Aucune réponse à ce sujet

[jb1983]

 From now on, in gaming, whenever an epic game has a horrid ending which fans universally hate it will be referred to as, "Oh, they Mass Effected it I see." 

From ME1 all the way up until the very ending of ME3 (even the way the Illusive Man dies was awesome), I kept thinking, "Wow, what great writing." Playing through ME3 I was convinced that the writing here was so good that it put the other two to shame. I actually felt invested in this game. And then came the ending...

What were you thinking? I don't buy that this was rushed, I think these endings are the endings you actually wanted. I understand that you were probably aiming for artistic expression, but you didn't really provide an ending. You left it open-ended. I get it if you want to have some DLC to shore things up, but is that really fair to your fanbase? And let's face it, like the vast majority of ME fans wouldn't go out and buy DLC if they felt they had closure in the ending? C'mon. 

Look, I'm not going to make exact specifications on what the ending should have had, but just some broad expectations of what I expect to be in upcomming DLC to fix this mess. 

1) A perfect ending should actually be a perfect ending. That is, Shep lives, goes and makes little human, quarian, or blue babies with whomever he's chosen (or Turian babies if you please). Mass Effect relays stay together because in a perfect ending you've actually saved the galaxy. I mean, I figured that's what I've been working for and investing hours of gaming into. Is it cliche? Yup. Does it work? Yeah, it does. The whole point in stories, especially epic ones, is to convey the message of hope (which was the entire point of ME3!); but that message is ripped away in the end. That's why in some of the best epics of all time, there is a conclusive ending that while not 100% happy, it's conclusive and makes the hero's sacrifices look like they were worthy sacrifices. You failed at this, majorly, and I think the massive amount of fan backlash you're getting proves this. 

Not to mention that you can throw TONS of DLC at this, continue the story, have a ME4 that isn't focused on Shep but still has a galaxy in place, and so on. From an artistic standpoint, it's predictable (but who carse? If perfect endings where everything works out are good enough for Lewis and Tolkein, then it's good enough for Mass Effect), but it really ties everything together. From a fan standpoint, it gives us a sense of satisfaction after investing all these hours into three games. From a marketing standpoint, you get to add tons of DLC to it that your fans will willingly buy without thinking twice about it. 

2) A less-than-perfect ending where Shep sacrifices himself, but the ME relays stay together so millions aren't stranded (which would effectively lead to mass extinction anyway - might as well have let the Reapers win). 

3) The endings you currently have - this is for players who just rushed through to the ending, didn't invest time in doing quests, and so on. And let's add that a few decisions from ME2 will put you in this category no matter what, meaning our decisions actually matter. Notice where I rank this - these endings are fine...for people who aren't investing time into the game and just don't care. 

4) The reapers win - why not allow an ending where the reapers win? Where the player, due to rushing through things and not taking their time, actually "lose" the game? 

I know the cynic in me realizes that these suggestions will go unnoticed. In many ways, I feel like the fans are Shepherd and Bioware has become the Reapers we're fighting against, with the "perfect ending" being a release of DLC (I'll pay for it, I don't care) that gives us a happy ending. And yet, I hear the cries of the indoctrinated, telling us that the Reapers will inevitably destroy all organic life (aka "fan base") and start from scratch. C'mon, let the Shepards win.