101103 réponses à ce sujet

[wolf99000]

maybe instead of a dlc like the one for fall out 3 a expansion like the dragon age awakings is in order the story of how the galaxy rebuilt and how they all met up again

but the main problem with any dlc/expansion is that flash forward scence how do you explain it the crew desencendents talking about shepard

[JPfanner]

Lucy_Glitter wrote...

Ghost Rider LSOV wrote...

Lucy_Glitter wrote...

So, why would you do that? Why change the entire tone of the series in the last game? It makes the game both inconsistent and puts a bad taste in your mouth. It would be like watching Frodo finally give in to The Ring and let it consume him so he kills off Sam and gives it to the Dark Lords. If the message in the last two stories were about surviving against the odds, and giving audiences hope for the future, why would you change that?

I put this question to you guys to try to figure out.

Unfortunately I'm not a BW writer...

Thar be my point.

Yep.  I keep thinking back to my first playthrough of ME1.  When Anderson and omni-tool flashlight guy were helping your squad up from the wreckage in the Council Chamber.  Shepard is nowhere to be seen and the music is sad.  Then the music picks up and Shepard limps out of the wreckage.  That gets me excited and smiling even now.

Then I think about the "best" ending in ME3.  What the hell?  It's even more annoying because the Normandy gets stranded after the war is technically over.  It has nothing to do with the Reapers being very mean or war being bad.  The scene with the kid in the shuttle is pretty hamfisted and contrived, but at least it is at the start of the conflict.  Taking away the Normandy after the war is over is just petty.

[Acrylium]

They could change this scene easily.

I mean, what the hell were they thinking? Tali and Garrus die of starvation, and the rest of the crew starts inbreeding? Seriously BioWare?

[hollowbird]

wolf99000 wrote...

maybe instead of a dlc like the one for fall out 3 a expansion like the dragon age awakings is in order the story of how the galaxy rebuilt and how they all met up again

but the main problem with any dlc/expansion is that flash forward scence how do you explain it the crew desencendents talking about shepard

Incestuous ancestral memory.

[Archelaos]

Pr3ying M4nt15 360 wrote...

Merge seems to be the idealistic ending but I believe isn't one that most people would want to pick. Especially not when the illusive man and Saren gave you a pretty bad impression of it and it doesn't sound like there is enough context for the player to feel happy about that choice. And Shepard still dies, and the normandy is still stranded.

Idealistic? It's Reapers victory with trumpets and feasting. Reapers finally heroicaly give their lives to get rid of organics once and for all.

And if you consider, that Reaper fleet may actually be front guard only, while rest is still somewhere outside mass relay explosion zone... Or even single Reaper survives said explosion...

Modifié par Archelaos, 02 mars 2012 - 01:36 .

[Broder O]

hollowbird wrote...

wolf99000 wrote...

maybe instead of a dlc like the one for fall out 3 a expansion like the dragon age awakings is in order the story of how the galaxy rebuilt and how they all met up again

but the main problem with any dlc/expansion is that flash forward scence how do you explain it the crew desencendents talking about shepard

Incestuous ancestral memory.

Say that fast five times in a row

[Abram730]

Lucy_Glitter wrote...

Okay, here is my take on why this ending pisses me off.

It's clearly forcing canon points (crew stranded, relays destroyed) which hasn't been done before in ME games. It's silly. If you want a game to be good, make it consistent. Forcing canon and ignoring every single decision made in trilogy end-game is really offensive to players and does not benefit ANYTHING save manipulation of emotional reactions in players to make the game seem better than it may be.

My friend sums it up perfectly with comparing it to Star Wars here:

New Hope: Deathstar destroyed, heroes win but villains loom in the distance.
Empire: Heroes lose, villains seem like they've kind of won but there's still hope.
Jedi: Heroes win.

ME1: Reapers stopped, heroes win but villains loom in the distance.
ME2: Reapers stopped, heroes win but the threat is more real now.
ME3: Reapers stopped, heroes lose and the entire galaxy explodes. Everything you did in the first two is made invalid.

