101103 réponses à ce sujet

[Harvoification]

Why is everyone complaining? You wanted a happy ending where very little is sacrificed? The Reapers continued the cycle for millions of years, stopping them should be a huge sacrifice. It should be sad. There should be no ultimate happy ending where Shepard settles down for retirement with his LI because it just isn't realistic and breaks the immersion and isn't believable.

For those that say "It makes everything Shepard does seem pointless" are illogical. Without the actions of Shepard in ME1 the Reapers would've gained access to the Citadel and all spacefaring life would have been exterminated within centuries.

Shepard broke the cycle. At huge cost, yes, but wasn't that his true goal? To save the galaxy from the Reapers? He did, and saved all future civilizations as well.

[turian councilor Knockout]

Demigod wrote...

One thing that doesnt seem to be touched in the spoilers mentioned so far. What is the scene after the credits the first review mentioned?

Your reward for saving the galaxy a copy of fornax but interactive signed by the council 

Modifié par turian councilor Knockout, 28 février 2012 - 05:27 .

[CerberusSoldier]

cerberus1701 wrote...

DiegoProgMetal wrote...

****SPOILER***** ALERT ***** SPOILER *****


But let's think for a moment: IF we save earth, and destroy the reapers. The citadel is moved to Earth during the game, and the final choice will happen there. Which means Shepard is in Earth after the destruction, so are all the civilizations, ships, troops, from every species Shepard gathered to help retake Earth. The protheans reverse engineered the mass relays. So, with the help of Turians, Salarians, Asari, Krogan (maybe even the Prothean himself) *, which will want to get back to their homeworlds, wouldn't it be a logic outcome that everybody would try to build mass relays ASAP, and eventually finding the Normandy crew wherever they are?


As we say in Brazil, "Hope is the last one to die!".

EDIT: forgot about Quarians and Geth!*

This makes perfect sense.

Add to that the fact that they've already confirmed mission style DLC and the fact that they simple are not going to *end* the universe of a AAA title that has consitently earned more acclaim and more cash for BW/EA I'd say this is likely.

But too many people want their bows tied up all nice and pretty NOW.

    



Bioware should have learned after DA 2 well this time  they will learn the hard way

[Arthas9]

As for future ME games. There's still plenty of space in the lore: first conact war, Scilian-conflict etc.. They could make a story with an alien protagonist. Or they could explore the distant future with a new galactic community or something else where Shepard and his heroic fight against the Reapers will have become a great legend of the past. Why not. But I could also live with it, if they left the saga alone. (Based on what I heard of EA and assuming that the game will be a huge blockbuster I find it very unlikely that they would not carry on with ME's legacy in some form.)

Modifié par Arthas9, 28 février 2012 - 05:31 .

[magnuskn]

Capeo wrote...

Actually the "ultimate sacrifice" archetype is the far more prevelant one.

About one of the most overused clichés in fiction, yep. Of course I wouldn't want to deny people who like that trope their preferred ending, if they would extend the same courtesy to my preferences...

[cerberus1701]

Capeo wrote...

Xayoz wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...


BW told us, the endings won't make everybody happy.
Truth is: the endings will make everybody sad.

Thats the intent. The endings are supposed to be sad.

Gotta give some props to Bioware for daring to bend the glorious US archetype of 'good guys always win'.

Actually the "ultimate sacrifice" archetype is the far more prevelant one.

To be honest, ALL the possible options (including the fanboy demanded "hearts and flowers, eveything goes on perfectly, Shep gets schools and planets named after him and the galaxy erupts in parades") are well-treaded archetypes.

Modifié par cerberus1701, 28 février 2012 - 05:28 .

[CerberusSoldier]

Harvoification wrote...

Why is everyone complaining? You wanted a happy ending where very little is sacrificed? The Reapers continued the cycle for millions of years, stopping them should be a huge sacrifice. It should be sad. There should be no ultimate happy ending where Shepard settles down for retirement with his LI because it just isn't realistic and breaks the immersion and isn't believable.

