Sections

First proper Mass Effect 3 info – plot details, multiplay nixed

Friday, 8th April 2011 10:31 GMT By Johnny Cullen

Not even 24 hours after Mass Effect 3 was confirmed as being on Game Informer’s next cover, the first proper information on the sure-to-giant BioWare RPG is now online.

Warning: SPOILERS.

Mass Effect 3

Developed by EA super-studio, BioWare.

Will release this holiday season for PC, 360 and PS3.

ME3 is the final chapter in a trilogy that began in 2007.

First teaser trailer showed London being invaded by the Reapers.

The game starts out with Shepard on trial on earth following the events of Mass Effect 2′s final DLC pack, Arrival. During the hearing, though, the Reapers start their invasion of the planet.

As well as that, Cerberus, the mysterious organisation that played a major part in Mass Effect 2, is out to kill Shepard. The Illusive Man is said to play an crucial role in ME3.

Squadmates confirmed for the game include Garrus, Liara and, depending on a choice made in Mass Effect 1, Kaiden or Ashley, with Wrex, Mordin, Legion and Anderson to also appear as non-party members – that’s assuming everyone’s still alive after your adventures in ME1 and ME2.

If you’re new to the series, the game will start out with a “Previously on Mass Effect” comic that enables you to make decisions in a similar fashion to the comic at the beginning of the PS3 version of Mass Effect 2.

The game will have multiple ending, some for good and some for bad. These will be influenced by who who you recruit to your squad.

While the game won’t be reverting to the Mass Effect 1 standard, RPG elements will be beefed up for ME3. More freedom will be given to character skills, skill trees will be bigger and your powers will evolve several times instead of just once.

The weapons in the game will be based on ME2, but will include mods, which will enable you to swap out gun parts, such as barrels, and scopes.

All classes will now go unhindered in terms of weapons, but will be limited in terms of carrying capacity. The only class to carry unlimited weapons is the soldier.

Despite previous speculation saying, there’s no multiplayer. BioWare apparently told Game Informer that it’ll look at it for future games or spin-offs, but it won’t be in ME3.

Mass Effect 3 releases this holiday season for Xbox 360, PC and PlayStation 3.

Thanks, GAF.

Latest

31 Comments

  1. Blerk

    Kind of disappointing that it picks up after that DLC pack, that seems a bit harsh on people who didn’t/couldn’t buy it.

    Otherwise, all sounding good! Although I’d have liked to have had Legion back in my squad.

    #1 3 years ago
  2. Johnny Cullen

    So gay and ready for this.

    #2 3 years ago
  3. Edo

    So I guess saving that collector’s base was not a good thing to do…

    #3 3 years ago
  4. hosseincode

    hey johnny, you’ve missed James Sanders as a squadmate

    #4 3 years ago
  5. onlineatron

    Hoping for a Thane appearance.

    #5 3 years ago
  6. combat101

    @3 I was thinking the exact same thing.

    #6 3 years ago
  7. AHA-Lambda

    OMG SO HYPE :O

    @1 – actually i’m gladof this it may show companies not to treat dlc addons as throw away experiences. Too many of them just revert the game’s story back to the status quo we left them at (*leers at aln wake* >:( )

    #7 3 years ago
  8. Maximum Payne

    Funny thing i was like to completely ignore ME3 because of Battlefield 3 and Skyrim and i read 3 lines of info and I am super Hyped :)

    #8 3 years ago
  9. YoungZer0

    Stopped reading after the first sentence. That’s really too much info.

    #9 3 years ago
  10. spiderLAW

    im not liking the story so much. Trial, cerberus trying to kill me, old team mates from ME2 are not gone just like the transition from 1 to 2…..jeez…. but still, its ME and i will jizz all over ME when the opportunity cums ( :) )

    #10 3 years ago
  11. threadzilla

    Soo excited for this game…this and uncharted 3 in the same year is just awesome….2011 is the year for gamers with the GOTY’s for the past two years both getting sequels….Can’t wait for ME3

    #11 3 years ago
  12. Moonwalker1982

    So it won’t be like ME1 but they will bring some RPG stuff back. GOOD, cause as nice as ME2 was, it really missed the RPG things.