So, why would you do that? Why change the entire tone of the series in the last game? It makes the game both inconsistent and puts a bad taste in your mouth. It would be like watching Frodo finally give in to The Ring and let it consume him so he kills off Sam and gives it to the Dark Lords. If the message in the last two stories were about surviving against the odds, and giving audiences hope for the future, why would you change that?

I put this question to you guys to try to figure out.

I think it comes down to the number of variables the game must account for. It's a 1,000 now.. conciser all the possible permutation and content that bust be made and the number of playthroughs to see it all.

I see 2 choices to continue the series.
a) force a cannon ending that creates a start point for a new story arc.. less variables
give many endings but force a cannon for next story arc..

I think they choose "a" so that Me3 endings weren't ignored in the next one. The lesser of the 2 evils so to say.. I think having many ending variety but not having that effect following games would be worst then this.. I think the events of Me3 will be part of ME4.. a new PC starting off at the attack on earth. The messed up situation is great for spin off games.. a privateer type game, a MMORG.. ext..

Variables need to be manageable... New ideas for manageable variations would be helpful.. I can think of one.. events that cause scars.. It's easy to have a companion have or not have a scar due to an event.
Dead vs Alive makes for some difficult writing... Ash vs Kaden you don't have so much lost dialog.. but with ME2 you can get some big holes as games progress.

If there were huge differences in the endings then they'd need to make 3 ME4 games.

If this is the end of Mass Effect then I agree the ending suck... but I don't think it's the end.
Try to think from a continuation point of view.

[hollowbird]

Broder O wrote...

hollowbird wrote...

wolf99000 wrote...

maybe instead of a dlc like the one for fall out 3 a expansion like the dragon age awakings is in order the story of how the galaxy rebuilt and how they all met up again

but the main problem with any dlc/expansion is that flash forward scence how do you explain it the crew desencendents talking about shepard

Incestuous ancestral memory.

Say that fast five times in a row

Oh god, I couldn't even get through it once without cracking up.

[Abram730]

Archelaos wrote...

Pr3ying M4nt15 360 wrote...

Merge seems to be the idealistic ending but I believe isn't one that most people would want to pick. Especially not when the illusive man and Saren gave you a pretty bad impression of it and it doesn't sound like there is enough context for the player to feel happy about that choice. And Shepard still dies, and the normandy is still stranded.

Idealistic? It's Reapers victory with trumpets and feasting. Reapers finally heroicaly give their lives to get rid of organics once and for all.

And if you consider, that Reaper fleet may actually be front guard only, while rest is still somewhere outside mass relay explosion zone... Or even single Reaper survives said explosion...

Hmmm.. How will Sheperd's sacerfice be remembered?  As a Hero or terrorist?

[Ghost Rider LSOV]

JPfanner wrote...
Yep.  I keep thinking back to my first playthrough of ME1.  When Anderson and omni-tool flashlight guy were helping your squad up from the wreckage in the Council Chamber.  Shepard is nowhere to be seen and the music is sad.  Then the music picks up and Shepard limps out of the wreckage.  That gets me excited and smiling even now.

Admittedly it's cliche, but when I first saw that ending, along with the music, it was just "Hell yeah! I'm a hero!", cheesy smile and all.

In ME2, I also love the ending with the End Run theme and escaping like a boss.

In ME3... guess Shepard makes a good pancake or something...

Abram730 wrote...

I see 2 choices to continue the series.
a) force a cannon ending that creates a start point for a new story arc.. less variables
give many endings but force a cannon for next story arc..

I think they choose "a" so that Me3 endings weren't ignored in the next one. The lesser of the 2 evils so to say.. I think having many ending variety but not having that effect following games would be worst then this.. I think the events of Me3 will be part of ME4.. a new PC starting off at the attack on earth. The messed up situation is great for spin off games.. a privateer type game, a MMORG.. ext...