For those that say "It makes everything Shepard does seem pointless" are illogical. Without the actions of Shepard in ME1 the Reapers would've gained access to the Citadel and all spacefaring life would have been exterminated within centuries.

Shepard broke the cycle. At huge cost, yes, but wasn't that his true goal? To save the galaxy from the Reapers? He did, and saved all future civilizations as well.

   


don't you get it nothing you do in the game even matters since in the end you die no matter what

[Arthas9]

CerberusSoldier wrote...

Arthas9 wrote...

No offence but why so many people are obsessed with all this LI thingy and an optional ending with the LI? Like the whole trilogy and would be about nothing but our "dashing commander" getting layed. ... I mean, come on! I like the idea of the love interests (and I find Tali's character and her story and culture very amusing), but it's not a romantic tale, but a huge apocalyptic sci-fi, with some bad ass "boys will be boys" attitude in it (no offence to the lady fans and femshep players).

   



well its garbage thats why

You are a very pissed of man, Sir!

[Yuoaman]

Harvoification wrote...

Why is everyone complaining? You wanted a happy ending where very little is sacrificed? The Reapers continued the cycle for millions of years, stopping them should be a huge sacrifice. It should be sad. There should be no ultimate happy ending where Shepard settles down for retirement with his LI because it just isn't realistic and breaks the immersion and isn't believable.

For those that say "It makes everything Shepard does seem pointless" are illogical. Without the actions of Shepard in ME1 the Reapers would've gained access to the Citadel and all spacefaring life would have been exterminated within centuries.

Shepard broke the cycle. At huge cost, yes, but wasn't that his true goal? To save the galaxy from the Reapers? He did, and saved all future civilizations as well.

I don't want the ending to be a happy-go-lucky ending where every is sunshine and rainbows - I just want there to be a small hope spot at the end.

[AVPen]

Alex06 wrote...

There are 7 endings we know of. 6 of them are:
2 endings for Control
4 endings for Destroy
Each of these range from "Earth is screwed" to "Earth is ok". This has been confirmed by several people who played the game early.

There's also another one, a 7th ending, which is stated to be an ending we can achieve if we "get a perfect game", and that is the Synergy, or "Merge" ending. (They are one and the same) I'm guessing the NG+ ending is this one.

Incorrect, the Synergy "Merge" ending is NOT the Perfect Ending (not by a long shot, apparently), nor is it the NG+ Ending (which no one has seen as of yet).

Modifié par AVPen, 28 février 2012 - 05:31 .

[Nathan Redgrave]

You know what this reminds me of?

inFAMOUS 2. The RFI.

[magnuskn]

Harvoification wrote...

Why is everyone complaining? You wanted a happy ending where very little is sacrificed? The Reapers continued the cycle for millions of years, stopping them should be a huge sacrifice. It should be sad. There should be no ultimate happy ending where Shepard settles down for retirement with his LI because it just isn't realistic and breaks the immersion and isn't believable.

For those that say "It makes everything Shepard does seem pointless" are illogical. Without the actions of Shepard in ME1 the Reapers would've gained access to the Citadel and all spacefaring life would have been exterminated within centuries.

Shepard broke the cycle. At huge cost, yes, but wasn't that his true goal? To save the galaxy from the Reapers? He did, and saved all future civilizations as well.

What exactly gives you the authority to decide whether a more happy ending is appropiate or not? There has been tons of fiction where you could get a good ending, is all of that fiction wrong? Because you say so?

You are not the sole arbiter of what is good writing and what is not.

[Nathan Redgrave]

Yuoaman wrote...

I just want there to be a small hope spot at the end.

A small, very specific spot of hope, apparently, since "the galaxy is saved and life goes on" simply isn't hopeful enough!

[Teredan]

Harvoification wrote...

