Talk:Mass Effect 3
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Mass Effect 3. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Mass Effect 3 at the Reference desk. |
Online pass
"By purchasing copies of Battlefield 3, players will receive a Mass Effect 3 online pass" You do not get a Mass Effect 3 Online Pass from Battlefield 3, you get a Battlefield 3 Online Pass which grants early access to the multiplayer demo of Mass Effect 3. EasilyLost (talk) 14:58, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
- Good catch! You're right and I've corrected the wording. Swarm X 08:43, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
PAL release date 09.03.2012
please update the release info box. PAL/Europe release date is 09.03.2012. source: http://masseffect.bioware.com/me3/game/biowaretv/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by IvanI (talk • contribs) 10:41, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Trailer released
The game's teaser trailer was released at the Spike VGAs today. Synopsis on the article seems to reflect it. Not much more info than that though. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 01:45, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Do we really need a blow by blow description of the trailer? I've cut out the speculation in it but we really just need a source saying a teaser was released, and a very brief description of it. The whole contents of the trailer is not historically notable - and we cannot come to conclusions on it's overall relevance to the plot. Rehevkor ✉ 19:00, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't think we need that huge description. Maybe just drop a line like you were saying in the development section. (ktmartell) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ktmartell (talk • contribs) 00:17, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Holiday?
This may sound like a dumb question, but not everybody is from the US. If ME3 is release during "Holiday 2011", if I chose not to go on holiday in 2011, does this mean that it won't be released. Or, being as the first public holiday of 2011 is New Year's Day... you see where I'm going. Please change the term or at least add a description so that the rest of the world knows just what the hell you're on about here (like summer, autumn (fall), winter, christmas - it doesn't have to be exact but there are a lot of "holidays" - just need to narrow it down). Angry Mustelid (talk) 21:47, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
- I always thought "Holiday 2011" referred to the US Thanksgiving/Christmas period, if that's so I suppose an international wording would be Q4 2010. Rehevkor ✉ 21:50, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
- Bioware, a Canadian company, announced the release date for "Holiday 2011". The word is in quotation marks and referenced; it is also wikilinked, for anyone who doesn't understand, to Christmas and holiday season. "Q4" means any time from the beginning of October to the end of December; "Holiday" (as in the "holiday season") traditionally goes from late November to the first or second week in January. This being a game release, it's likely to be before Christmas. Therefore, 'Holiday' is a much more narrow and detailed term than Q4. Swarm X 23:53, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- Main problem being that "Holiday" refers to summer, not Q4 in Europe. I've tagged it with "Nov/Dec" for clarity and secularity.Angry Mustelid (talk) 01:43, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, the holiday article here suggests "holiday season" is used in the UK too, but when I think of "holiday 2011", I think of the summer. Rehevkor ✉ 02:32, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
- This really is a non-issue. Just wikilink holiday season (it redirects to Christmas and holiday season), no discussion needed. Swarm X 02:51, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
- As previously mentioned, somewhat, wouldn't Q4 encompass the North American holidays, anyway, AND be an international method of indicating the approximate timeframe? I suppose that using the direct quote is more precise, though, but the fact that you need to mouse-over the link to see where it leads to understand that it refers to the Christmas season isn't very user-friendly and doesn't convey the information very quickly to the reader. Gary King (talk · scripts) 05:58, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
- Should be fine now, no? Swarm X 00:05, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
- As previously mentioned, somewhat, wouldn't Q4 encompass the North American holidays, anyway, AND be an international method of indicating the approximate timeframe? I suppose that using the direct quote is more precise, though, but the fact that you need to mouse-over the link to see where it leads to understand that it refers to the Christmas season isn't very user-friendly and doesn't convey the information very quickly to the reader. Gary King (talk · scripts) 05:58, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
- This really is a non-issue. Just wikilink holiday season (it redirects to Christmas and holiday season), no discussion needed. Swarm X 02:51, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
I live in Argentina, and holidays here, are on summer (December). As a kid, I lived in UK, and holidays there, are also in December; June. Why do you suppose a north-american company would mean Q4 by saying holiday - holiday=December only in the southern hemisphere. I read the above discussion, but you're just *clarifying* what you think they mean; is there no official announcement that's a bit more specific? HuGo_87 (talk) 06:20, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
- Well, they're very Northern Hemisphere-oriented, that's the problem, so they assume most people will think November to December when they say such things, either not realising or not caring that it might be a bit confusing to our brothers in the Southern Hemisphere. Nope, they're not gonna give us the info more precisely I'm said to say. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie Say Shalom! 06:28, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
- They're a Canadian company, and in Canada and the US "holiday season" only refers to what some call the Christmas season. There's never any clarification needed, that's just the societal name for it. Otherwise, North America uses "vacation" where other countries use "holidays". For example, what the UK calls the "summer holidays" we in North America call "summer vacation". It's a clear, definite and indisputable distinction in North American English. Swarm X 02:08, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
134.243.210.54 (talk) 02:49, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Wow I cannot believe someone thought that this was worth arguing about. Yes I realize that when they say "Holiday Season" the wording may be confusing to people that use the word "holiday" to mean something akin to taking time off or going on a trip. But seriously did you think that they were going to release the game when you personally took time off to take a trip? It isn't like the people at BioWare are sitting their wiating for you to take a vacation to give you the option to buy a game. I think you are an angry little person who feels that any "North American" company who does world wide business should use the vocabulary that your home country uses. Well guess what they aren't and you perfectly well knew what they meant so stop trying to make a point when there is not one to make. Sure they should use the terms "Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4" but many people wouldn't understand those and would be here complaining that they should use terms like "Holiday Season".