Even then, the other 2 endings have all synthetic and organics merging and the reapers not being a threat or something or the reapers not being a threat since Shepard controls them, but still, that's quite a difference between them for canon endings.

Modifié par Ghost Rider LSOV, 02 mars 2012 - 01:56 .

[Cowards Mercy]

Abram730 wrote...

Lucy_Glitter wrote...

Okay, here is my take on why this ending pisses me off.

It's clearly forcing canon points (crew stranded, relays destroyed) which hasn't been done before in ME games. It's silly. If you want a game to be good, make it consistent. Forcing canon and ignoring every single decision made in trilogy end-game is really offensive to players and does not benefit ANYTHING save manipulation of emotional reactions in players to make the game seem better than it may be.

My friend sums it up perfectly with comparing it to Star Wars here:

New Hope: Deathstar destroyed, heroes win but villains loom in the distance.
Empire: Heroes lose, villains seem like they've kind of won but there's still hope.
Jedi: Heroes win.

ME1: Reapers stopped, heroes win but villains loom in the distance.
ME2: Reapers stopped, heroes win but the threat is more real now.
ME3: Reapers stopped, heroes lose and the entire galaxy explodes. Everything you did in the first two is made invalid.

So, why would you do that? Why change the entire tone of the series in the last game? It makes the game both inconsistent and puts a bad taste in your mouth. It would be like watching Frodo finally give in to The Ring and let it consume him so he kills off Sam and gives it to the Dark Lords. If the message in the last two stories were about surviving against the odds, and giving audiences hope for the future, why would you change that?

I put this question to you guys to try to figure out.

I think it comes down to the number of variables the game must account for. It's a 1,000 now.. conciser all the possible permutation and content that bust be made and the number of playthroughs to see it all.

I see 2 choices to continue the series.
a) force a cannon ending that creates a start point for a new story arc.. less variables
give many endings but force a cannon for next story arc..

I think they choose "a" so that Me3 endings weren't ignored in the next one. The lesser of the 2 evils so to say.. I think having many ending variety but not having that effect following games would be worst then this.. I think the events of Me3 will be part of ME4.. a new PC starting off at the attack on earth. The messed up situation is great for spin off games.. a privateer type game, a MMORG.. ext..

Variables need to be manageable... New ideas for manageable variations would be helpful.. I can think of one.. events that cause scars.. It's easy to have a companion have or not have a scar due to an event.
Dead vs Alive makes for some difficult writing... Ash vs Kaden you don't have so much lost dialog.. but with ME2 you can get some big holes as games progress.

If there were huge differences in the endings then they'd need to make 3 ME4 games.

If this is the end of Mass Effect then I agree the ending suck... but I don't think it's the end.
Try to think from a continuation point of view.

That just the thing it didn't have to end in such a grimdark way. If the crew were stranded on earth or even if shep was with them then the epilouge, which takes place in the future, would still have worked. Sheps not immortal he would have died with age. At the end of every fallout theres a way for your character to live and instead of just dying or being sepearted from all the companions theres a text epi and in the next installment its in the future. What if you and everyone who saids this game is just a bridge to another are right? Doesn't that mean in the next three installments when the variables become so much Bioware will make another depressing ending again? I mean they didn't treat Shep well.

Modifié par Cowards Mercy, 02 mars 2012 - 01:56 .

[Witty_Remark]

Abram730 wrote...

I think it comes down to the number of variables the game must account for. It's a 1,000 now.. conciser all the possible permutation and content that bust be made and the number of playthroughs to see it all.

I see 2 choices to continue the series.
a) force a cannon ending that creates a start point for a new story arc.. less variables
give many endings but force a cannon for next story arc..

I think they choose "a" so that Me3 endings weren't ignored in the next one. The lesser of the 2 evils so to say.. I think having many ending variety but not having that effect following games would be worst then this.. I think the events of Me3 will be part of ME4.. a new PC starting off at the attack on earth. The messed up situation is great for spin off games.. a privateer type game, a MMORG.. ext..