Why is everyone complaining? You wanted a happy ending where very little is sacrificed? The Reapers continued the cycle for millions of years, stopping them should be a huge sacrifice. It should be sad. There should be no ultimate happy ending where Shepard settles down for retirement with his LI because it just isn't realistic and breaks the immersion and isn't believable.

For those that say "It makes everything Shepard does seem pointless" are illogical. Without the actions of Shepard in ME1 the Reapers would've gained access to the Citadel and all spacefaring life would have been exterminated within centuries.

Shepard broke the cycle. At huge cost, yes, but wasn't that his true goal? To save the galaxy from the Reapers? He did, and saved all future civilizations as well.

Because after 2 me games a significant amount of people don't care about saving the galaxy
People care about their crew about giving the reapers some asswhooping, but galaxy whatever.

Also again there is no choice reflecting in the endings.
If there was a ending where the crew is screwed but the galaxy is really well off and an ending where the crew is somewhat happy and the galaxy is in significantly worse shape. I think a lot more people would have less problems with that.

Modifié par Teredan, 28 février 2012 - 05:32 .

[Capeo]

Harvoification wrote...

Why is everyone complaining? You wanted a happy ending where very little is sacrificed? The Reapers continued the cycle for millions of years, stopping them should be a huge sacrifice. It should be sad. There should be no ultimate happy ending where Shepard settles down for retirement with his LI because it just isn't realistic and breaks the immersion and isn't believable.

For those that say "It makes everything Shepard does seem pointless" are illogical. Without the actions of Shepard in ME1 the Reapers would've gained access to the Citadel and all spacefaring life would have been exterminated within centuries.

Shepard broke the cycle. At huge cost, yes, but wasn't that his true goal? To save the galaxy from the Reapers? He did, and saved all future civilizations as well.

Jeez, go back and read the whole thread.  As many people already posited you could still destroy the relays, set back the galaxy, and still allow Shepard to be stranded with the people he spent the last 2 games with.  That's not enough sacrifice?  Destroying all the tech in the galaxy and being left to live with the consequences?  Instead the only choice is the martyr choice?

[eye basher]

magnuskn wrote...

Harvoification wrote...

Why is everyone complaining? You wanted a happy ending where very little is sacrificed? The Reapers continued the cycle for millions of years, stopping them should be a huge sacrifice. It should be sad. There should be no ultimate happy ending where Shepard settles down for retirement with his LI because it just isn't realistic and breaks the immersion and isn't believable.

For those that say "It makes everything Shepard does seem pointless" are illogical. Without the actions of Shepard in ME1 the Reapers would've gained access to the Citadel and all spacefaring life would have been exterminated within centuries.

Shepard broke the cycle. At huge cost, yes, but wasn't that his true goal? To save the galaxy from the Reapers? He did, and saved all future civilizations as well.

What exactly gives you the authority to decide whether a more happy ending is appropiate or not? There has been tons of fiction where you could get a good ending, is all of that fiction wrong? Because you say so?

You are not the sole arbiter of what is good writing and what is not.

And you are like a pot calling the ketle black.

[Big I]

Harvoification wrote...
Why is everyone complaining? You wanted a happy ending where very little is sacrificed?

No, I wanted 2 things. To preserve intelligent life and galactic civilization from the Reapers, and to keep Shepard alive.

[sangy]

I'm a skeptic. I see no proof. I understand some have already played the whole game and anything is possible. Still, there's no evidence as to exactly what the endings are. Till I see it on video or after I've played the game through thoroughly, all these statements are just baseless ramblings.

How many endings could someone have gone through even with the "Space Edition"? The Mass Effect team won't confirm anything because they're not allowed. Only they can give a true spoiler. Even with videos, you'll still never know unless you play it through several times.

Don't believe the hype!

[Nerevar-as]

Teredan wrote...

KoToR 2 is an obsidian game nuff said, I was arguing bioware games.

TOR is a BW game and it screwed what was left of Kotor 1 and 2, mainly the main characters, without any need for it.