-JA88ERW0CK
Not Necessarily the Last Game
Hi all. Any Mass Effect fan worth his salt would know that the series was originally planned as a trilogy, and this may very well still be the case, but as of now, there is still a possibility that Bioware may expand the franchise further and create more games, as speculated by this site: http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/2010/12/13/mass-effect-3-announced/1 While one has reason to be skeptical, the mentioned site is just one of the many places where it is said that the Mass Effect 3 might just 'not' be the final game. For this reason, i believe it would be more suitable for the article to have a reference to this alongside the mention of it being the 'final' game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.57.50.221 (talk) 14:29, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
- I think it was always presumed that while the Mass Effect "trilogy" had a beginning, middle and an end, this was only in terms of Shepard's story. Other games are probably likely, starring new/other characters, but at this point it's all speculation, we'd need more solid sourcing than a passing mention such as this, so far the coverage has been saying this will be the final game. "Shadows on the silver. And silence. The circle closed." and all that. Rehevkor ✉ 14:39, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
- Not sure where I read this, but pretty sure somebody official said ME3 is the final game in Shepard's story as in there may/may not be other games set in the same universe, it just won't be about Shepard.202.53.199.23 (talk) 04:17, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
- I think you're right and it will be like the Pirates films where they have a fourth film and different story (still with Depp ofc, but Bloom's story is over). They might do what Ubisoft is doing with AC except make neat little trilogies for each character's story arc. If it sells, don't put it to rest. Ofc we'll need more sources to confirm that.Hpelgrift (talk) 17:15, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
- Not sure where I read this, but pretty sure somebody official said ME3 is the final game in Shepard's story as in there may/may not be other games set in the same universe, it just won't be about Shepard.202.53.199.23 (talk) 04:17, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Development section?
Hey guys. I think a development section where Casey Hudson's comments and some information about the trailer could be put would be a very useful tool. We could also put something in about the recent announcement of the game's score-composer, who I do not know the name of off the top of my head but who is apparently an Academy Award-Winner.
Thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.7.8.181 (talk) 19:05, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
EDIT: I went ahead and made the changes I was thinking about, although it made the introduction a little bare. Thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.7.8.181 (talk) 20:07, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Music: Wall and Hulick leaving the series
Here are the sources. Jack wall's forum post: http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/103/index/5987442/10#5991831 Jack Wall's tweet: http://twitter.com/#!/WALLofSOUND/status/35746918587961345 Sam Hulick's tweet: http://twitter.com/#!/SamHulick/status/35697479852756992 Sam hulick's facebook profile: http://www.facebook.com/#!/samhulick
194.78.37.122 (talk) 21:12, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Everything Has Been Organized
Hey. I took all the information and organized it into sections based around what is present in the Ocarina of Time article, which is a featured article.
I also deleted some information that was getting repetitive. For example, I know there is a Release section, but there is no reason for the release date to repeated three or four times.
Finally, I made sure titles were formatted the same way. All titles are now formatted in italics, as opposed to some being in italics and some being bold. We need to come to a consensus on this! :D
Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ktmartell (talk • contribs) 17:48, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
"Reapers coming to destroy human race"
Maybe this isn't the right place to ask, but aren't the Reapers coming to destroy the intelligent races of the Milky Way who utilize Mass Relays and Mass Effect technologies?
