Recommended Posts

Mass Effect 3 Ending Fighter Goes To The FTC

A fan who wants to see the ending of Mass Effect 3 changed has taken his complaint to the Federal Trade Commission, the agency created to protect consumers.

His argument is that Bioware did not deliver on the promise of its game saying, "after reading through the list of promises about the ending of the game they made in their advertising campaign and PR interviews, it was clear that the product we got did not live up to any of those claims."

He continues by inviting others to file complaints against Electronic Arts with the FTC if they share his sentiments.

Source (gameinformer.com)

OH FFS!! :laugh: This is taking it too far :/

It works pretty great if you ask me

It's not as much of an issue in single player campaign but quickly becomes a pain in MP. Trying to revive a team member? Your character is more likely to start hugging a wall, repeatedly (happens a lot since most ppl die next to cover/wall). Trying to run away from an enemy heavy? Your character decides that you are trying to get into a cover instead.

That Banshee is one tough b*tch

Hate her

There's two of them to fight while defending the bomb in the monestry

Lots of sprinting away to sinpe them with the Widow and using squadmates warp/frag grenades when you're playing as an Infiltrator

I can't see why some people consider the "Destroy" choice to be the most appropriate. Remember "Arrival"? Destroy a relay, it destroys the entire system. And all the home worlds contain a mass relay. So even if you destroy the repears, you destroy the home worlds (what you were fighting for) and some of their colonies as well. Whatever survivors that are left on remote planets are usual in hostile environments that depend on supplies from aforementioned worlds. Considering that, they'd be dead within a few months or years. It would be a Pyrrhic victory.

I can't see why some people consider the "Destroy" choice to be the most appropriate. Remember "Arrival"? Destroy a relay, it destroys the entire system. And all the home worlds contain a mass relay. So even if you destroy the repears, you destroy the home worlds (what you were fighting for) and some of their colonies as well. Whatever survivors that are left on remote planets are usual in hostile environments that depend on supplies from aforementioned worlds. Considering that, they'd be dead within a few months or years. It would be a Pyrrhic victory.

Unless the Catalyst and Crucible are able to destroy the Mass Relays without destroying the systems (which is possible).

There's two of them to fight while defending the bomb in the monestry

Lots of sprinting away to sinpe them with the Widow and using squadmates warp/frag grenades when you're playing as an Infiltrator

Thats the worst part.

I can handle Brutes easily, with Nova at full, but that Banshee is just too much

Cerberus Network was different, that gave you access to DLC for free for single player, the online pass gives you access to multiplayer(that's already on the disc) to expand the single player

When EA shuts down the ME2 Cerberus network, that DLC will still be there, just not for free, when EA shuts down the online servers, that's it, unless they release a patch and when

has EA EVER done that in the history of ALL EA games?

PS: Sorry, but EA hasn't earned any points with me, only lost.

I was merely referring to how they attempted to cut down on used copies. They didn't need to shoe-horn the multiplayer in there to create the online pass. Cerberus Network was one of the first examples of the "online pass": redeem the code, log in to EA servers, and get free DLC (that would cost $10 without the code).

The multiplayer was in there because OMFG every has to have a multiplayer function at this point, amirite?

/s

I can't see why some people consider the "Destroy" choice to be the most appropriate. Remember "Arrival"? Destroy a relay, it destroys the entire system. And all the home worlds contain a mass relay. So even if you destroy the repears, you destroy the home worlds (what you were fighting for) and some of their colonies as well. Whatever survivors that are left on remote planets are usual in hostile environments that depend on supplies from aforementioned worlds. Considering that, they'd be dead within a few months or years. It would be a Pyrrhic victory.

Mass Relays are destroyed in all endings.

Internets is awesome... cue the newest of many hilarious memes of Mass Effect - Marauder Shields :laugh:

tumblr_m13iianHrh1rrx8evo1_500.jpg

Bioware forums thread: http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/325/index/9976862/1

Comic series (way above any of that Dark Horse crap): http://koobismo.deviantart.com/

  • Like 1

I saw Jack yesterday! I had just a huge smile on my face, she was my favorite and it was good to see her.

The small stuff is frustrating though. Why can't I press the "J" key to bring up my journal, for example? I know it's a console port, but how long would it of taken to at least try to do a few things for the pc?