    #12 3 years ago
  13. Moonwalker1982

    Scans

    http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/5335/masseffect34.jpg

    http://img864.imageshack.us/img864/1231/masseffect35z.png

    http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/3749/masseffect32.jpg

    http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/9069/masseffect33.jpg

    #13 3 years ago
  14. DSB

    Mass Effect is dead to me.

    Well, ‘cept the original. I hope that one gets a sequel some day ;)

    #14 3 years ago
  15. Moonwalker1982

    Dead? Wtf…you disliked ME2 that much?

    #15 3 years ago
  16. Tamo123

    I have to also also confess, ME1 was way better than the second… The second one, while a great story, just never lived up to the original for me. I honestly can’t see the third one fixing that…

    #16 3 years ago
  17. DSB

    @15 I realize I’m totally outnumbered on that :P I bought it at the same time as my brother, and we were both like “This is shit though, isn’t it?!” after having played through it. Well, he gave up before finishing.

    It really felt like I was playing the original Rainbow Six: Vegas in space with some halfassed dialogue squeezed in between, and some cockamemy story that didn’t care to connect with the original in any way, shape or form.

    The idea of the council turning its back on you, the idea of working for Cerberus, the idea of the alien race being what they are and doing what they do is just extremely poorly founded. And the final boss made me not know whether to laugh or cry. It was bad, but it was so bad it was almost funny.

    “How do you kill a universe-eating monster?” – That’s easy, you just shoot him in the huge, glowing eye, that’s shaped like a target. They build those that way, didn’t you know?

    I really liked a lot of the characters, but there was some dead weight. The blonde chick was as one-dimensional and tiring as Morrigan in DA:O and I couldn’t wait to kill off the hopelessly naive black guy. He had no personality, what so ever, so he must be there to be killed off, right?

    Again, I’m not trying to steal anyones joy of ME2 away, but as far as I was concerned, it really was one of the biggest disappointments as a gamer since Deus Ex 2. I won’t be picking up the third.

    #17 3 years ago
  18. Phoenixblight

    @17

    I am assuming you didn’t read the books if so you wouldn’t have built up such high expectations. The book prior to the release of ME 2 fleshed out Cerberus and their intentions so with colonists being abducted by the Collectors makes complete sense for Cerberus to step in not sure how you had an issue with that.

    But I didn’t build my own story in my own head on how ME 2 or the series will go thats how you shoot yourself in the foot.

    “It really felt like I was playing the original Rainbow Six: Vegas in space with some halfassed dialogue squeezed in between, and some cockamemy story that didn’t care to connect with the original in any way, shape or form.”

    Should have read the books prior to playing the game than maybe you wouldn’t have bothered with picking up ME 2 because I saw the direction of where the game was going and had no issues with it. I am sorry you did.

    ““How do you kill a universe-eating monster?” – That’s easy, you just shoot him in the huge, glowing eye, that’s shaped like a target. They build those that way, didn’t you know?”

    That was an infant version of a Reaper nothing to the level of Sovereign or any other Reapers. Take it however you wanted.

    You had way too much expectations for ME 2.

    #18 3 years ago
  19. DSB

    @18 Simply put: A game that needs a book to justify it’s story, is a game that’s cutting some serious narrative corners within its own medium.

    I know you genuinely believe that Bioware can do no wrong, to every extreme, but if they actually expect that people pay for official fan fiction just to get the game, as a sequel, that just makes it even more of a failure on their part. Being games developers and all.

    I expected a proper sequel, what I got was a game that made no sense. If they wanted people to read Mass Effect, rather than play it, they shouldn’t have made it a videogame.

    “Oh, you thought the movie sucked? That’s just because you didn’t buy the book and play the videogame” – I know, right? My bad.

    Selling a narrative the way Scientology sells its beliefs (fragmented, compartmentalized and behind a paywall) isn’t the way to go.

    #19 3 years ago
  20. Phoenixblight

    @19

    The book wasn’t necessary to Mass Effect 2 or even the first one it was just added flavor to it. All I was saying is if you would have read the book you would have just simply not have bought Mass Effect 2 because the book was very subtle about where the series was going that and Casey Hudson talking about Sheperd joining Cerberus along with the colonists being abducted by the collectors. Did you read the codex in Mass Effect 1? They also tell you Cerberus is a prohuman group.