They'd probably go for humans first, but I doubt they'd stop there. 67.194.184.86 (talk) 10:07, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
- If my memory suits me they basically pwn the hell out of any race that is either capable of space-travel or has reached a certain point in its technological development every 50.000 years, and yeah that includes able to use Mass Relays and Mass Effect. Not very friendly folks imo. Hpelgrift (talk) 17:29, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
ME3 engine
I know that ME2 on PS3 used the "Mass Effect 3 engine", yet the visuals looked exactly the same. Is the ME3 engine the same as Unreal Engine 3.5? TehMissingLink Talk 20:57, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Our article on the Unreal Engine has no information about a version 3.5 (btw, on a side note, you can create a redirect by using the button in the toolbar - I did it for you in this case), so that is probably only an unofficial name. As such, there is no real reliable sources that refer to the engine as "3.5" and none that tie it to ME3. I found one mention through Google here that says that ME2 used 3.5 but for the moment there is no way to answer this in any reliable way and thus also no way to integrate such information into the article (see Wikipedia:Verifiability). On a side note, please remember that talk pages are not a forum about the subject itself, so if you have any more questions about ME3 itself and not the article about it, you are probably better served with asking them at a dedicated forum for Mass Effect 3. Regards SoWhy 11:23, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
- Brenon Holmes from BioWare said it's not really a new engine. They're just using some tweaks from ME2 PS3 in ME3 and vice versa. http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/103/index/5545910/2#5580629 194.78.37.122 (talk) 13:20, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
- It'll probably turn out to be UE3. TehMissingLink Talk 20:57, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Brenon Holmes from BioWare said it's not really a new engine. They're just using some tweaks from ME2 PS3 in ME3 and vice versa. http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/103/index/5545910/2#5580629 194.78.37.122 (talk) 13:20, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
- There's no such thing as Unreal Engine 3.5 - and every Unreal Engine 3 developer tends to make various changes to the engine, such is their perogative as a licensee who can do as they want. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.27.229.89 (talk) 22:39, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
- I agree and disagree with your statement regarding the Unreal 3.5 Engine. Mass effect 3 and Gears of War 3 are both slated to use the Unreal 3.5 Engine. With that said however, I believe that the Unreal Engine 3.5 is just a heavily modified and updated version of the Unreal Engine 3. That leaves me wondering if these games should just be labeled as using a heavily modified Unreal 3 Engine, or if we should keep them as using the 3.5 Engine. Personally either way seems acceptable to me. - 22 August 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.77.6.190 (talk)
Wich platform in particular is this game desgined for?
Odds are its the xbox i swear i saw at on bioware's site and oh no need to worry it isnt forum posts but im haveing trouble finding a link —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.175.172.248 (talk) 09:10, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Edit request from Naseeg915, 4 April 2011
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
According to Gamestop, the release date for Mass Effect 3 is 11/9/2011
Naseeg915 (talk) 20:16, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
- Not done Game stores are not reliable sources for release dates. They often estimate (or lie) to help secure pre-orders. Rehevkor ✉ 20:21, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
How to approach Kinect support
Kinect support in ME3 is a big deal. What do you guys think is the best way to approach writing about it? Should it have it's owen sub-header? Should it only be mentioned briefly where relevant? Ktmartell (talk) 01:57, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Is there anything actually known about it? Isn't it little more than a rumour based on a (leaked?) cover at the moment? There's no way to tell how it'll be implemented anyway, might just be a gimmick. Rehevkor ✉ 00:13, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
- Ah, I see it's tactical/dialogue voice control type thing. I suppose if there's the coverage and enough detail to support it's own section it should have one. Rehevkor ✉ 00:22, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Is it an Action RPG?
I thought it's been widely confirmed that this will be an action game as opposed to a role playing game.
Think the movie Aliens switching it's genre from Alien's Horror genre Sticka (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- From everything I've read, ME3 is bringing in more RPG elements than ME2 had.
- I have no idea where you heard that rumor, but it seems to be wrong. Swarm X 21:14, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Release Dates
Mass Effect 3 is not being released worldwide on March 6 2012. It is scheduled for release on March 6 2012 and March 9 2012 for US and EU respectively. There are multiple sources, and many online retailers have the correct release dates stated.
