104 réponses à ce sujet

[Customz]

TheBlackBaron wrote...

While not having outright failure beyond simply dying, the ending of Van Buren (Black Isle's original Fallout 3) may be akin to what I think Bioware is trying to shoot for with the ME3 endings.

In a nutshell, the goal was to stop an NCR scientist from using the nuclear missiles aboard the Ballistic Orbital Missile Base (B.O.M.B.) to destroy the wasteland communities. Long story short, by the time you killed him and deactivated the B.O.M.B. only some of the missiles can be recalled. So you had to pick which of the societies you had encountered in the game would be spared and which ones would go up in mushroom clouds.

This is what it feels like Bioware is going for, with not being able to achieve a perfect victory that is all sunshine and ponies crapping rainbows (like the ME1 Paragon ending *cough*). So it's not just "you lose, ha ha sucker", and the degree of failure can be changed by choices, but victory will not be absolute.

That would be cool. Tough, but cool. In all honesty, depending on the true goal of  the reapers, I think there should be a "horrible" ending where you basically chose to battle it out and die fighting (humanity, and maybe closer allies), or understand or believe that there's really no option other then joining the reapers. An ending a la Saren. It could even have the love interest try to stop you. But the story had to really sell the player on this being the only choice, to the point where they consciously make this decision.

[Estelindis]

Arrival offered a non-standard game over. I don't see why ME3 shouldn't. :-)

[Red Panda]

Estelindis wrote...

Arrival offered a non-standard game over. I don't see why ME3 shouldn't. :-)

This person speaks the truth.
*hugs Estelindis*

[LPPrince]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Sylvius, more than any other forum member, I have faith in your ability to fail.

Pwnage ensued.

[Reapinger]

LPPrince wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

Sylvius, more than any other forum member, I have faith in your ability to fail.

Pwnage ensued.

And Chris said yea and it was good. 

[Estelindis]

OperatingWookie wrote...

This person speaks the truth.
*hugs Estelindis*

You're too kind.    *hugs Wookie back*

LPPrince wrote...

Pwnage ensued.

Nah, I think Chris's post was unfair.  Sylvius raises a valid point.  One might have varying opinions about how a non-standard game over should be implemented (e.g. I'm pretty sure it'd get old fast if one saw it every time Shepard died), but in certain situations I can imagine it would be very appropriate and add to the dramatic sense of high stakes.

[Ryzaki]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

I hope there's a throwback to JE where you can choose to join Harbinger or tell him where to shove it.

JE is an interesting example, as I would argue that the Closed Fist ending is itself a failure ending.

The game explains in great detail how the continued enslavement of the Water Dragon is destroying the world, and can only result is death and destruction for everything.  And then you're allowed to take over and keep the Water Dragon enslaved.

The game doesn't explain that you've just destroyed the world, and you'll eventually be the despotic ruler over nothing at all, but it's required by the previously established lore.

 

Pfft you maybe. 

my SM learned how to hone the WD's powers perfectly.Go Mary Sue powers. :innocent: 

Honestly though I saw that ending as the PC becoming a god of death and destruction. So being a desotic ruler over nothing at all was the whole point. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 10 juin 2011 - 12:53 .

[BigBody26]

I would LOVE if Bioware made failure a very real possibility. It would make the game and the mission at hand feel a great deal more hopeless and intense. I would be willing to take it a step further though and say that if you fail during the final mission you don't get to simply reload...you start over. That would make every single decision feel like it carries tons of weight.

All I know is that after I have seen the trailers and gameplay all my fears and concerns for ME3 have been laid to rest.

[LPPrince]

If you failed at the end and couldn't reload, the game would BLOW.

Forcing a player to go back all the way to the beginning to succeed at the end would make a lot of players quit the game. Not everyone plays these games as much as some of us do.

I've done 12 of ME1, currently on #15 of ME2.

The new customers that Bioware wants to bring in? If this happened to them(failing the end game and being forced to restart at the beginning with no reload option) they'd STOP PLAYING THE GAME.