    I take the games for what they are not what they “should” be everyone has thier own idea about what a game “should” be.

    The books were not huge pieces of the Mass Effect series infact you can play the game and wouldn’t even know there was a book. The first book was about Saren before he met Sovereign and how Anderson almost became a Spectre. The second book was about Cerberus experimenting on a little savant girl to make her very powerful biotic also you would know why Quarians hate Cerberus. See nothing needed for Mass Effect 2 just a little back history on small things within the ME universe.

    “I know you genuinely believe that Bioware can do no wrong, to every extreme”

    I don’t remember saying this nor did I ever say Bioware are gods with RPGs, they have their flaws just like any developer does but overall I have never been disappointed with a Bioware game. Mass Effect 2 was better than the original in gameplay especially since it was polished and no critical bugs like the original. I also enjoyed all the characters of ME 2. Ashley and Kaidan could go die in a fire and I wouldn’t shed a tear. They were much more shallow than Jacob. I didn’t like the fact that the majority of the game was collecting people and than the collectors were an afterthought but I still found it to be better than the original even with that flaw. Only thing Bioware could do to stop me from buying this game is including Multiplayer which is not the case here.

    #20 3 years ago
  21. DSB

    Thing is, Bioware built the story, and they built the games. If they aren’t tied into eachother without a book, there’s no one else to blame.

    I didn’t have “wild expectations”, I just expected some sort of believable continuity, from what was constructed by Bioware. From finally convincing the council, to painting Cerberus as the ultimate assholes of the universe, to introducing the Reapers as universe-eating, godlike creatures in the first games.

    The disbelief is only half of it though. The generic gameplay, the pacing, the lack of items, and the lack of depth in the quests were equally huge issues. It pretty much ruined any idea I had of Bioware as capable storytellers.

    I don’t accept a cop out like a book to solve any of that. I don’t rely on books to complete games, and developers who do, don’t reserve my respect. And if the books were indeed footnotes like you now say, then the sequel is still left with those huge gaps.

    #21 3 years ago
  22. Phoenixblight

    @21

    There were no huge gaps not sure where you are getting at. The reaper you fought at the end of ME 2 was an infant it was in preproduction nothing to compare against sovereign. Not sure what gaps you are talking about. THe council doesn’t want to believe there is a big bad coming that is believeable especially if like my SHeperd I let the council die.

    “From finally convincing the council, to painting Cerberus as the ultimate assholes of the universe, to introducing the Reapers as universe-eating, godlike creatures in the first games.”

    Casey Hudson and Christina Norman both went into this that you wouldn’t be a spectre in the sequel nor would there be any part of the game would be involved with the council. Cerberus was the only ones that were taking notice of an entire colony going missing, how hard is that to believe? THe council was ignoring it because the colonies were out of alliance and council space. Whatever, you just seem to be grabbing at straws with the plot, it was all explained in game.

    #22 3 years ago
  23. Shonak

    @13: Thanks. Here’s also a scan of the new Ashley. http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g45/freedan_the_eternal/Snapshot_20110407_1.jpg

    #23 3 years ago
  24. DSB

    The gaps are absolutely crystal. You’re the one that’s desperately seeking books and various other references outside the game, as somehow explaining what’s actually in it.

    In the first game you establish Cerberus as a genocidal organisation, the embodiment of evil, and then you have your hero join them with little to no convincing in the second game. Where’s the logic? Captain America joins the nazis. Jolly good.

    In the first game Reapers are established as transcendental, godlike creatures, only to have the collectors build one that’s incredibly weak, and looks like a T-1000 from the Terminator movies (which is more comical than scary) and can be shot through it’s eye with a simple assault rifle, and totally destroyed. You can barely even bring down an attack chopper with an M-16 these days, but you can kill a universe destroying robot with a mass accelerated assault rifle? Come on now.

    Even if the pretense is that the collectors build awful reapers, or that the reaper is supposed to be weakened, that’s still a humongous anticlimax to end a game on, especially with a supposed suicide mission that turns out to be as harmless as that.

    Then you have a council who suddenly do a 180 and refuses to recognize humanity’s concerns, in spite of humanity having proved them certifiably wrong in every way the first time around, and saved the entire known universe, supposedly finally earning the trust of the council and gaining their equal place on it. The idea that they forfeit that outright, and repeat the exact same stupidity for a second time is more than a little laughable.