Source 1: http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2011/06/09/mass-effect-3-live-action-trailer/
Source 2: http://thegamershub.net/2011/06/mass-effect-3-fall-of-earth-e3-2011-trailer/
Retailer:
US: http://www.amazon.com/Mass-Effect-3-PC-DVD/dp/B004FYEZMQ/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8
EU: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Mass-Effect-3-PC-DVD/dp/B004T8C20U/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8
North America on the 6th, not just the US.
While that really only emcompasses one or two other countries, its still important to note.
Relationships
I doubt it's really an issue for anyone else, but I think that saying, "then there will be two love interests vying for Shepard's attention," is a little bit vague...can it be changed to "then both previous love interests will be vying for Shepard's attention,"?
Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by IHopeThisNameWorks (talk • contribs) 05:57, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
- I've changed it to your suggestion; it sounds better anyway. Swarm 19:05, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- How is this game not considered a romance game when that is the way I and many others play it? It seems like "dating sims" are only for Japanese games. What about Western romance simulators?Zhandao (talk) 00:37, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
- One tiny aspect of a game, does not make a genre. Look up games that are considered to be dating sims. That is 90-100% of their game play. Is the first mass effect game a commerce simulator since you sell and buy equipment?Caidh (talk) 02:44, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
- If more than one romantic subplot is enough to make a game a "dating sim", I think the inclusion of more than one form of fauna in Super Mario Brothers is enough to count it as a horticulture/mycology game. Dragon Age comes closer to the date sim tropes than any Mass Effect game does. - Vianello (Talk) 04:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
- RPGs have had romantic sub plots since forever - this does not make them dating sims. How you choose to play the game has no bearing either, the article is based on reliable sources. A Google search] brought up nothing to support your claim beyond forums, blogs, social networking sites and at best, anecdotal references. Яehevkor ✉ 11:41, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
- How is this game not considered a romance game when that is the way I and many others play it? It seems like "dating sims" are only for Japanese games. What about Western romance simulators?Zhandao (talk) 00:37, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
He/she for Shepard
Probably best to resolve this once and for all. So, any thoughts on how to refer to Shepard with pronouns? Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2, due to a single editor's edit a few months ago, refer to Shepard with as few pronouns as possible, resulting in a lot of "Shepard did this... and then Shepard did that." with a few "him or her"s sprinkled in. I personally would just prefer to refer to Shepard as a "he", since he's usually depicted as male. It makes it easier to read, so we can use both Shepard and "he", instead of "he or she", which breaks the flow a bit. Thoughts? Gary King (talk · scripts) 23:43, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
- Is there any actual canon for Shepard's gender? Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 6 Tishrei 5772 02:07, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
- Apparently not according this this source [1], but that doesn't necessarily rule out using one or the other here. Яehevkor ✉ 19:08, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
- Absolutely not! Just because Shepard is usually depicted as male doesn't mean that this article has to refer to the character as male, if you think this your priviledge is really showing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.46.18.98 (talk) 18:43, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
- It has a strong basis on what this article does, actually. If almost all the promotional material, trailers, box art, screen shots etc, show the default male Shepherd, it makes a strong case for referring to him here as male. Using gender neutral adjectives or he/she can become cumbersome and inconsistent in a long article and coming to a consensus to use one of the other will make life easier (not that I'm implying consensus could be reached), privilege has nothing to do with it. In my mind the male Shepherd has the much stronger case. Яehevkor ✉ 19:08, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
- Isn't the default character the default male? That being the case while Shepard can be female, by default he, like most ME players, is male. That being said NWN2 classes are given genders and while I never had a problem reading Class X ... he\the class X ... it irritated me when they assumed I'd be a chick if I played a sorcerer or whatever. Assume he's a guy unless it bugs a lot of girls in which case cumbersome 'll have to do. 118.208.177.8 (talk) 01:16, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
- As aforementioned "single editor" who turned the first two games' summaries gender-neutral, I just thought I'd weigh in. I did that partially to maintain an objective & encyclopedic viewpoint, partially as a self-imposed challenge... and partially because the summaries are constantly wrapped up in if/then language, due to the number of variables and the forty gazillion potential outcomes. I feel like assigning one path as "canon" does a disservice to the games, which are all about choice and how there is not, necessarily, one right way to solve every problem. As such, the summaries need to encompass the variables, and show how they play out, objectively and without judgment. And since Shepard's gender is one of those variables, it needs to remain undefined. Even if that does make it harder for me to write the darn summaries. ~Marblespire (talk) 00:57, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
- (And for the record, I'm a male running three separate saves. One is a Paragon female, one is a Renegade male, and one is a male I whipped up last week with the express intent of killing off everybody--only Miranda and Kasumi survived the suicide mission, and only Kasumi was loyal. I consider the Paragon female to be my "real" Shepard. ~Marblespire (talk) 00:59, 11 March 2012 (UTC))
Weapons
Hello! There is a thing you should add to this article. The player is able to pick up weapons that enemies have drop apon theire death. This is a new feature to the series. Blackjohnbird (talk) 01:30, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
This may have been false information, unless it was omitted from the demo, because the feature was not present in the ME3 Demo. Kastrenzo (talk) 00:23, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Mass Effect 2 DLC expansion Arrival
- Will we need Mass Effect 2 DLC expansion Arrival in order to play Mass Effect 3? 68.75.25.228 (talk) 09:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- No. Does something in the article suggest otherwise? Яehevkor ✉ 10:18, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Well then what's this about?