Variables need to be manageable... New ideas for manageable variations would be helpful.. I can think of one.. events that cause scars.. It's easy to have a companion have or not have a scar due to an event.
Dead vs Alive makes for some difficult writing... Ash vs Kaden you don't have so much lost dialog.. but with ME2 you can get some big holes as games progress.

If there were huge differences in the endings then they'd need to make 3 ME4 games.

If this is the end of Mass Effect then I agree the ending suck... but I don't think it's the end.
Try to think from a continuation point of view.

Bold emphasis mine.

I'm not in the concrete THE END IS NIGH, ENDINGS SUCK! camp, but Bioware specifically stated that they had more freedom in ME3 to diverge the story and branch off in different directions because it was the end of the series.

Granted, they did say series, not franchise, but if these are the only endings, then their words were misguided at best, misleading/blatant lying at worst.

ME3 was not supposed to be filler continuation to set us up for a new game. It was supposed to be the grand finale, where all our choices come full circle and the endings could be amazingly, wildly different. I'm not in favor of a pure-win, everyone lives ending, per se, but that choice should have been there.

People were replaying these games over and over to get the fine-tuned, best-ending finale possible. To then slap your customers in the face and say "well I'm sorry, rocks have to fall and (almost) everyone has to die because we might make a new game after this"... I can't get behind that from a gamer OR writer perspective.

TL;DR: They said they didn't have to do this. If they don't have an ace up their sleeve, then they either lied to us or they over-hyped what was possible to do and probably don't feel that great about it anyway.

I give them the benefit of hope against hope because I'm still in denial.

Modifié par Witty_Remark, 02 mars 2012 - 01:57 .

[xtorma]

LookingGlass93 wrote...

I was prepared to be forced to see Shepard have to make the ultimate sacrifice to save the galaxy. I wouldn't have liked it but I was prepared for it. I was even prepared to see the Normandy and crew die, or Earth be a devastated ruin. I wasn't prepared for what they did to the galactic civilization.


The ending makes me feel like everything Shepard and co. did, all they sacrificed, was for nothing. These endings don't count as victory. It's just trading one horrible fate (the Reapers) for another one (the collapse of civilization)

I guess living  is preferable to getting turned into grey goo.

[JPfanner]

Abram730 wrote...
If there were huge differences in the endings then they'd need to make 3 ME4 games.

If this is the end of Mass Effect then I agree the ending suck... but I don't think it's the end.
Try to think from a continuation point of view.

My problem with this is that from a continuation standpoint there is already some mutually exclusive variability.
Earth can be ok/damaged/destroyed
Reapers can be destroyed/controlled
The Geth/Quarian issue
Organics versus Total Cyborgization
Shepard alive/dead/guardian/absorbed
Whatever the canon is for anything moving forward, it is going to not match up on some player's experiences. Which, having become so embittered recently, I doubt is even a minor concern of Bioware's. So what is the big deal about Shepard being denied one not alone ending?

[Rob_K1]

I just saw this post on the Something Awful forum by the leaker there:

From user:

I have no idea, maybe they take their sweet sweet time. And about the epilogue: you're right, it's not specifically stated it's the same planet. That's just the assumption going around right now. Tank did say the Normandy planet looked like Jurassic Park while the epilogue video looks more like a Christmas card.

From leaker:

That's because - as far as I know - there's no confirmation that the planet the Normandy crashes on and the planet that Stargazer is on is one in the same. In fact, considering the epilogue scene fires regardless of the ending you get (even the one that implies the Normandy crew is dead), there's little proof that the Normandy crew is permanently stranded or that they form an incestuous colony.

Considering the overall tone of the ending, I'd say it's unlikely they are stranded or that the ending is supposed to be considered 'sad'. Everyone's smiling and poo poo and looking at the sunrise, not wailing helplessly because they believe they're trapped forever.

Modifié par Rob_K1, 02 mars 2012 - 02:16 .

