[quote name='shrike4242']There's only one event I can see being something that carries over into ME3 from Arrival:
Rest of it, can't see what would carry over.
It's preferrable, as it gives backstory into ME3, though it's not direly important like LoTSB might be, or possibly Overlord.
ME3 starts about six months after the events of Arrival, when the feces is about to hit the circular air oscillator.
Shadow Broker should tied into ME3 for what happens at the end of it. Overlord might also have some implications with ME3, depending on what you did at the end of it as well.
Stolen Memory shouldn't, and Arrival would only have one item I can see, mentioned above.[/QUOTE]
Well, I played Arrival.
Honestly, I
ing hated it. Not because it was particularly bad, but just because it wasn't particularly good, and almost entirely unnecessary. I've been told that ME3 starts AFTER that. Which is ridiculous. You can't assume everyone is going to want to play DLC for the previous game in the series. It's ridiculous. There's just a chunk of story missing if you don't play it. The whole thing could have easily been the beginning of ME3.
And even worse, I hate its implications on the narrative. Basically, what this DLC says is that they had noing idea what ME3 was going to be about when they were working on ME2. As in, this bit could have just been the end of ME2. The game could have came out a month later. This could have been it. Small adjustments would have to be made. And the end of ME2 would have been less climactic, but I can't see how this was overlooked. How there is a portion of the plot that isn't part of your trilogy.
And no, I hadn't played ANY of the DLC. I played Mass Effect 2, I enjoyed it, and I moved on. That was it. Paying extra for side stories is okay. If there's other DLC that relates directly to the main plot of Mass Effect 3, or that would alter the game in any LARGE way, it should go itself. It's ridiculous. You made three games. Those games should be contained experiences. I shouldn't need other shit to enjoy what is in those games.
DLC should NEVER function as some sort of extension of the main plot. because then, all you did was leave things out of your game in the first place. Stuff that people will have to buy. That's really shitty.
I may play through the DLC when I replay the series this summer, but only if I can get some sort of GOTY edition, or some sort of bundle for it. I refuse to pay between 5-15 dollars for each piece of content. It's like buying the game twice.
Did you try to warn the Batarian planet or not before dumping the asteroid into the mass effect relay?
Rest of it, can't see what would carry over.
It's preferrable, as it gives backstory into ME3, though it's not direly important like LoTSB might be, or possibly Overlord.
ME3 starts about six months after the events of Arrival, when the feces is about to hit the circular air oscillator.
Shadow Broker should tied into ME3 for what happens at the end of it. Overlord might also have some implications with ME3, depending on what you did at the end of it as well.
Stolen Memory shouldn't, and Arrival would only have one item I can see, mentioned above.[/QUOTE]
Well, I played Arrival.
Honestly, I
ing hated it. Not because it was particularly bad, but just because it wasn't particularly good, and almost entirely unnecessary. I've been told that ME3 starts AFTER that. Which is ridiculous. You can't assume everyone is going to want to play DLC for the previous game in the series. It's ridiculous. There's just a chunk of story missing if you don't play it. The whole thing could have easily been the beginning of ME3. And even worse, I hate its implications on the narrative. Basically, what this DLC says is that they had no
ing idea what ME3 was going to be about when they were working on ME2. As in, this bit could have just been the end of ME2. The game could have came out a month later. This could have been it. Small adjustments would have to be made. And the end of ME2 would have been less climactic, but I can't see how this was overlooked. How there is a portion of the plot that isn't part of your trilogy. And no, I hadn't played ANY of the DLC. I played Mass Effect 2, I enjoyed it, and I moved on. That was it. Paying extra for side stories is okay. If there's other DLC that relates directly to the main plot of Mass Effect 3, or that would alter the game in any LARGE way, it should go
itself. It's ridiculous. You made three games. Those games should be contained experiences. I shouldn't need other shit to enjoy what is in those games. DLC should NEVER function as some sort of extension of the main plot. because then, all you did was leave things out of your game in the first place. Stuff that people will have to buy. That's really shitty.
I may play through the DLC when I replay the series this summer, but only if I can get some sort of GOTY edition, or some sort of bundle for it. I refuse to pay between 5-15 dollars for each piece of content. It's like buying the game twice.
[/QUOTE]
"