- Mass Effect 3 will follow from the events of the Mass Effect 2 DLC expansion Arrival
- Mass Effect 3 will begin with Commander Shepard on Earth for trial as a result of events from the Mass Effect 2 DLC pack Arrival 68.75.25.228 (talk) 15:06, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- I believe it means the plot follows on from that point. I don't see how it implies the DLC is required. Яehevkor ✉ 17:06, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Right, the plot of ME3 (initially) follows from the events of that DLC story-wise. That's it. Swarm 18:50, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Improvements?
The article's quality ratings have started to dip a little. What needs to be improved specifically? Ktmartell (talk) 22:45, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
- What do you mean? Swarm 00:20, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
- I suspect Ktmartell is referring to the page ratings on the bottom of the page. The writing in the article seems fairly good to me, a few unsourced statements, but nothing major. Яehevkor ✉ 10:17, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
Development and Marketing
The article has a lot of information in Development and Marketing, but I'm not sure everything is in the right place. For example, the Development section talks a lot about the game's trailers and it being shown off at video game conferences. Are these pieces of developmental information, or marketing information? Ktmartell (talk) 18:58, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
1000 variables
This is corporate shenanigans. There aren't 1000 actual variables, only about 50. The other '950 variables' they refer to are minor and unrelated story choices. Basically, BioWare is making it up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.181.58.64 (talk) 23:00, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Sources? Яehevkor ✉ 23:05, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
134.243.210.54 (talk) 02:55, 30 January 2012 (UTC) While you are probably right that some of the choices made will not have a hand in how the game ends, like the pointless quest to get a fish and tell the Krogans that it came from the Prosiduim will probably not have an effect. But where did you come up with the number of 50 choices? Was there an article or website that states that?
134.243.210.54 (talk) 02:55, 30 January 2012 (UTC)JA88ERW0CK
Rating
Could you add the PEGI rating? It's 18. You can verify this on any game website (such as game.co.uk) or the official website itself (if you start watching a trailer it shows you the rating, not sure if there's any other way to find it on their site, didn't check too deeply). Lord-Schmee (talk) 20:31, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- (new discussions go at the bottom) PEGI themselves give no rating yet. I don't believe retail sites are reliable sources, and apparently (and confusingly) the BBFC have rated this game for the UK. Яehevkor ✉ 20:36, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- I'm American so I'm not 100% familiar with the PEGI rating system, but the pegi.info site does not list Mass Effect 3 yet. They have Mass Effect 1, 2, and some DLC but not 3. Either the ratings that sites are using are based on them being 'expected' to be PEGI 18, or the ratings database on PEGI's only site are not updated. Perhaps these are provisional ratings of some sort that the gaming (news & retail) sites are using?Caidh (talk) 20:42, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- If you go on the Mass Effect 3 WEBSITE, and watch their trailers and such, it's rated as PEGI 18. This isn't speculation from retail sites - this is the rating the game's publisher is giving us. I wouldn't think they would give such a high age rating, if it was going to be a 15 or 16 instead. More than likely they've been told the rating and PEGI haven't updated their list yet.
- See: http://www.masseffect.com/me3/home/ Within the first second of the video, PEGI 18 shows up. Not "likely" or "most probably," but a solid confirmation of the rating. Lord-Schmee (talk) 10:34, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
- Local box art shows MA15+ rating. So legally restricted to over 15. There's only one higher legal classification. Amazon.com's still showing RP. 118.208.50.217 (talk) 10:43, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Origin and PC's
“Yes, is required for all PC editions of Mass Effect 3, physical or digital.” To play Mass Effect 3 PC users must install the program known as "Origin" on their computers. Rendering them vulnerable to EA's brand of corporate espionage unless they “opt-out of Mass Effect 3 data collection from inside the game.”.
