100% agree with you. I don't care for ME3 multiplayer, and I don't want to waste my time with it. In a game like this, I typically wouldn't even touch the MP until I finish the singleplayer, and that isn't even an option for ME3. There's nothing worse than having to put this awesome story on hold to dick around with 3 strangers for a bit fighting waves of clone enemies. What a colossal waste of time.
I believe it is possible to get the best ending to the game without playing the MP, but you have to grind through every single last mission and side quest. This means burning through all the asinine scan and fetch quests. According to PC Gamer, they finished all the major and important quests, full paragon, and did every side quest available. Some of the scan/fetch quests were still incomplete. Regardless, they still got a mediocre ending because they didn't play the multiplayer. PCG said it best when they describe this setup as "Things that are frankly bullshit."
You can also play one of their two iOS-only games to increase your readiness.
But yeah, it kind of sucks. I'll say that I actually preferred the finish at only 50% readiness: it was grittier, more realistic. If my troops had just breezed through everything, I think it would have been rather anticlimactic. That said, second run through will be with 100% readiness so I can see what changes. nospoilers
And to think I was just about to buy in to the Trilogy. Thanks for saving me the money Bioware.
0
Binh NguyenK-Pop authority™, Pho KingMadison Heights, MIIcrontian
It is a complete waste of time and energy. I got my Galactic Readiness around 75% and I got fed up and just finished the game.
The ending to the game should NOT be dictated by MP. Especially when the first two installments has been solely a single player game. I was never excited for the MP when it was first announced and I am not a fan of it now.
To be fair to Bioware they are giving you two options both of which I think you all might not agree with still. First of all let us get this straight you DO NOT have to do multiplayer to get the best ending. However, the other path you must take is you have to collect all WAR ASSETS. So yes you have to do some serious OCD if you don't plan on doing multiplayer. “It is possible to get the best ending in single player without playing multiplayer, but it’s twice as hard” (Tom Francis from PC Gamer.
Secondly based on my opinion I like the multiplayer it is a lot of fun and if anyone of you have not tried it I suggest giving it a chance. Hell play it with some Icrontians (*cough* cough* me) before you criticize it. Bioware took a weird path in this whole "Galactic Readiness" this is true, but in their defense I believe they were just trying to do something new.
Now on to the aggressive side (which needs to be focused on more) unless you bot the Digital Deluxe part of Mass Effect 3 you did NOT get the DLC and must pay for it. Now that is absolutely ridiculous and Bioware is doing this on purpose to milk more money from their loyal buyers. I will not explain further on what the DLC is because I don’t want to get raged on if people start randomly shouting spoilers. All I can say is it should be in the game because it was made BEFORE Mass Effect 3 was launched and the character involved in the DLC is a big impact in the game! It is fine for companies to make and sell DLC AFTER the game was created but before is completely unacceptable and just plain foul.
You can get the supposedly "best ending" by playing a 2nd play through people. There is even a "secret ending" on the 2nd play through. So, NO, you do not need to play MP at all. And each player has a different opinion on what is the best ending. Rainbows and glitter won't happen.
Now before you start screaming bloody rage....
Mass Effect 1 required you to play multiple play throughs to achieve the max level of 60, usually doing it on the insanity difficulty level.
Mass Effect 2 required you to purchase/play DLC's to achieve maximum weapon/armor proficiency (6/6)
So, this is nothing new in the Mass Effect world.
Is it right? That is your opinion. There are THOUSANDS of posts on the bioware forums of people bitching about the end of ME3. I feel the story is not over yet, and will come down to DLC's, which I'm sure, more people will complain about also...
Remember, we all had to originally buy the Orange Box which included HL2:Ep1 which we all already had just to play TF2...
The ending that I want is there. Requiring multiple playthroughs to get it is arbitrary, and in a completely different league from requiring multiple playthroughs to get max level or full armor upgrades.
You can maximize your EMS just by collecting War Assets in the single-player game. There is a certain threshhold of these you would need to exceed (I can't get too specific) but I can tell you there are MORE than the required amount that can be gathered in the single-player campaign.
I am so proud, he used to post non-formatted walls of text with instant messenger speak and random word spellings. Now he's making posts with clear opinions that are well researched and easily read. Plus he's linking to sources!?!?
Kids these days, knowing how to write? Preposterous.
The alternative to mandatory multiplayer should NOT be either grinding out hopelessly boring fetch quests that don't progress the story, nor playing through a second time to maximize your potential. Both methods break the seamless storytelling that Mass Effect has created over two titles worth of video gaming. There's no better way to break the illusion of this story than with such asinine means.
The Multiplayer is bland at best. If I wanted to fight waves of CPU enemies, I'll play Tower Defense (Dungeon Defenders is better at this, anyways). It has no place in the three-part telling of an epic save the universe story.
This makes me upset... I am one of those people that is always late to the party with games typically because I have limited time to play and I invest my time in games that take a long time to complete. I'm currently playing Skyrim and given my current pace I'll be finished in time for retirement. The same day I finish Skyrim I would have gladly gone to pick up ME3, however reading this, I'll probably reconsider. I don't like being forced to have to play multipler especially when I won't have many people to play with at that time... And while I think there is something to be said about a realistic, gritty ending when not all of the good guys make it through, I would like to have all of the endings at least available on the first run through...
This makes me upset... I am one of those people that is always late to the party with games typically because I have limited time to play and I invest my time in games that take a long time to complete. I'm currently playing Skyrim and given my current pace I'll be finished in time for retirement. The same day I finish Skyrim I would have gladly gone to pick up ME3, however reading this, I'll probably reconsider. I don't like being forced to have to play multipler especially when I won't have many people to play with at that time... And while I think there is something to be said about a realistic, gritty ending when not all of the good guys make it through, I would like to have all of the endings at least available on the first run through...