That's the WORST thing that can happen. Bioware's not that stupid.

[xxSgt_Reed_24xx]

I agree! There should be a few ending where ... if you effed something important up.... the Reapers ultimately win and destroy all life... and show that in the ending cutscene.

The trick is... not showing that cutscene at the point Shepard actually fails during the game... making you think you've done everything you can to win ... then when you lose at the end it will be that much more of an... "omg!!" feeling.

Also, if you just randomly die in combat portions of the game... you should just get the "critical mission failure" screen and get to reload.

/my two cents

[Shotokanguy]

I can't be the only who swears they read that there will indeed be a "Reapers wipe out the entire galaxy ending", right?

I could've sworn that was confirmed recently.

[Estelindis]

LPPrince wrote...

If you failed at the end and couldn't reload, the game would BLOW.

I agree.  I die far too often, especially on my first playthrough!  But it could be made optional as in one of The Witcher 2's difficulty settings.  (Though not instead of regular Insanity.)

[xxSgt_Reed_24xx]

Estelindis wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

If you failed at the end and couldn't reload, the game would BLOW.

I agree.  I die far too often, especially on my first playthrough!  But it could be made optional as in one of The Witcher 2's difficulty settings.  (Though not instead of regular Insanity.)

That would be why your CHOICES would determine which ending you got! NOT your proficiency in combat... 

If you die in combat you should just get the "critical mission failure" screen and get to reload from a recent save. 

But if you make bad choices or don't rally enough to your cause... you should get the Reapers win ending as the ending cutscene. 

[Digifi]

I'm not a fan of the "die and there's no reload" but I do like the idea of being dumb=fail. If you don't recruit any help and then charge back in all disorganized, you should not defeat the reapers. After they pwn your face, you can reload before that final relay jump that we all know will be the "end of the game ensues after this, hope you're ready" and maybe go see how the Salarians are getting along with the Krogan, or the Geth with the Quarians and bring some help with you for your next attempt.

[InkognitoV]

I think Sylvius wants the opportunity to fail to add more intensity to the game. If you know that a possible outcome is allowing the Reapers to win, then you have to take the game more seriously and actually think about the long-term consequences of your actions.

So long as it isn't exactly easy to fail, I can agree. Or maybe the guys at Bioware never planned for us to win at all..

[JetsoverEverything]

Syreniac wrote...

There should be three failure endings:

1. Shepard willing joins the Reapers to allow them to process humanity into a new Reaper, ensuring some sort of survival.

2. Shepard is indoctrinated and joins the Reapers, shown by events such as the little boy in the ducts slowly driving him mad.

3. Shepard tries his best to defeat the Reapers, but it all goes wrong.

In all the cases, it should be obvious after the event what exactly Shepard did wrong so the player can go back and fix it, but it should not necessarily be obvious in the run up; a few total failure endings will increase the drama.

LOL!!!! really point 2 is stupid

[WizenSlinky0]

I think the big thing is not that people don't want the option to fail...but exactly how easy/difficult it is to get that failed ending. In a non-typical "you failed" it would basically be, rather than reloading, a playthrough in of itself.

This causes some problems. Perhaps it was just too easy to fail and players are stumbling into it non-stop. While some players would enjoy this ending from a roleplaying perspective...a lot of people with limited time to dedicate to games may infact feel their money and their time have been wasted in not seeing a satisfactory ending to complete their journey.

Especially if you don't feel you have the spare time to dedicate yet another playthrough to the game (I know plenty of people who only play through games, regardless of the ending they get, and I'm sure you all know some too).

I believe that's why it was so utterly hard to fail in ME2 and so blatant that you would if you continued on your current course of actions.

[Vena_86]

I hope it is hard NOT to fail. I hear that you can have your whole team and your self dying in ME2, but for that to happen you have to be either mentally retarded or you are actually trying really hard to get the worst ending possible.
Saving the galaxy should feel like a reward and not a given.