Furtled (talk) 23:44, 31 January 2012 (UTC) Not exactly neutral POV there, I'll add the basic info but without the editorialising.
I don't see how is does not constitute corporate espionage. In Germany Origin has been banned because of how invasive it is, it was proven to even be able to access people's tax files on their computers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.243.97.180 (talk) 16:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Origin is NOT banned in Germany. Where do you have this information?
- Also, the respected German magazine c't did some tests and didn't find any hint that Origin actually scans or transmits any personal data. I haven't found the article on their website, only a quote on severa Gamer websites: http://game2gether.de/47858/ct-vorwurfe-gegenuber-origin-waren-und-sind-unbegrundet/ (German). The article can be found in c't 24/2011 192.166.53.200 (talk) 15:05, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Console Specific?
I read the bit "Gameplay in the multiplayer mode will only allow for players to carry two guns at a time in their inventory ... weapons will be changed by holding down a button" and thought it sounded odd. I checked the source site and it looks like it's a Video Game site. Might need to be amended for PC players. 118.208.177.8 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:46, 2 February 2012 (UTC).
Background
Do we really need to give background information in the plot section? Ktmartell (talk) 20:41, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
- Probably doesn't need to cover quite so much detail, as long as it covers the link with "Arrival" and has links to ME1 and 2 plots. Яehevkor ✉ 12:10, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Wider Love Interest?
Just wondering what the wider love interests mentioned by Casey Hudson entail. Gay content's already been mentioned what else? Wider means new so multiple partners, pederastry (legal?) what?
I'm assuming celibacy is still a legitimate option to pursue but that there's no way to avoid surprises? I got a shock in Skyrim when I realised the male blacksmith was coming onto my chap. 118.208.50.217 (talk) 10:49, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Controversy Section
Since the page is locked, I'm just leaving a suggestion here; it really should either be better written or deleted. It really comes off as a lot of hearsay as is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.247.39.34 (talk) 00:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
It needs to be deleted. It's 99% opinion and sources nothing.--68.1.111.29 (talk) 01:27, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah just unsourced weasel word loaded opinion. Glad it is gone. Dbrodbeck (talk) 02:52, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
- There has been quite a bit of backlash against the "Day One DLC," which actually prompted BioWare and EA to release statements. There was also a lot of discussion about this topic in the gaming community in general. I'm curious as to why there is nothing at all mentioned in the article. There have been quite a few calls for boycott from notable members of gaming communities (TotalBiscuit comes to mind). Whether you agree with these people or not isn't the issue, I feel it's worth mentioning even if it's very briefly. Celynn (talk) 00:53, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
- What was here was unsourced junk. If you can provide some stuff we can all evaluate it and then perhaps come up with a wording, if it seems notable. We need stuff from reliable sources. Dbrodbeck (talk) 01:50, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
- There has been quite a bit of backlash against the "Day One DLC," which actually prompted BioWare and EA to release statements. There was also a lot of discussion about this topic in the gaming community in general. I'm curious as to why there is nothing at all mentioned in the article. There have been quite a few calls for boycott from notable members of gaming communities (TotalBiscuit comes to mind). Whether you agree with these people or not isn't the issue, I feel it's worth mentioning even if it's very briefly. Celynn (talk) 00:53, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
Metacritic rants
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A bunch of so-called internet trolls decided to give a game a bad grade on metacritic, I'm guessing because of the day one dlc... Therefore, I think that when the "Ratings" section is written, only official, gamer magazine ratings should be written there, because there can't be a normal user rating because of the aforementioned trolls.
--94.253.201.207 (talk) 08:52, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
- Ratings in reception sections always use the MC critics' average, not the user average. Regards SoWhy 09:26, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Well for the record did you actually read the User reviews. Unlike MW3 which was essentially zeros because we like BF3, these were well thought out. Including the awful endings, the fact that choices from the previous games affected nothing (except who is still alive), the pandering to homosexuals, and the poor writing. Not arguing for or against inclunsion, just saying actually read the reviews, because they are well thought out and bring up very good points. Superbowlbound (talk) 15:44, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
- I DID read the negative rewiews. SOME of them had sensible things to say - mostly about the day one DLC and the (potential, if you really work at developing the character relationship) homosexual scene. Some actually were valid opinions/criticism. Not everyone is going to love ANY plot - and the level of graphics have been seen before. MANY of them were obvious vitiolic filler to prop up a negative rating post. And it was quite clear that clots of self-reinforcing negative review bombers had up rated each others' posts; seriosly, when I looked large numbers of negative reviews were found helpful by the same number of people (really, EXACTLY 17 people each time?!).