[Nerevar-as]

Unless they crashed on Earth or the Normandy is still spaceworthy they are stranded. They can´t get out the planet, nobody knows where they are and even if they did without Relays it would probably take years to decades get there.

Killing EDI and the Geth to get sure the Reapers never again have the chance to screw everything is already bad enough. This is just horrible.

On the plus side, the Reapers are deactivated, so retroengineering them will make science advance ages in a few years. We are talking about ships that arrive to the Milky Way in months from the point we see them in ME2.

Modifié par Nerevar-as, 02 mars 2012 - 02:15 .

[ratzerman]

The notion that the writers somehow became overwhelmed by the complexity of the story is ludicrous to me. It was laziness.

Why not crash the Normandy on Earth? It changes nothing, except providing fans with the ability to imagine a reunion. I don't think ANYONE here wanted a super-happy ending. All we wanted was an allusion to a possible future for our Shepards and their loved ones.

Arbitrarily separating them just to ensure that you never have to worry about including them in any future game is the laziest, cruelest move the writers could have made.

[Capeo]

Rob_K1 wrote...

Just for the record, I saw this post on the Something Awful forum by the leaker there:

From user:

I have no idea, maybe they take their sweet sweet time. And about the epilogue: you're right, it's not specifically stated it's the same planet. That's just the assumption going around right now. Tank did say the Normandy planet looked like Jurassic Park while the epilogue video looks more like a Christmas card.

From leaker:

That's because - as far as I know - there's no confirmation that the planet the Normandy crashes on and the planet that Stargazer is on is one in the same. In fact, considering the epilogue scene fires regardless of the ending you get (even the one that implies the Normandy crew is dead), there's little proof that the Normandy crew is permanently stranded or that they form an incestuous colony.

Considering the overall tone of the ending, I'd say it's unlikely they are stranded or that the ending is supposed to be considered 'sad'. Everyone's smiling and poo poo and looking at the sunrise, not wailing helplessly because they believe they're trapped forever.

Well, from the pics Xio posted last night it certainly looks like the same planet.  He believes it is.  The crash scene ends with the crew looking up at the giant planet taking up half the sky.  The epilogue frames the same shot.  He said the epilogue also makes it clear that there is no space travel.  The kid askes if he/she (I forget) will ever get to fly in the stars and the guy answers "Someday".

[Max Knight]

god dammit say something BioWare!!

[Nerevar-as]

Max Knight wrote...

god dammit say something BioWare!!

Probably something along the lines we don´t get their innovations again.<_<

[Abram730]

Cowards Mercy wrote...

Abram730 wrote...

Lucy_Glitter wrote...

Okay, here is my take on why this ending pisses me off.

It's clearly forcing canon points (crew stranded, relays destroyed) which hasn't been done before in ME games. It's silly. If you want a game to be good, make it consistent. Forcing canon and ignoring every single decision made in trilogy end-game is really offensive to players and does not benefit ANYTHING save manipulation of emotional reactions in players to make the game seem better than it may be.

My friend sums it up perfectly with comparing it to Star Wars here:

New Hope: Deathstar destroyed, heroes win but villains loom in the distance.
Empire: Heroes lose, villains seem like they've kind of won but there's still hope.
Jedi: Heroes win.

ME1: Reapers stopped, heroes win but villains loom in the distance.
ME2: Reapers stopped, heroes win but the threat is more real now.
ME3: Reapers stopped, heroes lose and the entire galaxy explodes. Everything you did in the first two is made invalid.

So, why would you do that? Why change the entire tone of the series in the last game? It makes the game both inconsistent and puts a bad taste in your mouth. It would be like watching Frodo finally give in to The Ring and let it consume him so he kills off Sam and gives it to the Dark Lords. If the message in the last two stories were about surviving against the odds, and giving audiences hope for the future, why would you change that?

I put this question to you guys to try to figure out.

I think it comes down to the number of variables the game must account for. It's a 1,000 now.. conciser all the possible permutation and content that bust be made and the number of playthroughs to see it all.