Just my 2 cents.
well hell, by the time you DO get to ME3 there will be enough DLC's and "OOPS SORRY" patches from Bioware that you won't have to worry about multiplayer
You had to grind something like 11 different loyalty missions (and in the correct order) to get the best ending in ME2. Why is grinding some planets or MP any different?
You had to grind something like 11 different loyalty missions (and in the correct order) to get the best ending in ME2. Why is grinding some planets or MP any different?
So much unnecessary rage.
Those were pretty awesome and built story onto the characters. I can't help but feel like the only way to get the best ending at this point is to do the equivalent of the Planet Sweeps over and over again.
My argument is that while MP is unquestionably worse, both methods totally suck and waste my time. Bioware is holding the story hostage by means of frivolous time-wasting grinding.
Lynx the multiplayer is not really that bad. Sure you can say that as your opinion but a lot of people like it. At least they are giving you more than 1 option to try and get the best ending. True it is hard but they are not going to give it out freely and honestly I don’t want them to. Games need to actually make gamers put a lot of effort into their storyline so a person who worked through it all can say I put a lot of effort into this and I was rewarded for it. I mean come on grinding has been going on in gaming for years now! As Fatcat said “Get to it ” or just get owned by the Reapers.
It's about the journey, not the destination. Otherwise I would watch the game endings on YouTube and never buy it. I'm not arguing though, everyone feels the way they feel and that's all there is to it.
Canti
=/= smalltimehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9K18CGEeiI&feature=related Icrontian
Comments
I believe it is possible to get the best ending to the game without playing the MP, but you have to grind through every single last mission and side quest. This means burning through all the asinine scan and fetch quests. According to PC Gamer, they finished all the major and important quests, full paragon, and did every side quest available. Some of the scan/fetch quests were still incomplete. Regardless, they still got a mediocre ending because they didn't play the multiplayer. PCG said it best when they describe this setup as "Things that are frankly bullshit."
You can also play one of their two iOS-only games to increase your readiness.
But yeah, it kind of sucks. I'll say that I actually preferred the finish at only 50% readiness: it was grittier, more realistic. If my troops had just breezed through everything, I think it would have been rather anticlimactic. That said, second run through will be with 100% readiness so I can see what changes. nospoilers
The ending to the game should NOT be dictated by MP. Especially when the first two installments has been solely a single player game. I was never excited for the MP when it was first announced and I am not a fan of it now.
Secondly based on my opinion I like the multiplayer it is a lot of fun and if anyone of you have not tried it I suggest giving it a chance. Hell play it with some Icrontians (*cough* cough* me) before you criticize it. Bioware took a weird path in this whole "Galactic Readiness" this is true, but in their defense I believe they were just trying to do something new.
Now on to the aggressive side (which needs to be focused on more) unless you bot the Digital Deluxe part of Mass Effect 3 you did NOT get the DLC and must pay for it. Now that is absolutely ridiculous and Bioware is doing this on purpose to milk more money from their loyal buyers. I will not explain further on what the DLC is because I don’t want to get raged on if people start randomly shouting spoilers. All I can say is it should be in the game because it was made BEFORE Mass Effect 3 was launched and the character involved in the DLC is a big impact in the game! It is fine for companies to make and sell DLC AFTER the game was created but before is completely unacceptable and just plain foul.
Information I acquired to support my statement.
http://social.bioware.com/forum/Mass-Effect-3/Mass-Effect-3-General-Discussion-No-ME3-Spoilers-allowed/A-note-about-multiplayer-in-relation-to-the-quotperfect-endingquot-9665384-1.html
http://www.pcgamer.com/2012/03/06/mass-effect-3-war-assets-and-readiness-how-multiplayer-affects-your-ending/
http://wolfsgamingblog.com/2012/03/07/mass-effect-3-how-multiplayer-relates-to-getting-the-perfect-ending/
Now before you start screaming bloody rage....
Mass Effect 1 required you to play multiple play throughs to achieve the max level of 60, usually doing it on the insanity difficulty level.
Mass Effect 2 required you to purchase/play DLC's to achieve maximum weapon/armor proficiency (6/6)
So, this is nothing new in the Mass Effect world.
Is it right? That is your opinion. There are THOUSANDS of posts on the bioware forums of people bitching about the end of ME3. I feel the story is not over yet, and will come down to DLC's, which I'm sure, more people will complain about also...
Remember, we all had to originally buy the Orange Box which included HL2:Ep1 which we all already had just to play TF2...
Reputation = Paragon and Renegade added. You DO NOT need to be Full Paragon or Full Renegade anymore
http://blog.bioware.com/2012/03/01/reputation-in-mass-effect-3/
I am so proud, he used to post non-formatted walls of text with instant messenger speak and random word spellings. Now he's making posts with clear opinions that are well researched and easily read. Plus he's linking to sources!?!?
They just grow up so fast these days
The alternative to mandatory multiplayer should NOT be either grinding out hopelessly boring fetch quests that don't progress the story, nor playing through a second time to maximize your potential. Both methods break the seamless storytelling that Mass Effect has created over two titles worth of video gaming. There's no better way to break the illusion of this story than with such asinine means.
The Multiplayer is bland at best. If I wanted to fight waves of CPU enemies, I'll play Tower Defense (Dungeon Defenders is better at this, anyways). It has no place in the three-part telling of an epic save the universe story.
Just my 2 cents.
and no more spoilers alright
my 2 canadian cents
Good luck explaining this one Bioware
So much unnecessary rage.