- In the end, it won't matter. Either the game will sell well past the initial fan push, and show good market performance (continuing sales, players willing to continue the game with DLC, etc.) - or it won't.
- Purile whiners rate bombing metacritic won't matter a whit. - 173.230.187.183 (talk) 22:53, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Well, I haven't read them because I don't want to spoil the game for myself. However, I don't hate homosexuals and believe everyone should be able to enjoy the game regardless of their sexual orientation. I do hope that the game isn't as bad as people say it is, because I don't think it would get such good ratings from Xbox magazines, etc., and because I liked Mass Effect 2. --94.253.201.207 (talk) 19:39, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
It is on 500 hundred negatives and counting, just not "some trolls". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.180.155.183 (talk) 06:23, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
- The volume doesn't mean anything. Are we expect to reference something as credible just because of 500 rants brought on by internet mentality. Heck, 500 is small compared to other instances of ranting and/or trolling online. Even if there are legitimate points, since there is inherent bias that clogs up the score so much and the fact that many user scores were made on day of release meaning it's highly unlikely anyone has either actually played it or close to playing a good chunk of it at the the time, how can anyone call that credible and worthy of reference as a genuine reflection of reception? Metacritic doesn't represent gamers on the whole and has had habits of this mob mentality in the past. Stabby Joe (talk) 13:48, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
- I agree. Whatever you personally think about the merit of those user reviews, they are not reliable sources and thus have no place in this article. The discussion here seems to be more about whether they are valid or not - which belongs to a forum, not this talk page. Regards SoWhy 19:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
DRM
Could somebody put up some info about the DRM used in this game? My purchase decision depends on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.83.1.251 (talk) 15:00, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
- It uses EA's Origin service as DRM. Says so in the "Release" section of the article. -Rycr (talk) 02:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Metacritic ratings are up.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect-3 Perhaps sum1 with the authority could add it to the article, yes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.64.180.171 (talk) 21:52, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Arrival DLC
Some information should be given about the Arrival DLC, everybody did not buy & play it, that DLC is leads to the beggining of Mass Effect 3, we should atleast add that what kind of a crime Shepard committed that he was being held for Trail on Earth at the start of Mass Effect 3. Some of this information was on the article Mass Effect 2 but it was removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.103.201.160 (talk) 22:05, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
User Reception
The Metacritic user rating was quite bad for ME3, maybe someone could add this to the reception section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by StoopidCity (talk • contribs) 23:27, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
- This topic has already come up and as a general issue with game receptions has been encouraged to discussed elsewhere. Although many feel that they aren't a reliable reflection given the heavy bias. Stabby Joe (talk) 03:24, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
- We would need an RS, not some random opinions. Metacritic user ratings are not unlike forum postings, which are not sources. Dbrodbeck (talk) 03:29, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
How's this for a source that the ending and game was panned? http://www.ign.com/blogs/goldenadamas/2012/03/09/how-mass-effect-3-free-additional-dlc-endings-can-redeem-the-trilogy/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by WhisperBlade (talk • contribs) 09:19, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
- A user blog post and the only one made? What makes this user unique? How does that make it a credible source? Further more what does it have to do with Metacritic users even if it was credible? Stabby Joe (talk) 14:00, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
- There was a big backlash to this game due to the day 1 DLC, which was viewed as a major ripoff. Additionally, Forbes theorized that the presence of gay sex in the game played a role in the backlash. Whatever the motivation for the Metacritic score was, it certainly isn't reliably indicative of actual audience reception of the game. For example, the IMDb user score is at 10/10. Swarm X 19:42, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Personally, I think user reviews should only be mentioned if they're covered in reliable sources. While there are issues with professional critics of any calibre ("this gets my lowest rating ever: seven thumbs up."), they nevertheless are experts. User reviews also don't touch on aspects of the game, as evidenced by the hundreds of people who hated Modern Warfare 3 so much they evidently spent $200 to give it a negative review on three different platforms. Sceptre (talk) 23:32, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Should there be mention here of the building negative reaction to EA supplying only some pre-order bonus codes for the AT-12 Raider Shotgun DLC to select customers despite repeated assurances from Chris Priestly and advertising that it would be provided to all pre-orders placed on their Origin service? Some users are even complaining that they did not receive their channel-wide offer of the M-55 Argus Assault Rifle. Many threads on BioWare Social Network were created discussing the shortage, and the YouTube clip advertising the shotgun has recently been hit with a few (<200) vocal dislikes. There is also a rumor which seems to be floating around that the DLC was offered as PC only, based mostly on EA Customer Service representatives saying they could not find the codes for consoles. Despite this, the complaint of unsent items has been expressed by PC and console users alike. I've been looking but haven't found an official source for either side of this issue yet. 70.75.89.120 (talk) 08:27, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
- Additional speculation (Yes, I admit it's speculation on my part exclusively), this may have contributed to the negative Metacritic user rating in addition to the romance options. 70.75.89.120 (talk) 08:27, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
- Please read WP:RS WP:OR and WP:RECENTISM Dbrodbeck (talk) 13:57, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
more detail in the plot section
we need more detail in the plot section is that ok with everyone? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123465421jhytwretpo98721654 (talk • contribs) 00:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Edit War from Fanbase
I just wanted to note that there seems to be an "Edit War" movement by some angered fans.