    Not wanting to risk a war with a few anarchists over the fate of the universe is more than a little silly.

    Really, you’re free to eat that sort of 80′s B-movie tripe if you want, and bon appetite, but redefining everything you’ve established in the first game, with as little to explain it as is provided, means that I absolutely can’t buy the pretense of it at all. The suspension of disbelief was never there.

    #24 3 years ago
  25. Phoenixblight

    @24

    “he gaps are absolutely crystal. You’re the one that’s desperately seeking books and various other references outside the game, as somehow explaining what’s actually in it.”

    Depesrately seeking really? Maybe because I like the first book that I decided to continue reading the books is that so hard to believe. Redemption came out long before the original came out. Bioware has done the same with Dragon Age and will be doing so with TOR. THey know their fans like to read about back history about their games. You attacking just shows how mature you really are, you sterotype and assume I am some guy that goes looking for books to justify a game’s story. Believe whatever you want but the original game went in detail that Cerberus were creating a super soldier for the humans to have the upperhand and they do so for the books too. Cerberus, Saren were/are the ideal for the renegade, do anything to get the job done, the end justifies the means. Anything to give humans the upper hand its pretty obvious that they do so in Mass Effect 2 throwing Sheperd against the collectors because the Illusive man believes Shepherd is the idea of the perfect human and will also obtain collector technology for their cause. Believe whatever you want doesn’t matter to me. You are just throwing mud at people just proves you are simply flame baiting like you were in your original post and like you do in most topics. Just call you a Erth or TEA wanna be.

    #25 3 years ago
  26. DSB

    All I have to go with is your arguments. I say a game is unbelievable, and you say it most certainly is not, supplying only books and quotes to back it up, which most people who buy a game will never lay a hand on.

    If I was flame baiting, I wouldn’t bother using concrete examples. I’d just wail about how bad Mass Effect 2 sucked yo daddy’s balls, and how I’d like my money back, but I understand that it’s very important to you to believe that I don’t have a point at all, and put me in that fairly childish fantasy.

    Believe what you want to believe, I’m not interested in a stamina contest with a fanboy. You obviously love everything Bioware serves up more than I could ever hate any of it.

    Book or not, at least ME2 showed me enough to stop blindly buying Bioware games.

    #26 3 years ago
  27. Phoenixblight

    Of course I am called a fanboy because I disagree with you. Wow you just keep climbing down that ladder.

    You came on to a topic related to a game you don’t like and said ME is dead to you. Good for you? Want a cookie? You were flame baiting just like if Loki was to go on topic related about a PC game or a game that is also on PC and claims it suck. I don’t go onto Battlefield topic or COD topic and claim its dead because it serves no purpose other than to flame bait.

    #27 3 years ago
  28. DSB

    Actually that’s pretty much just a comment. As far as I know, the word comment doesn’t imply showering unabated love on something, and leaves room for both criticism and blind admiration alike. Whatever rules you make up for yourself is never going to be any of my concern.

    It’s only baiting to you because you’re so sensitive about a game you adore to the extents that you do, hence my conclusion that I’m dealing with a fanboy. No one else seemed to mind all that much, and why would they? I’m not challenging anyones right to like the game, I just found it seriously disappointing personally. My standards, my opinion.

    I don’t see why that would be a threat to anyone.

    Again, by all means, comfort yourself that I’m just a troll. Make me live under a bridge, and eat Norwegian farmers goats for all I care. It’s certainly easier than actually accounting for that story.

    #28 3 years ago
  29. brookie44528

    @DSB

    “In the first game you establish Cerberus as a genocidal organisation, the embodiment of evil, and then you have your hero join them with little to no convincing in the second game. Where’s the logic? Captain America joins the nazis. Jolly good.”

    with the experience of going full renegade and paragon in two different game saves, i can safely say that it only seems that way because you chose to say the wrong things to the illusive man at the beginning of the game. the renegade dialogue options have your character agree to cerberus’s cause and the mission with almost no questions or worries. paragon, on the other hand, has you doing the opposite. you most likely chose the renegade dialogue options. you are also shown blatant proof that humanity is being targeted, i mean you see cctv footage of it happening for fucks sake.

