draw
ME2 - Hale
ME3 - Meer
 
In the Hale vs Meer argument, I will certainly agree with Arikado's point that Meer has gotten better from ME1 up to ME3. No question there. ME1 it was forced, ME2 more natural, ME3 best out of the 3.

Hale's work in ME3 I would say is lesser than her work in ME2, though ME2, she hit it out of the park without question over Meer, especially with her as Renegade and Hale as Paragon. In ME3, Meer did do it better, and a good bit of the Renegade options for Hale were a bit over-the-top, I would agree.

Hale does keep it consistent in how she does her voice work, yes. Phoning it in, I'd have to listen a bit closer to try and pick up on that to see if I agree.

Though I only have experience with Hale as a Renegade and Meer as a Paragon, so I'm not sure if there's differences with those roles reversed.
 
You want great Hale? Play Diablo 3. 'Nuff said.

She makes an excellent Leah.


And I'm done with the BS VO debate. It's utterly childish to say one is better than the other. Each person has their own preferences, so keep them to yourself.

Just because everyone HAS an asshole, doesn't everyone has to BE one.
 
[quote name='Ink.So.Well.']Uh... relax Edge. I don't think anybody was going out of their way to be a dick here.[/QUOTE]

He was just blowing off some steam after a rough recess. It's cool.
 
[quote name='Spybreak8']You gotta have a feisty red head playthrough, oh yeah.[/QUOTE]

This is what I did. Played paragon but she's not afraid to give someone the business when it's needed.
 
[quote name='IanKazimer']ME1 - Keener
ME2 - Keener
ME3 - Keener[/QUOTE]

Haha yes! Keener for President.
hqdefault.jpg

He'll clean up the streets, look at what he did at Omega. :p

Yeah when you guys were talking about female voice actors discussion I thought immediately of Tara Strong who's done everything from Powerpuff girls to Harley Quinn.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6djynjqXS4
 
Last edited by a moderator:
LOL @ the thread edit. Oh X... you so cra-zy.

Remember loyal Femshep fans... it only hurts because deep down we all know he deserves one.

[quote name='Spybreak8']

Yeah when you guys were talking about female voice actors discussion I thought immediately of Tara Strong who's done everything from Powerpuff girls to Harley Quinn.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6djynjqXS4[/QUOTE]

Ah... Tara Strong a.k.a. the undisputed Goddess of Voice Actors in my humble opinion. *Ahem* I mean... I guess you could say I'm a bit of a fan. She was Omi from Xiaolin Showdown for christ sake. MAD SKILLZ BRO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top