http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/9772095
Whether you agree or disagree with their opinions, I don't think we should let people with agendas write a NPOV article, and I think we need to take some care here. I dislike WP being used to "mount opinion campaigns" as it ruins objectivity. I'm not sure this is a relevant controversy right now, so we need to take a close look at this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnRTroy (talk • contribs) 14:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
- As long as the information is from a reliable source(s), verifiable, and notable, then this is a simple content dispute, regardless of your agenda or theirs. It is not our job to determine what is "relevant", but whether or not it satisfies undue weight: "...in determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among Wikipedia editors or the general public." Since WP:RS and WP:V seem to be fulfilled, I believe you are questioning the weight, correct? DrNegative (talk) 15:25, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
- I agree. For instance, I left the links in, but the weight is not verifiable and I was just pointing out to be prepared for "edit wars". Plus I figured people should comment here on why this is worth commenting on. JRT (talk) 15:38, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
- As long as the information is from a reliable source(s), verifiable, and notable, then this is a simple content dispute, regardless of your agenda or theirs. It is not our job to determine what is "relevant", but whether or not it satisfies undue weight: "...in determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among Wikipedia editors or the general public." Since WP:RS and WP:V seem to be fulfilled, I believe you are questioning the weight, correct? DrNegative (talk) 15:25, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/03/10/the-problem-with-biowares-mass-effect-3-day-one-dlc-from-ashes/ http://social.bioware.com/633606/polls/28989/ http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/9512916/729 comment added by Sid (talk • contribs) 14:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
- Forum postings prove nothing, the other article is an opinion piece. What is everyone's rush on this anyway, can we not freaking wait a week, or a month, to find out if any of this stuff is even remotely notable? Dbrodbeck (talk) 14:53, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Edit request on 11 March 2012
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I think there should be an addition to the reception section involving Bioware's handling of game content. Specifically one of the characters in the game Tali'Zorah. One of the bigger reveals of this final game was supposed to be the unmasking of Tali'zorah, a character famous for dawning a helmet and never showing her face. The reveal involved an in game picture showing her with her helmet. The problem was the image used was taken from a stock photo company. This issue has been controversial among fans due to the fact they couldn't even take the time to model an appropriate face model for such a moment. They took two games of build up and decided to end it with a google search and a quick photoshop.
Basically I think there should just be an addition that says the following.
"Fans declared backlash upon discovering stock photos were used in the unmasking of character Tali'Zorah"
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/116202-BioWare-Uses-Stock-Photo-for-Tali-in-Mass-Effect-3
Bigbuddhabelly (talk) 16:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
- Not done How is this notable? Please read WP:UNDUE. Dbrodbeck (talk) 17:20, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Edit request 2 on 11 March 2012
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Also this : http://crystalprisonzone.blogspot.in/2012/03/bioware-day-one-dlc-developed.html?m=1,http://geek.pikimal.com/2012/03/08/mass-effect-3s-from-ashes-is-disc-locked/ DLC character is already on the disc and buyers have payed double You see these things will never be out officially on reliable sources. I know the chances of my request happening are next to nil so its up to u to take it or leave it. Sid (talk) 16:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.200.89.32 (talk)
- Not done
Some guy's blog is not a WP:RS. Find a reliable source, then we can discuss if it merits inclusion. Dbrodbeck (talk) 17:18, 11 March 2012 (UTC)