But if this is all true BW is in for a nasty surprise regarding DLC sales and future games. DA2  has already cost them a lot of credit, so possibly failing to end ME properly would hit even harder.

At least I´m starting to understand how Deception got approved.

[RiouHotaru]

AVPen wrote...

Alex06 wrote...

There are 7 endings we know of. 6 of them are:
2 endings for Control
4 endings for Destroy
Each of these range from "Earth is screwed" to "Earth is ok". This has been confirmed by several people who played the game early.

There's also another one, a 7th ending, which is stated to be an ending we can achieve if we "get a perfect game", and that is the Synergy, or "Merge" ending. (They are one and the same) I'm guessing the NG+ ending is this one.

Incorrect, the Synergy ending is NOT the Perfect Ending, nor is it the NG+ Ending (which no one has seen as of yet).

I'm calling bullcrap on the whole "the six endings are variations of a theme".  There's no point to that.  ME1 allowed for variations on a theme with it's ending, even if it was only in the dialog.  Why make 6 endings if they're just copy-pastes with minor changes.

And locking an ending behind NG+ is the biggest kind of 'No'.  Again, much like these supposedly "leaked" endings, it flies directly in the face of Bioware's style.  Regardless of whether you like their writing or not, Bioware is amazingly consistent.  To suddenly pull a 180 degree paradigm shift NOW makes NO GODDAMN SENSE.

[Xayoz]

Capeo wrote...

Actually the "ultimate sacrifice" archetype is the far more prevelant one.

Heh. No.

[BloodyFleelancer]

i dont want the happily ever after I want war with the reapers , There will be sacrifice , but still It will be fun : ))

[Capeo]

cerberus1701 wrote...

Capeo wrote...

Xayoz wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...


BW told us, the endings won't make everybody happy.
Truth is: the endings will make everybody sad.

Thats the intent. The endings are supposed to be sad.

Gotta give some props to Bioware for daring to bend the glorious US archetype of 'good guys always win'.

Actually the "ultimate sacrifice" archetype is the far more prevelant one.

To be honest, ALL the possible options (including the fanboy demanded "hearts and flowers, eveything goes on perfectly, Shep gets schools and planets named after him and the galaxy erupts in parades") are well-treaded archetypes.

True.  So give them to us as possible outcomes.

[Nathan Redgrave]

magnuskn wrote...

What exactly gives you the authority to decide whether a more happy ending is appropiate or not? There has been tons of fiction where you could get a good ending, is all of that fiction wrong? Because you say so?

You are not the sole arbiter of what is good writing and what is not.

True, but there has always existed a certain rule of thumb: the more cataclysmic the antagonistic force, the less wiggle-room happy endings have to come off as believable. Since the Reapers were portrayed as such apocalyptic, almighty galaxy-crushers from the start, there was always worry about whether the ending would come off as too happy in a contrived sort of way. At the same time, we want it to be happy.

Hence the current dilemma...

[xtorma]

eye basher wrote...

magnuskn wrote...

Harvoification wrote...

Why is everyone complaining? You wanted a happy ending where very little is sacrificed? The Reapers continued the cycle for millions of years, stopping them should be a huge sacrifice. It should be sad. There should be no ultimate happy ending where Shepard settles down for retirement with his LI because it just isn't realistic and breaks the immersion and isn't believable.

For those that say "It makes everything Shepard does seem pointless" are illogical. Without the actions of Shepard in ME1 the Reapers would've gained access to the Citadel and all spacefaring life would have been exterminated within centuries.

Shepard broke the cycle. At huge cost, yes, but wasn't that his true goal? To save the galaxy from the Reapers? He did, and saved all future civilizations as well.

What exactly gives you the authority to decide whether a more happy ending is appropiate or not? There has been tons of fiction where you could get a good ending, is all of that fiction wrong? Because you say so?

You are not the sole arbiter of what is good writing and what is not.

And you are like a pot calling the ketle black.

My kettle is metallic silver , my pot is brownish green.