    “In the first game Reapers are established as transcendental, godlike creatures, only to have the collectors build one that’s incredibly weak, and looks like a T-1000 from the Terminator movies (which is more comical than scary) and can be shot through it’s eye with a simple assault rifle, and totally destroyed. You can barely even bring down an attack chopper with an M-16 these days, but you can kill a universe destroying robot with a mass accelerated assault rifle? Come on now.”

    it has been said before, but you seem to have ignored it. IT IS THE EQUIVELANT OF AN EMBRYO. think of a human embryo and compare it to an adult human. quite a difference in size and strength you would think. yes it made for a lame boss battle, but you say your main gripe was the storyline? well i can see nothing wrong here.

    “Then you have a council who suddenly do a 180 and refuses to recognize humanity’s concerns, in spite of humanity having proved them certifiably wrong in every way the first time around, and saved the entire known universe, supposedly finally earning the trust of the council and gaining their equal place on it. The idea that they forfeit that outright, and repeat the exact same stupidity for a second time is more than a little laughable.”

    humanity didn’t prove the council wrong, shepherd did. shepherd now works for cerberus. the council do not trust cerberus, cerberus and shepherd both know this, so as i recall they dont even bother telling the council what they are up to. i also seem to remember that anderson had tried to explain to ambassador Udina but he wouldn’t listen. as we know from the first game he only cares about how humanity appears to the council, unless there is rock hard evidence to proove that there might be a problem which would threaten the whole galaxy.

    you claim there are potholes in the storyline, but its obvious that you are just a cynical prick, who fails to engage properly with the storyline. the two really dont mix.

    p.s. i havent read any of the books nor have i read up on any backstory, it’s all there in the game, you just explore a little.

    #29 3 years ago
  30. DSB

    So are you saying I could’ve avoided Cerberus alltogether? If that’s the case, then I obviously missed the off-ramp on that one.

    Siding with genocidal, xenophobic fanatics: My point is, it doesn’t matter what the threat is, you still won’t side with the nazis if you’re even a halfway sensible person. I’m not saying they don’t try to justify this with the narrative, I’m saying the justifications they present are incredibly thin.

    The baby reaper: As I say in the second paragraph, they’re still trying to follow a monster of a fight with a tiny peep of one. I don’t really care how harmless the reaper is supposed to be according to the story, my point is, it’s the ending of the game, and it’s weak as fuck! It makes me feel like a janitor of universal peace, not a super hero.

    And it still makes no sense that you’d have super intelligent beings (in their original form the greatest engineers in the known universe) building a universe-ending automaton, which is still easily taken down by an assault rifle. That goes directly against everything we’re told about those things.

    The suicidal council: Sheperd was representing humanity in the first game, at the very least as a major agent in the role of a Spectre. He proves everyone completely wrong in every verifiable way, putting them completely to shame, making them see the err of their ways in the final sequence – To which they respond by going back to the exact same sort of beaurocratic apathy that almost cost them the known universe the first time around?

    No politician is that stupid. None. Even dogs learn from critical mistakes. And it’s made a lot worse by the fact that they actually had credible reasons to doubt Sheperd in the first game. In the second one, they just figure they’ll vote against the guy who singlehandedly saved the universe, when they were sitting on their asses ready to be annihilated.

    The fact that they may or may not disbelieve the hero, because he joined a movement of genocidal madmen, doesn’t exactly add credibility to the scenario as a whole.

    Still, to be that stupid you’d have to be on a city council, not an intergalactic one. Painting the council as one-dimensional incompetents simply doesn’t square up against the competence they’re attributed in the first game. The blue people aren’t stupid, the scaly ones are rash, but ultimately logical, and the eggheads pride themselves on being lead by intelligence.

    In that way it feels to me like most of those critical characters are only put there with a plot device in mind. They don’t have to make any kind of sense, they just have to say “No” or “Yes” to important issues, or make you feel hopeful or sold out, with very few in betweens. My problem is that I can’t buy that if the people delivering those reactions aren’t credible in doing what they do.

    The problem with your conclusion is that if a story actually needs me to accomodate it, rather than trying to accomodate me, then it isn’t a very good one.

    #30 3 years ago
  31. Hunam

    No, you can’t choose to not work with cerberus.

    #31 3 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.