[Vena_86]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

I think the big thing is not that people don't want the option to fail...but exactly how easy/difficult it is to get that failed ending. In a non-typical "you failed" it would basically be, rather than reloading, a playthrough in of itself.

This causes some problems. Perhaps it was just too easy to fail and players are stumbling into it non-stop. While some players would enjoy this ending from a roleplaying perspective...a lot of people with limited time to dedicate to games may infact feel their money and their time have been wasted in not seeing a satisfactory ending to complete their journey.

Especially if you don't feel you have the spare time to dedicate yet another playthrough to the game (I know plenty of people who only play through games, regardless of the ending they get, and I'm sure you all know some too).

I believe that's why it was so utterly hard to fail in ME2 and so blatant that you would if you continued on your current course of actions.

That is why the difficulty setting should also change the way certain variables are weighted when determining what happens in the story. Usually the people who actually play on hard appreciate a fail ending while the casual gamer rather prefers the happy end beeing handed to them.

[JayhartRIC]

I want the ending to hinge on if you killed any monkeys in Lost Module.

[Medhia Nox]

Great - JayhartRIC wants the pyjaks to decide the fate the the ME universe.

[xxSgt_Reed_24xx]

Vena_86 wrote...

I hope it is hard NOT to fail. I hear that you can have your whole team and your self dying in ME2, but for that to happen you have to be either mentally retarded or you are actually trying really hard to get the worst ending possible.
Saving the galaxy should feel like a reward and not a given.

exactly!

[MinotaurWarrior]

1. I don't want their to be any wrong choices. Kill or spare the Rachni? Both should have pros and cons. Handle Rannoch in way A or way B? Both should have pros and cons. If one choice is strictly better than the other, it's no choice at all.

2. How you capitalize on your choices should matter. If you save the DA in ME1, you lost a lot of ships, but probably helped humanity out diplomatically. If you then proceed to take a 180 and say that "humanity must stand alone!" things shouldn't work out so well for you.

3. Total failure should be difficult, as should total success. I think ME2 did this quite well. It's quite easy to mess up on a suqad member assignment and get someone killed, but it's really tough to get everyone to die, unless you're trying to. You want to feel like your victory was earned, but you don't want to be punished unfairly for a minor mistake.

4. There should be genuine choices when it comes to the ultimate ending, including possibly siding with the reapers. The thing is, and I just now realized this, the reaper cycle has allowed far more intelligent races to evolve than would have happened otherwise, and has preserved more races for longer than could have happened otherwise. It's actually a somewhat complicated issue, whether or not they're evil, and I'd like to have a choice to let them continue on. This sort of choice was really fantastic in Jade Empire and Alpha Protocol (and probably some others). Of course, for development reasons, it must be a last-minute choice, but still, I'd like it.

5. I'd also like an option where, if things are looking bad, you can change your focus and try to pull a prothean, sacrificing for the next wave of species and possibly destroy the citadel / mass relay system, or something like that, to prevent the next reaping.

6. Everything should come down to choice. This is pretty much a given, but I'd hate it if, say, your preformance on a mission (how many of the people you were escorting survived, for example) had a major impact on the game's outcome.

Of course, since the game is mostly made, it's not like anything I just said mattered at all, anyway!

Modifié par MinotaurWarrior, 10 juin 2011 - 02:57 .

[Memphis Slim]

Digifi wrote...

I'm not a fan of the "die and there's no reload" but I do like the idea of being dumb=fail. If you don't recruit any help and then charge back in all disorganized, you should not defeat the reapers. After they pwn your face, you can reload before that final relay jump that we all know will be the "end of the game ensues after this, hope you're ready" and maybe go see how the Salarians are getting along with the Krogan, or the Geth with the Quarians and bring some help with you for your next attempt.

This. No need to be sadistic jerks like the Silent Hill devs when it comes to endings, but if you just ignore, turn down or kill off potential allies/resources, then the endgame should adjust accordingly.