I see 2 choices to continue the series.
a) force a cannon ending that creates a start point for a new story arc.. less variables
give many endings but force a cannon for next story arc..

I think they choose "a" so that Me3 endings weren't ignored in the next one. The lesser of the 2 evils so to say.. I think having many ending variety but not having that effect following games would be worst then this.. I think the events of Me3 will be part of ME4.. a new PC starting off at the attack on earth. The messed up situation is great for spin off games.. a privateer type game, a MMORG.. ext..

Variables need to be manageable... New ideas for manageable variations would be helpful.. I can think of one.. events that cause scars.. It's easy to have a companion have or not have a scar due to an event.
Dead vs Alive makes for some difficult writing... Ash vs Kaden you don't have so much lost dialog.. but with ME2 you can get some big holes as games progress.

If there were huge differences in the endings then they'd need to make 3 ME4 games.

If this is the end of Mass Effect then I agree the ending suck... but I don't think it's the end.
Try to think from a continuation point of view.

That just the thing it didn't have to end in such a grimdark way. If the crew were stranded on earth or even if shep was with them then the epilouge, which takes place in the future, would still have worked. Sheps not immortal he would have died with age. At the end of every fallout theres a way for your character to live and instead of just dying or being sepearted from all the companions theres a text epi and in the next installment its in the future. What if you and everyone who saids this game is just a bridge to another are right? Doesn't that mean in the next three installments when the variables become so much Bioware will make another depressing again? I mean they didn't treat Shep well.

I think for all the talk about this being carefully planned 3 part deal.. It was really, by the seat of their pants and they painted themselves into a corner. This is a trim to that branching plot. I think they should put more thought into that issue and look for as many manageable ways to have our actions change the world as possible. I don't want this to be an every 3rd game thing.

I'd do an out of the ashes new PC focused mostly on fighting the invasion and introducing new NPC's..
New consoles will be out and thus a new engine..

I'd do a privateer type game to develop the space and economic system.. later linking it into the ME game. You'd get to play as a trader, merc pilot or pirate.. That game could restore mass relays and introduce other less advanced, yet close races. Perhaps you get as rich as the illusive man and run into yourself in a later mass effect game.. I'm just putting some ideas out there.

Consider the size of the galaxy.. not know where life would advance would make the relays quite important... there would have to be more, yet turned off waiting to be found.

Modifié par Abram730, 02 mars 2012 - 02:18 .

[mulder1199]

still nobody has answered this that i've seen....did the leakers DL a patch before playing?

[Risselda]

Alright...thought of a cute headcannon for this disaster of an ending for the people upset about LIs/ sunshine and flower ending.

The planet (being alien) is a hybrid dna planet, which can cater to both types...so that takes care of the starvation problem.

Shep (survival ending) is picked up by human/turian/salarian etc group sent to assess damages to the area to which shep dies. You know there will be squads to do damage control everywhere, with everyone stuck in the same solar system.

Maleshep- LI on island is with his child. Femshep- finds herself with LI child.

Year or so passes...all the races (asari who already know the basics) construct the first mass relay. Takes them to 'the alien planet.' Which lets assume isnt in a galaxy TOO far away, as the first mass relay pair can traverse it. OK...so the squad sent there finds the normandy, everyone freaks out. They bring the crew to earth, where the LIs child now is.

LI/crew tells shep about an awesome jurrassic park planet (which sounds a little cooler than earth) and they live their lives out there, bringing some necessary technology. Or they could stay on earth.


Also- about all the quarians starving in earths solar system...the flotilla we can presume is in the final showdown...as long as their agricultural ship is ok, they can sustain themselves...and thats how they have been survivng isolated the whole time.

[Elegana]

Max Knight wrote...

god dammit say something BioWare!!

How can they? If they come in to confirm the endings, then they screwed themselves over. If they come in to deny the endings, it causes even MORE confusion as to why these endings exist AND/OR people will think BioWare is doing damage control and won't believe them. At this time, it's smart for BioWare to not say anything.