So apprenlty because I missed the Eden Prime thing I wasn't high enough to get the ****ing ending I wanted after playing full paragon and keeping everyone alive throughout the entire series(minus the one that had to die in ME1 and Moradin cause I'm Paragon) I only bothered to play MP till I had 66% readiness thinking that it would be enough since I was sitting around 6.9k assets. But that became clearly wrong as I made my way to the beam at the end. Yeah this ending has caused me to no longer buy Bioware games on day 1. The ending to 1 and 2 I loved this one I wished the game just ended after the Cerebus HQ. i still don't know anything about the Illusive man and I shouldn't have to read the stupid comic to learn about it. 3 games of playing Paragon but I guess that wasn't enough to get the Illusive Man killing himself choice. The only renegade choices I know I made was killing Fei Ling and something on the Rachni mission)(let the queen live) I still don't know where those renegade points came from. I was going to go ahead and play through all 3 games again but idk if I want to at this point. I honestly thought I could put the ending aside like I did in Deus Ex but nope, don't even care about the three choices its the getting there part I hate. And if Liara and Javik(people I took on final mission) are the only ones to step off the ship at the end does that mean everyone else died? Also why am I starting back on my ship after that? What the hell is the point, I'm not gonna build the legend with DLC I built it in 1 and 2 and finished it in 3. Also my screens color was really messed up am I suppose to think Shepard lived at the end? I couldn't see what moved in the wreckage.

O and **** banshees.

Its like a 3 hour movie.

First hour was released in 2007

Second in 2010

Third in 2012

Its like every single scene of the movie is a masterpiece. Excellently done, performed and presented. Only in last 5 minutes, they screwed up for whatever reasons.

The last five minutes are out of the blue. With little, very little to no connection with the first 175 minutes.

*sigh*

I completed the game yesterday afternoon. I felt too that the ending was disconnected from the universe and it raised many eyebrows and questions, especially since I did not play the first two games, I may be missing a few pieces of the puzzle.

It had a very 'completion of trilogy' cliche-esque feel to it, I just wish we had more information on what happened to the rest of the characters.

Still, it did not alter my opinion of the game: I enjoyed every minute of Mass Effect 3 and I look forward to continue playing it,

I completed the game yesterday afternoon. I felt too that the ending was disconnected from the universe and it raised many eyebrows and questions, especially since I did not play the first two games, I may be missing a few pieces of the puzzle.

On the contrary, you're not missing out on anything... because the first two had no impact on the ending. Which is one the biggest complaints people have currently.

Mass Effect 3 Easter Egg - Blasto the Hanar Spectre "movie" - Blasto 6: Partners In Crime :rofl:

Starring:

Blasto - hanar Spectre

Chief - volus... well, Chief

Booben - "badass" elcor C-Sec agent

Booben's sister

and some angry vorcha...

Badassfully: easily the most interesting [useless] mix of species Mass Effect has to offer :laugh:

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • It STILL has horrid theme support. Hard to look at for me. The white is too bright, and the black too dark. I'm using classic outlook for the Dark Grey theme. It's just right for me.
    • inb4 someone leaves the usual "what an unfortunate name" comment
    • Cuktech 10 Ultra charger review: big display, four ports, 110W total power by Taras Buria Cuktech recently announced a couple of Ultra-branded chargers, including a desktop 300W charger, which I reviewed a few weeks ago. For those who do need that much (or who do not want to spend that much on a charger), Cuktech also offers the 10 Ultra, a traditional wall charger with similar features. Four ports, a big display, and up to 110W of power output. After using it for a few weeks, here are my impressions. Disclaimer: Cuktech provided the review unit without any editorial input or pre-approval. Like the 30 Ultra, the 10 Ultra arrived in a box made of nice cardboard with quality print all over it. Inside, besides the charger, you will find a 240W 6A charger, which, this time, is fully braided. While Cuktech always bundles high-power cables with its chargers and power banks, they are usually regular and unassuming. This time, the cable is much nicer, matching the charger's $59.99 price tag. The charger itself measures 67 x 76 x 33 mm or 2.6 x 3.0 x 1.3 inches and weighs about 250 grams. Considering the charger has four ports and a big display, I would say the compact size is quite impressive, albeit a little hefty. The overall design is similar to other chargers from the manufacturer, minus the chrome Cuktech logo next to the four ports. The Cuktech 10 Ultra has retractable prongs for better portability. Its front side is covered with piano black plastic housing two elements: a capacitive button with backlight and a quite large display for various charging stats. Ports are downward-facing, and I have mixed feelings about such a design. It is not the most convenient when you frequently connect and disconnect cables. It makes you bend over to find the right port to connect, and it is a no-go with outlets mounted closer to the floor. On the bright side, design like this eliminates clutter and sagging, especially when using four cables at once. Plus, you get plenty of space for a big display. Ports include two high-speed USB Type-C ports, one Type-C for less demanding devices, and one classic USB Type-A. The first two ports deliver full 100W, while the third is capped at 45W. As for the Type-A port, its maximum output is 18W. In total, the charger delivers 110W of power, but in my testing, I managed to squeeze 117W when charging two power banks and a tablet. Quite impressive. Type-C1 Type-C2 Type-C3 Type-A Single-port 100W 100W 45W 18W Two ports 80W 20W - - Three ports 65W 20W 20W - Four ports 65W 20W 10W 10W The charger can detect handshake protocols and balance power across all four ports according to each device's needs. As such, power is not limited to the values in the table above. You can have two ports charging at 55W, three ports at 45W + 20W, and more. For some reason, Cuktech is not listing the supported protocols, but a quick test showed that it is compatible with PD3.0, PPS, QC5, DCP, and UFCS. When you connect a compatible device, the charger automatically detects its charging standard and displays it on the screen, for example, Apple 6A or Samsung 3A. Speaking of the screen. The main highlight of the 10 Ultra is its 1.57-inch display with a maximum brightness of 700 nits and 160-degree viewing angles. The display takes up most of the front, and it shows various charging-related information, including total output power, current temperature, power distribution across ports with watts, volts, and amps, a screensaver, and more. You can toggle between the different views by tapping the button, and holding it changes the screen orientation (portrait or horizontal, plus flipped) according to your socket position. The screen is very nice. It is sharp, vivid, and the fonts are easy to read. As for settings, you can change the following: Keep the screen on or off Lock the screen orientation (hold the button to change the screen orientation) Keep the USB Type-A port on Toggle power modes The charger has three power modes: AI: standard mode that automatically allocates power to each connected device. Power Priority: prioritizes power for high-demand devices, such as laptops or power banks. Balanced: splits power evenly across connected devices according to their needs I was skeptical at first, but after testing a few devices in different modes, I can see the benefit of these three modes. The most useful is power priority, which gives the first Type-C port more power. When I was charging a 100W power bank (port 1) alongside a 140W power bank (port 2), Power Priority split the total output about 75-30. Balanced mode, as the name suggests, splits the total output between the two ports more or less equally. As for AI mode, the charger uses its brain to detect which device needs more power. In my testing, it figured out that the 140W power needs a bit more juice. As I said, I expected this to be more of a gimmick, but the three built-in modes turned out quite useful. For example, you can prioritize your laptop while giving other ports a little less power, but still enough to charge at acceptable speeds. Unfortunately, unlike the 30 Ultra, this charger cannot display the battery level of the device being charged. This small feature turned out to be very useful when I was testing the 30 Ultra, as it allowed me to see my phone's battery level without picking it up. Like other Cuktech chargers I tested, the 10 Ultra one proved itself reliable and well-made. It uses Gallium nitride semiconductor technology to reduce the charger's size and improve efficiency. It is also better at dissipating heat, but I have to say that when charging two power banks at 117W total, the charger got hotter than what I would call comfortable (hold it for a few seconds, and you start feeling a burning sensation at your fingertips). However, the built-in thermal indicator remained below the temperature threshold, with the screen reassuring that the device operated at "High performance" (I tested it in a 21 °C / 69 °F room). Overall, the Cuktech 10 Ultra is a solid choice. If you need four ports and you like to nerd out on various stats, it is a very easy recommendation. It will take care of your laptop, phone, tablet, and power bank without breaking a sweat, plus the build, material, and cable quality are top-notch. The mode switcher is handy when charging different devices with different power needs, too. I cannot say a display is a must-have in a charger, especially when it makes you more conscious about where to plug it, but it is a neat addition if you have a socket at your table or bed level, so that you can actually use the display and its features. The more important fact is that despite its size and quality, the display does not make the charger that much more expensive than similarly powerful chargers from competitors. Plus, you can save 10% on the 10 Ultra with a promo code on Amazon. Buy Cuktech 10 Ultra charger - $53.99 on Amazon with a promo code As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Last week I was investigating an issue with contacts and tried using the new Outlook. In the real (Classic) Outlook, you can easily go to any Outlook folder and present it in a Table View, then customize the columns to show/sort any field, which was exactly what I needed. But of course, the new Outlook doesn't have this feature at all. I gave up. Oh, and can we possibly stop claiming the new Outlook has PST support? What it really has is the ability to use the real Outlook in the background to pretend to have PST support. There is no PST support without the real Outlook installed.
    • Honestly just before Panos left it started to feel like MS just wasnt interested in them so they were being less innovative with them, and then when he DID leave for Amazon its kind of clear the direction is gone. It felt like Panos had both goals and drive, and a vision, but it felt like no matter what his title/department was the Surface devices never had the full interest of the rest of management and he was just pushing a bolder up a hill that MS was adding dirt to as he went.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      mobandz earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Apprentice
      fernan99 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • One Month Later
      nothanks earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      B2Proxy earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      MadMung0 earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      477
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      247
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      79
    4. 4
      FloatingFatMan
      76
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      60
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!